A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

FADEC = complex



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 25th 06, 09:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Kev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default FADEC = complex

Greg Farris wrote:
In article om,
says...
The most famous of all, the Airbus "low pass" at the French air show,
when the FADEC throttles refused to power up (thinking the plane was
landing) and the plane settled into the trees.


It is anything but demonstrated that the aircraft systems did anything
unexpected in this accident. The pilot tried to make this claim at the
outset, but ended up being saddled with responsibility for his show-off
manoeuver. The official result of the investigation is that it was the
pilot's fault, and the aircraft has been exonerated of any failure.


LOL. If you believe official investigations all the time, then I've
got a bridge for you. Of course the pilot was blamed. But they
changed the software afterwards, and Airbus officials had this to say:
"Until the crash, there was a genuine psychology around Airbus that it
had designed a crash-proof airplane because of the hard protections.
The repercussions from that accident continue to reverberate,"

Not a bug per se, but certainly poor software planning and it resulted in
changes in fly by wire thinking.

Much more to change thinking on matters of pilot training. the claim of "poor
software planning" is unsubstantiated.


Hardly wry grin. The pilot did what he was told to do, but had two
hits against him. First, he was told to fly by at 100'. He did so,
not knowing that Airbus had a bug in the Atlimeter software, and he was
really at 30'. This screwed him, since he also didn't know that
Airbus had issued an bulletin the month before the crash, stating that
the engines sometimes didn't respond to throttles at low altitudes.
The pilots had not gotten the notice yet. The engine software was
modified after the crash.

Kev

  #2  
Old November 25th 06, 10:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,749
Default FADEC = complex

Kev,

If you believe official investigations all the time,


Oh yeah, conspiracy theories are so much better.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #3  
Old November 25th 06, 10:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Kev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default FADEC = complex


Thomas Borchert wrote:
Oh yeah, conspiracy theories are so much better.


Are you always such a snotty child?

I worked in Intelligence and for NSA. I have always said, "Never look
for a conspiracy when it can be explained by sheer stupidity or
bureacracy."

But in this case, it's obvious that France was not about to let Airbus
get blamed. Not much different from blaming the co-pilot for ripping
off that Airbus rudder.

Kev

  #6  
Old November 26th 06, 12:31 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Kev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default FADEC = complex

Greg Farris wrote:
In article . com,
says...

I worked in Intelligence and for NSA.


This gets better and better!:
Was that in the "embedded" period - or still rebuilding car engines?


*laughing* Yeah, it's interesting isn't it? There's not much I
haven't done in 50+ years. I used to say that I"ve been a tinker,
tailor, soldier, spy. All are true. I worked as a mechanic and body
repairer/painter. I've faced down a white tiger alone in the Korean
DMZ, got shot at, rewrote tactical Intelligence gathering procedures,
and worked with the most secret NSA equipment. I was promoted for
making a secret project succeed that stopped the Soviets in a certain
region. My first computer, I designed and handbuilt in 1979 from chips
and wires. It had 4K and I wrote 3D rotation and voice analysis
programs on it in assembly language. I was a sysop on CompuServe back
in the early days when it cost $1,000 a month to support 16kbps
uploads. Later I wrote a book on an embedded operating system that's
used in satellites and military apps, and gave seminars that were
infamous for their attendance. I've written many types of realtime
drivers and applications. I designed and programmed electronic casino
equipment that many of you probably have wasted money on. I was head
of one of the first labs designing settop boxes. For the past 13
years, I've had a quarter mill yearly income as one of the top embedded
systems designers. Many of the friends I grew up with are high
officials and state attorneys in NC. I've also watched the Exorcist
about 150 times and it just gets funnier each time I see it! (oops,
sorry, that was Betelguese ;-)

Last Christmas I was diagnosed with a vicious cancer and given four
months to live. Much chemo, rad and a rather brutal operation that
removed my esophagus later, I'm still around.

In any case, yes sir, I have a little experience here and there, and I
really don't like people who attack others.

Kev

  #8  
Old November 26th 06, 01:36 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Kev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default FADEC = complex


Greg Farris wrote:
In article . com,
says...
The belligerence here is completely atypical for this group.
It is the direct result of an injurious and defamatory attitude championed
by your protege and yourself.


He's not my protege. He simply sounds like a older man with really
poor discussion skills. But injurious? No, don't think so.

It could just be that you would
defend Mxsmanic less vociferously if you were to take full measure of the
number and quality of people he has insulted here.


My (and others') point has always been, that we haven't seem him
directly insult anyone. He's argued, yes, but never attacked anyone
as others have attacked him. Worse, the ones who attack him (and it's
always the same group) also attack anyone who dares question those kind
of gang tactics.

The only problem I see with his postings is with those who feel the
need to constantly post negative responses. Since he obviously doesn't
let that affect him, then all they're doing is clogging up the
newsgroup for others. Shut up, let him and others post, and we'd be
in much better shape. It was actually going pretty well there for a
few weeks until the gang spoke up again.

In other words, I think Jim in NC is taking the really wrong road.
It's just going to make pilots look worse and worse.

Regards, Kev

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is this a Complex Plane? [email protected] Piloting 12 December 7th 05 03:19 AM
Commercial rating: complex aircraft required aircraft for practical test? Marc J. Zeitlin Piloting 22 November 24th 05 04:11 AM
Complex / High Performance / Low Performance R.T. Owning 22 July 6th 04 08:04 AM
Experience transitioning from C-172 to complex aircraft as potential first owned aircraft? Jack Allison Owning 12 June 14th 04 08:01 PM
Complex Aircraft Question Chris General Aviation 5 October 18th 03 04:40 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.