IMC without an autopilot

wrote in message ...


Tarver Engineering wrote:


The Eastern airlines accident was traced to the pilot never engaging the
autopilot. The training failure that caused Eastern's pilots to cause
such
a crash was their arrogant attatude toward flying and their tendancy to
get
drunk and go play golf when they were supposed to be attending training
at
the Manufacturer.

You're so full of it Trav.

Not me.

The Eastern operator did not hold the AP engage button in long enough for it
to engage and the airplane flew into the ground. I agree with Lockheed and
having lived in the AV, I am quite aware of Eastern's drunk in the evening
and golfing through the day pilots.

Tarver Engineering wrote:

The Eastern operator did not hold the AP engage button in long enough for it
to engage and the airplane flew into the ground. I agree with Lockheed and
having lived in the AV, I am quite aware of Eastern's drunk in the evening
and golfing through the day pilots.

The autopilot was engaged, but in control wheel steering. As usual, your
comments make no sense. And, because you are so lacking in knowledge about how
an L-1011 autopilot works, or about the NTSB investiagtion, you try to switch to
how EAL pilots conducted themselves off-duty.

You are so full of pure BS.

wrote in message ...


Tarver Engineering wrote:

The Eastern operator did not hold the AP engage button in long enough
for it
to engage and the airplane flew into the ground. I agree with Lockheed
and
having lived in the AV, I am quite aware of Eastern's drunk in the
evening
and golfing through the day pilots.

you try to switch to
how EAL pilots conducted themselves off-duty.

Off duty? I have presented the facts as to the activities EA pilots engaged
in while at Lockheed for L-1011 training. It was behavior exclusive to EA
pilots, while other Airlines' operators attended training. There was
nothing wrong with Lockheed's airplane; except the price.

Tarver Engineering wrote:


Off duty? I have presented the facts as to the activities EA pilots engaged
in while at Lockheed for L-1011 training. It was behavior exclusive to EA
pilots, while other Airlines' operators attended training. There was
nothing wrong with Lockheed's airplane; except the price.

Did I say there was anything wrong with the L-1011? It was one of my
favorites. My airline conducted its own L-1011 training. I suspect an airline
the size of EAL didn't send crews to PMD except for perhaps the initial
management pilots. Those guys are known to be drunks.

wrote in message ...


Tarver Engineering wrote:


Off duty? I have presented the facts as to the activities EA pilots
engaged
in while at Lockheed for L-1011 training. It was behavior exclusive to
EA
pilots, while other Airlines' operators attended training. There was
nothing wrong with Lockheed's airplane; except the price.

Did I say there was anything wrong with the L-1011?

There was either a machine error, or a man error. I believe the L-1011 is
one of the finest wide bodies ever built, from an engineering perspective.
The NTSB did what they do and transfered liability back to the Manufacturer.
That turned out to be an unfortunate decision when Eastern's management
threw the Airline across a craps table.

It was one of my
favorites. My airline conducted its own L-1011 training. I suspect an
airline
the size of EAL didn't send crews to PMD except for perhaps the initial
management pilots. Those guys are known to be drunks.

The people who built the airplane are still angy with those drunks and still
blame them for the crash. There were still quite a few people that worked
the L-1011 line living on the AV in the 1980s.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
wrote in message ...


Tarver Engineering wrote:


Only if you want to be unemployed, others use the disconnect switch.

Shows how much you know, Trav. A pilot cannot fight with the autopilot in
an L-1011. When you apply a specified force to the control wheel or
column,
the autopilot complies and drops out of command mode into control wheel
steering mode. I thought all aeronautical engineers knew that, especially
in light of the long-ago Eastern Airlines accident.

Then after you spill eveyone's drinks you find other employment.

The Eastern airlines accident was traced to the pilot never engaging the
autopilot. The training failure that caused Eastern's pilots to cause such
a crash was their arrogant attatude toward flying and their tendancy to get
drunk and go play golf when they were supposed to be attending training at
the Manufacturer.


Bull****.

http://amelia.db.erau.edu/reports/ntsb/aar/AAR73-14.pdf

Tom Mosher

Tarver Engineering wrote:


There was either a machine error, or a man error. I believe the L-1011 is
one of the finest wide bodies ever built, from an engineering perspective.
The NTSB did what they do and transfered liability back to the Manufacturer.
That turned out to be an unfortunate decision when Eastern's management
threw the Airline across a craps table.

It was dumb-ass pilots, period. That auto-flight system was wonderful. Then
again, you had to have a brain and understand the auto-flight modes, including
how the trip from Command to CWS could burn you if you failed to mind the store.

The only airplane that I loved flying more than the L-1011 was the Boeing
707-100 fan-powered, seriously over-powered dream machine.

wrote:

Tarver Engineering wrote:


Only if you want to be unemployed, others use the disconnect switch.


Shows how much you know, Trav. A pilot cannot fight with the autopilot in
an L-1011. When you apply a specified force to the control wheel or column,
the autopilot complies and drops out of command mode into control wheel
steering mode. I thought all aeronautical engineers knew that, especially
in light of the long-ago Eastern Airlines accident.


There's your mistake, you assumed he was an aeronautical engineer.


Matt

Tarver Engineering wrote:
wrote in message ...


Tarver Engineering wrote:


The Eastern airlines accident was traced to the pilot never engaging the
autopilot. The training failure that caused Eastern's pilots to cause

such

a crash was their arrogant attatude toward flying and their tendancy to

get

drunk and go play golf when they were supposed to be attending training

at

the Manufacturer.

You're so full of it Trav.


Not me.

The Eastern operator did not hold the AP engage button in long enough for it
to engage and the airplane flew into the ground. I agree with Lockheed and
having lived in the AV, I am quite aware of Eastern's drunk in the evening
and golfing through the day pilots.



And if you didn't spend so much time with them, you'd be more coherent here.


Matt

wrote in message ...


Tarver Engineering wrote:


There was either a machine error, or a man error. I believe the L-1011
is
one of the finest wide bodies ever built, from an engineering
perspective.
The NTSB did what they do and transfered liability back to the
Manufacturer.
That turned out to be an unfortunate decision when Eastern's management
threw the Airline across a craps table.

It was dumb-ass pilots, period. That auto-flight system was wonderful.
Then
again, you had to have a brain and understand the auto-flight modes,
including
how the trip from Command to CWS could burn you if you failed to mind the
store.

The only airplane that I loved flying more than the L-1011 was the Boeing
707-100 fan-powered, seriously over-powered dream machine.

The 707 was one fast airplane.