Any updates on the Airbus lost in the Atlantic?

I don't have a dog in this hunt, except when I pick which flights to take. If Boeing does things that Airbus doesn't, I'd like to know.

Dale

 

Yes they are made on this side of the Ocean. - It's Ford vs Chevy just with wings.

And the whipping boy of the moment for Boeing fanboyz is the fly by wire system that Airbus adopted first. Mind you if Boeing had adopted it first, it would prove their intellectual and engineering superiority.

Adding to the fun, all the things they are whining about being spawn of the devil, Boeing is rushing to adopt. (then it will magically be a proven technology)

If you are really looking for something to worry about, worry about the maintenance crews and the pilots. Last I checked those two human issues account for something like 95% of all accidents.

Actually if you really want to worry, DON'T DRIVE TO THE AIRPORT. Relax and enjoy the view.

 

430man - you seem to have a lot of knowledge, and so do the others.

But why does this always have to turn into a personal attack with you? If you disagree, then state your disagreement - argue your point. I know I learn a lot from these threads, and I'm sure there are many other lurkers that do also. It's unfortunate that you take this so personally instead of making a good and reasoned argument.

So, solo says that the trim set itself to 13 nose up - I assume, from your comment, that you don't believe that it set itself. How about explaining why/how that couldn't have happened?

 

Because I have a failing that I don't suffer fools and liars well... so sue me.

Solo has a LONG history of just making stuff up to support his point. (see his other airbus threads)

Tell me... How DO you debate someone like that? With facts and reason? They don't mean a thing.

I take the path of proving they are liars or kooks for all to see and going on with my life. (see my earlier run in with the conspiracy theorist who was begging for a debate and I passed)

If you don't like my style, don't read my posts. I refuse to smile and nod while people just make S*** up. If you prefer to be lied to ok.. your choice.

If you can tell me how to make people like Solo tell the truth, I'm all ears. -- But until then I'll call liars liars. Sorry if that offends you man.

-------------

EDIT: BTW, for the record, I'm not here for a "debate." The facts are the facts and as such are not up for debate. (well unless you make your own) I'm reading here and elsewhere to try to unravel a mystery. Another failing of mine is that I HATE unsolved puzzles. I'll listen to any credible theory... I think the suicide theory is EXTREMELY unlikely, but it DOES have the merit of neatly tying up all the loose ends. I might have no respect for that -theory- BUT I can respect the guy who posted it was being an honest broker. I can disagree with him but still respect him. But when people start with a point they want to make and then fudge the facts to prove it, I neither respect their theory NOR them. -- As such I don't waste time on them.

I've wasted plenty of time with solo in the past and every time he makes a few reasonable points and I figure he's learned not to make stuff up because I'll call him on it. This is like the third time he's done it. Am I wrong for even engaging him in the hopes of intelligent discussion? Yeah, guilty as charged. But I won't apologize for throwing up my hands, calling him a liar and moving on. Life is too short.

 

Hold on a second, I'm not offended one bit - and my comments have nothing to do with your "style".

You may or may not convince solo that he is wrong or whatever - I don't really care. But since I'm taking the time to read all of this (and I'm sure there are many others), it would be much better for me to learn something. I read some other things yesterday that made what solo said make some sense. But you say it's not true - but you won't elaborate on why its not true - so us readers miss out.

It's not only that - but you go even further and say he is lying - thus he has intent to mislead. Hard to imagine, but would be easier to understand if you were to explain how his statement is untrue.

No, you don't owe anyone anything - I'm saying this so that you don't think the only purpose of your commentary would be to try and disprove someone else. It would also help everyone else that is reading.

 

I linked the report twice. Don't take my word for it. Read solo and read it.

If you don't understand the report or what solo is lying about, don't personally attack me. (gotcha )

(also I edited my post above)

 

Well, I didn't attack you at all - personally or in any other way, so I'm not sure where that came from.

Sorry for the interruption, carry on...

 

Ok, back to the report.

The report says "The trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) passed from 3 to 13 degrees nose-up in about 1 minute and remained in the latter position until the end of the flight."

You said "PF increased trim from 3 to 13"

How did you conclude that the PF increased the trim? The report does not say why/how the trim increased.

 

In fact, from what I've read - the trim wheels do not work until you fall into direct law, so the PF could not have set the trim, as autotrim was still in effect during alternate law.

Is that not true?

 

Dude, it was a joke... hence the smiley face.

No. If the pilot touches the wheel the autotrim drops out.

The only time the autotrim will freeze is if there is a manual trim order or they are below 50 feet. Ergo since they were above 50 feet the autotrim would only freeze in that position if the PF touched the wheel.

Well unless of course you had one of those evil demonically possessed Airbuses which sets the THS to full up at random. (rolls eyes)

 

430man - I think you missed my main question above - how did you conclude that the PF set the trim? The report does not say that.

