Posted on 03/24/2015 3:55:35 AM PDT by Drago
Yes, but that plane crashed when it ran out of fuel, this plane did not. Also, the autopilot would have kept the plane on course which is not consistent with the decrease in altitude and the crash into the mountain.
Snake Pliskin???
Boeing’s has a higher safety design than airbus’s.
There was too much $$ involved for Airbus to allow the plane to be blamed.
500fpm is typical only for small, slow planes. An airliner is much faster and the same glide path might require up to 2000fpm.
In an emergency, pilots are trained to first get the plane’s flight stabilized, and only after that to spend time communicating.
That is fairly accurate for a double failure, but the good AD system must be the one that is retained, not just any of the three, 2 of which are “bad”.
i know something about FBW systems and that is my suspicion, tho I was under the impression that the pitot problem had been fixed by Airbus. (If it hadn’t, then they are in deep doo-doo)
The pilot took the blame because Airbus had too many $$ riding on the call.
Wrong.
The 777 and 787 are FBW only, and some of the older designs such as the 767, 747-8 use FBW to a degree.
The 787 is full electric meaning no bleed air or hydraulic pumps to run the flight controls which means they fly anywhere near a thunderstorm they can become a 175+ ton lawn dart.
A tin can flying at 400 +/- knots hitting solid rock isn’t going to make much of a crater.
Boeing products have hydrolic redundancy for failover. Airbus products do not.
1. Flying at the 38,000 feet, the A320 suddenly experiences a major loss of cabin air pressure.
2. The flight crew--probably in violation of policy of having at least one crew member wearing an oxygen mask--started to lose consciousness and tried to start an emergency descent.
3. Since they lost consciousness within 15-20 seconds, the plane did nose down but not enough to do a truly rapid emergency descent--it looked like a normal rate of descent.
4. With the crew incapacitated, the plane with its "normal" rate of descent essentially did a prefect controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) crash, crashing into that mountainside in southern France.
Funny you say that because IIRC even Boeing says the A319,329,321 is a safe aircraft... I think it was mentioned somewhere in one of the UK news links posted above.
The comment I saw was apparently true, and meaningless. They said there was no indication it was terrorism, at this time. That is NOT the same as saying it was not terrorism.
FAR 25.1316(c)(7)... while I don’t have full confidence in the type certification process after the 787 battery fiasco, the requirement for the manufacturer to prove that exposure to an extreme lightning environment is there. Do you know of any accidents that have proven to be the result of loss of primary flight controls due to lightning strike (military or civilian)? Any cases of temporary loss of primary flight controls due to the same? I can’t say that I follow accident investigations or incident reports too closely, but I’ve never heard of such an event. Lightning strikes are fairly common events and I’d be shocked if the 787 (much less all the FBW airbus in operation) have not incurred multiple strikes by now.
First, newer Boeing products do not have hydraulic redundancy.
Second, learn how to spell hydraulic if you wish to discuss a technical subject.
Yes, there are thousands of A319, A320, A321 jets serving as the backbone of our airline industry, just as there are thousands of 737s and 757s doing the same.
More 737s have crashed (for all reasons) than A319, A320 & A321s. So, this notion of fly-by-wire and computers being dangerous is absolute nonsense written by ill-informed morons who are no different than those who want cars to return to drum brakes, manual transmissions and carburetors.
There are also more 737s delivered than the Airbus 320 variants, apparently. Some 2000 more.
I’ve had little sleep this week. I realized the error after posting but given the lack of an edit button was unable to correct it. Thank you for your charity and understanding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.