![]() |
| 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. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Greg Farris writes:
Well - we are getting much closer to a defensible response here. We can accept then that the plane crashed because the pilot flew too low and advanced the throttles too late. Contributing factors include the pilot's incomplete comprehension of the aircraft's systems. What the investigation had to determine then, was whether the pilot's poor comprehension was due to poor application of his training, or whether the training itself was inadequate. There's another possibility: The designers of the FBW system had no clue as to how real pilots react in different situations, and failed to anticipate what a pilot would do and expect in those situations. If they had done their job correctly, the FBW would do exactly what a pilot would expect it to do, and there would be no "modes" for a pilot to memorize over and above everything else that he already has to know. Flying isn't a video game, even if some desk-bound geeks at Airbus might like to pretend that it is. If a pilot, faced with an unexpected situation does something other than what his training suggests, and the result is positive, then nothing is said. But if the pilot does not act in accordance with his training and the result is negative, then it is fair play to attribute it to pilot error. What happens if the aircraft is designed to do something counterintuitive, such as having the movements of the yoke reversed, and the pilot forgets this (or is never trained about it) and makes a mistake that leads to an accident? Is it the pilot's fault because the aircraft behaved like no other that he has ever flown, or the manufacturer's fault because it designed in features that were in direct contradiction of a pilot's normal base training? But then, all of the above is moot when one considers, as resident experts have explained to us, that Airbus aircraft are not controllable through pilot input ... They are not controllable outside an envelope that is enforced by the computers. In this case, you have to wonder just exactly why pilots are needed at all. If all flying situations are covered by the computers, the computers can fly the aircraft from start to finish, and you can dispense with pilots. This will probably actually happen one day for commercial airliners, although that day is still quite far away. Pilots of airliners are increasingly just skilled attendants, not people who actually fly the plane. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! | Eliot Coweye | Home Built | 237 | February 13th 06 04:55 AM |
| Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? | tom pettit | Home Built | 35 | September 29th 05 03:24 PM |
| Mini-500 Accident Analysis | Dennis Fetters | Rotorcraft | 16 | September 3rd 05 12:35 PM |
| Paris Airshow - Helimat | HELIMAT | Rotorcraft | 0 | June 14th 05 07:42 AM |
| paris airshow 2003 / Le bourget / photo album | hugo36 | Aerobatics | 0 | July 9th 03 12:01 AM |