Co-pilot error caused AA 587 crash

Corky Scott wrote:

Since they *MUST* have four wheel drive in order to keep their light
truck status, commercials continually hype the usefulness of their
off-road capability, despite the fact that many of them are sold in
states where no snow or ice normally falls.



Do you seriously think that snow and ice are the only reason to have
4WD? You need to get out of the city more. On steep mountain roads a
little rain can make 4WD helpful. Drive down a dirt road after some bad
rain often enough and you will wish eventually wish you had 4WD

--
Chris W

Not getting the gifts you want? The Wish Zone can help.
http://thewishzone.com

"They that can give up essential liberty
to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Historical Review of Pennsylvania

devil wrote in message ...
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:03:21 -0700, running with scissors wrote:

Jose wrote in message .com...
An A320 full of passengers doing something it shouldn't have at an air show

What was an A320 doing full of passengers at an airshow?

Jose

al flyby.

Paris / Air France.

No such a thing in Paris.

****

"khobar" wrote in message news:E00gd.82589$kz3.38453@fed1read02...
"running with scissors" wrote in
message om...
Jose wrote in message
.com...
An A320 full of passengers doing something it shouldn't have at an air
show

What was an A320 doing full of passengers at an airshow?

Jose

al flyby.

Paris / Air France.

Is Paris a continent too? Or are you just being stupid for fun?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Paul Nixon


the question posed was "What was an A320 doing full of passengers at
an airshow?"

the response "a flyby. paris / air france"

if you cant work out that an air france a320 with pax on board was
doing a fly-by at an airshow in paris, from that you should stop
wasting oxygen and ****ing kill yourself. where do i state paris
being a continent? or even france being a continent.

jesus! nixon i retract anything i have referred to you as before.
congratulations. you earn yourself the title as the new ADA resident
"Stupid ****"

you ****ing ignorant prick.

devil wrote in message ...
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:03:21 -0700, running with scissors wrote:

Jose wrote in message .com...
An A320 full of passengers doing something it shouldn't have at an air show

What was an A320 doing full of passengers at an airshow?

Jose

al flyby.

Paris / Air France.

No such a thing in Paris.

yeah? look up paris airshow 1988. an airfrance 320 undertook a flyby
which didnt go according to plan.

prick

Stefan wrote in message ...
running with scissors wrote:

What was an A320 doing full of passengers at an airshow?

Those weren't just "passengers". They were invited guests. In those days
a common practice in France (and elsewhere). After that accident, no
more flying guests at an airshow.

Stefan


whatever. if they were not on duty flight crew or cabin crew, and
have a pulse, they are passengers.

Stefan wrote in message ...
running with scissors wrote:

What was an A320 doing full of passengers at an airshow?

Those weren't just "passengers". They were invited guests. In those days
a common practice in France (and elsewhere). After that accident, no
more flying guests at an airshow.

Stefan

oh and by the way stefan... next time you snip, get the right ****ing
quote to the poster.

idiot.

"Ralph Nesbitt" wrote in message m...
"nobody" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
Coming out of a very low (legal) ceiling, the rny was not
directly under the a/c, and the crew tried to correct laterally and
doing so, the decent rate increased. They started the go around to
late, the AC slammed down on the rny hard, the nose gear ripping the
control functions as it rammed vertically up through the floor
above.

The TSB report clearly stated that the pilots initiated a go around
WITHOUT
LANDING, with airspeed that would have required landing before speed was
high
enough to climb again. Upon starting to climb again, the skidoo did regain
some altitude before stalling, after which it fell to the ground where its
recessive skidoo genes became dominant again.

One problem is that the flight director had not been programmed to handle
such
a situation, neither had Bombardier foreseen/simulated situations such as
those. While the FO (PIC) was trying to climb according to normal climb
rates
provided by the flight director, the captain did not realise that the
newbie
co-pilot wasn't aware of the very low airspeed.

FBY is a great concept, but in practice not every conceivable situation/set
of circumstances, with all potential variables/responses can be foreseen &
programmed into the computer. The only "Computer" I know of that even comes
close to dealing with UNK/UNK (unknown/unknown) has 1 mouth, 2 legs, 2 arms,
2 eyes, 2 ears, & when it gets into allows A/C tog get into situations that
can't be recovered from is known to emphasize the impossibility of
recovering from the situation with a emphatic"OH ****".
Ralph Nesbitt
Professional FD/CFR/ARFF Type


except paul nixon of course

running with scissors wrote:

oh and by the way stefan... next time you snip, get the right ****ing
quote to the poster.

I get what? I'm afraid I don't understand your language level.

Stefan

Stefan wrote in message ...
nobody wrote:

No, this was a demo of its computer systems capabilities, they woudln't have
shut it down.

No. The pilot wanted to display his new toy low and slow to the public.
To achieve this, he ignored even the most basic safety rules and basic
airmanship.

The fact that there is still so much myth with this case was caused by
the French authorities, who handled the accident as a state affair,
because it concerned Airbus. France and Airbus at that time ... a story
for itself. With this behaviour they prepared the ground for many rumors
and deep misbelief in the eventual results of the investigation.

Secondly, the big red button isn't to ...

Obviously you didn't understand me: I wasn't talking of any real button.
I just pointed out that the computer system can be oversteered by the
pilot at any time.

Stefan


stefan you are full of ****ing ****, a liar and a ****ing idiot who is
making false claims concerning an incident you clearly know **** all
about.

1. it wasnt a demo of its fly by wire capabilities. quite the ****ing
reverse it located a flaw in the FADEC.

2. The fly-by was a management decision. was instructed by dispatch.
the pilot was chief pilot for AF.

3. the pilot didnt own the plane, why would he be showing off his new
toy ?

4. the flyby was approved by the aviation authority and not to my
knowledge broke any regulations of airshow display procedures current
for the time.

5. how did he ignore basic safety laws and airmanship?

6. the incident occured due to FADEC issue.

6. no myth, its all known and public knowledge. the FDR was switched
after the accident (finding by Lausanne Institute of Police Forensic
Evidence and Criminology)

7. french law meant the pilot was charged as he was.

8. commercial considerations led to the presentation of pilot error.
computers are never wrong ?

9. the pilot was sentanced to 18 months involentry manslaughter in 97
of which 12 months was suspended.

10 "the computer system can be oversteered by the pilot at any time" ?
enough said.

stefan you are clueless, shut the **** up making statements you
clearly know nothing about.

Dave wrote in message . ..
Yeh...

Painting "OVER" their logo, and the big red letters "Air
Canada" stretching along the length of the fuse...

Like with a roller & house paint! (!)


yep aircraft are ofen painted by roller.