DA 42 accident

On 2007-04-26, Kev wrote:
We had a large discussion of FADEC right here last November.
Unfortunately, non-engineer types decided to hijack the discussion,
mostly because they wanted to bash anyone who agreed with Mxsmanic
that all-electronic systems can have major failure modes. (Ever have
your car engine stop because of a failed sensor? I have.)

I've had more older car engines stop because of failed mechanical
ignition parts like points. I've never actually had a car engine with an
ECU fail.

I know a pilot who had a double magneto failure, too, which resulted in
the C172 on its back in a field. Guess what - most two magneto engines
have single points of failure.

It's not a question that FADECs will fail - but what will be more
failure prone: a manual-everything engine where the pilot can mismanage
the engine into quitting, or a FADEC that can lose electrical supply and
cause the engine to quit. Only time will really tell in aviation which
is more reliable. However, my bet on having owned both cars with purely
mechanical ignition and cars with engine management computers is that
the ones with engine management computers are orders of magnitude more
reliable. I would at this stage be putting my bets on FADEC being more
relibale than purely mechanical engines + manual engine management in
the long run. That's not to say FADECs won't fail, but pilots+mechanical
electrical systems will fail more often.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de