As far as "evil airbus that sets trim at random" - from what I've read, it sets trim based on stick input - so if stick input pulled the nose up 13, the trim would be auto set to that so that upon release of the stick, it would maintain that pitch.

Isn't it possible that is how the trim moved to 13?

 

OK I answered this already but I will slow down and go through it slowly.....

OK the trim froze at full up for the rest of the flight.... The only way autotrim will freeze in one position is if the PF puts it there OR if the plane is below 50 feet. Therefore to say the plane malfunctioned and set the trim full up by itself and left it there, solo either needed to have some inside information from BEA that they have not disclosed OR he just made it up.

I cannot say it any more clearly.

(bold mime)

I answered the larger question above, but I'll try and help you with this one too...

The short answer is no... AUTOtrim would not suddenly leave the trim in one position. Then they wouldn't call it AUTOtrim now would they?

 

One more thing...

Look if you go back and reread solo's post, he's made like 4 different claims about what the trim would do once they hit alt law. I DID NOT BUST HIS CHOPS ON ANY OF THEM.

For a very good reason. Neither he nor I drive airbuses for a living so we're both learning in real time. (as are thousands of other people right now) When he said the first time that the autotrim dropped out as soon as they hit alt law, I knew he was incorrect but I let him be. I figured I had simply read a page he had not and he'd catch up... In later comments he said something else about the trim that was closer but still incorrect... not a peep from me.

But I DO draw the line at one distinct place. As soon as he starts with his usual "There's demons in the airbus doing crazy things the pilot did not want" I call B.S.

We're all incorrect from time to time no matter how hard we try. But making crazy S*** up is another story.

Now I take you at face value that you're also just trying to figure this out like the rest of us. If you did not like the way I called B.S...well sorry, I'm a jerk sometimes. -- But I've been down this road with solo and I don't care to repeat it.

OK unless you REALLY have another problem can we quit hijacking this thread now?

 

430man - Wow, I was way past the commentary about solo and on to my own simple questions, really. I don't care about anyone else's argument anymore. So could we please leave that out? If you don't want to discuss this with me, then just say that and I'll move on.

My understanding of how the "autotrim" works (maybe I'm using the wrong term) - is that if the PF, for example, pulls the stick back to, for example, 13 degrees nose up - autotrim trims the aircraft to that configuration - and upon releasing the stick (back to "neutral", I don't know what to call that) - the aircraft stays in the 13 nose up position.

I assume that it works this way so the PF doesn't have to keep constant pressure one way or the other on the stick. Again, I'm just going by what I've read around the net.

I believe I read that it does NOT function this way below 50 feet. If I read you correctly, you are saying that it ONLY functions this way below 50 feet. Thus my confusion.

(BTW, notice I'm not saying the crazy airbus computer did something it wasn't supposed to do. I'm just trying to clarify how it would normally function. And also BTW, if anyone else wants to answer that would be fine too!)

 

geeze man you openly bust my chops for the way I "attacked" solo then when I defend myself, you accuse me of not wanted to drop it??? Dude, you brought up!

And no, you have no clue how autotrim works... in fact from your description I'm not sure you know how trims works... but frankly, I'm not inclined to waste anymore of my time dealing with you.... oh was that me getting personal again? You bet.

 

Glad we did not have any of that auto-trim crap on any of the aircraft I flew. Pilots have lazy thumbs now? One of my favorite things to do was trim way nose low before handing it back to the aircraft commander. Single ship, of course.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Awesome. Thanks for your efforts so far.

 

Please cease all personal attacks. This is an interesting topic and we all want to read more about it, just without the personal stuff.

 

geeze it was never that big a deal to begin with... solo and I are grown men we can trade a few barbs and live... (we have so far) until other people made it a big deal....

But I can assure you they'll me not comments personal other otherwise from me any more.

See ya'll around. I'm outta here.

 

A lot of you folks could take some lessons from Mr Bob Parks...His posts are always the words of a true gentleman. Can we start talking about what brought this aircraft and the hundreds of souls on board to their death........and leave our failings out of it???


Geffen

 

Questions:

If the stall warning goes quiet as the aircraft drops below 60 knots, does the warning come back on as airspeed increases from <60 to 60+?

Could this explain the suggestion that, as the pilot pushed the stick forward to gain speed, the stall warning came back on, thereby creating confusion?

 

That is a possibility but I suggest we wait for a more detailed report due in two months, or even better, wait for the final report. The May 27th report was posted by BEA to stop rumors.

 

That is my understanding....

Confusion yes, if the pilot didn't understand or remember this in training. But, I'm still not sure why when the stall warning came back on confusion would cause a pilot to want a nose up attitude unless he was so disoriented that he didn't know or thought the plane was inverted.

Like I said way back in my earlier post, I'm puzzled by the 13 degrees of trim no matter how it was set. Further I'm puzzled by apparently no pilot input to correct it.

I think I'll wait for the final report to get the full understanding.

 

Precisely.