August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[A320 Driver]

It's not the fly by wire that is the problem in the article, it comes down to the interface between the aircraft and the pilot. One company builds aircraft that dont think they need pilots, as computers are the end all beat all. The other company still gives the pilot the ability to still fly the AC. AF 447 is a perfect example of this. The system failed causing all sorts of problems for the crew. For various reasons but mostly the pilot aircraft interface, this flight resulted in tragedy. But this manufacturer has never had an issue, its always the pilots fault. Yea I know this aircraft is more comfortable eating dinner... but that's not what we are talking about.

A different interface didn't help the crew of 427 one bit. The SOB rolls over on it's back and augers into the ground and Boeing's FIRST instinct is "How did those guys manage to do that?". It doesn't matter what you fly. Sometimes they malfunction. Some days your skill and knowledge save you. Others, you get lucky. Every now and then nothing works and the blame game starts. Personally, I like the bus. I have a lot of confidence in the airplane if you treat it as such...it's an airplane. It has a stick and a fly by wire flight control system. Everything else is the same...

 

[nycbusdriver]

It's not the fly by wire that is the problem in the article, it comes down to the interface between the aircraft and the pilot.

In one sentence, you managed to contradict yourself. It is exactly FBW that keeps the pilots from interfacing with the CONTROL surfaces. I know you are talking about the computer interfaces in the cockpit, but the control stick/yoke and rudder pedals ARE the most immediate interfaces which can be rendered meaningless in FBW systems.

 

[luvthe9]

http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-05/embraer-in-talks-with-american-airlines-for-76-seat-jet-order.html

 

[nycbusdriver]

http://mobile.bloomb...-jet-order.html

Well, since Parker is not in charge at AA I am certain he had nothing to do with this.

 

[nycbusdriver]

NOT!

 

[A320 Driver]

Nothing surprising about talks for orders. Those go on all the time, virtually continuous. It did get their stock price up a little. The RJs smaller than that need to go. The CSM is outrageous.

 

[luvthe9]

[sup]"More ominous for AAL pilots is the provision in their new CLA with US Airways that provides an exception for the hard metrics to grow the mainline when the regional feed is upsized. The exception provides that if AMR irrevocably obligates itself to acquire new R-Js prior to the effective date of the US Airways/APA Conditional Labor Agreement, APA pilots have to suck up the disparity by not having any way to obligate US Airways to inflate the mainline accordingly." http://www.operationorange.org/2012/06/a-declaration-of-war/[/sup]
[sup] [/sup]
[sup] [/sup]

 

[im back..!!]

It's not the fly by wire that is the problem in the article, it comes down to the interface between the aircraft and the pilot. One company builds aircraft that dont think they need pilots, as computers are the end all beat all. The other company still gives the pilot the ability to still fly the AC. AF 447 is a perfect example of this. The system failed causing all sorts of problems for the crew. For various reasons but mostly the pilot aircraft interface, this flight resulted in tragedy. But this manufacturer has never had an issue, its always the pilots fault. Yea I know this aircraft is more comfortable eating dinner... but that's not what we are talking about.

I believe you are correct. The underlying problem with Airbus philosophy is the engineered and computer driven safety functions.
A great idea in theory, yet obviously not always in reality. And now I believe so financially entrenched in the industry.... Virtually imposible to correct without a financial burden against someone, either Airbus or the carriers.

 

[Phoenix]

[sup]"More ominous for AAL pilots is the provision in their new CLA with US Airways that provides an exception for the hard metrics to grow the mainline when the regional feed is upsized. The exception provides that if AMR irrevocably obligates itself to acquire new R-Js prior to the effective date of the US Airways/APA Conditional Labor Agreement, APA pilots have to suck up the disparity by not having any way to obligate US Airways to inflate the mainline accordingly." http://www.operationorange.org/2012/06/a-declaration-of-war/[/sup]
[sup] [/sup]
[sup] [/sup]

The 51% rule will always prevail over any notions of honor, integrity, or courage ( not that it won't be dressed up as such).

 

[Justme]

A different interface didn't help the crew of 427 one bit. The SOB rolls over on it's back and augers into the ground and Boeing's FIRST instinct is "How did those guys manage to do that?". It doesn't matter what you fly. Sometimes they malfunction. Some days your skill and knowledge save you. Others, you get lucky. Every now and then nothing works and the blame game starts. Personally, I like the bus. I have a lot of confidence in the airplane if you treat it as such...it's an airplane. It has a stick and a fly by wire flight control system. Everything else is the same...

I want to see you do this some day: "Using all of his strength, the pilot pulled back the control stick..." what the heck is that???

 

[EastUS1]

If it's FBW then, by design, the pilot is never really in control of maneuvering about the 3 axes, nor can he/she ever assume that control by any means.

Agreed sir, regardless of manufacturer, and I've never been able to make myself a huge fan of having any aircraft's current software/"ghost-in-the-machine"/etc be empowered to out "think" pilots. Just the infamous video of that airbus slowly settling into trees left a hefty and lasting impression. None can reasonably argue that had those pilots a coupla' magic buttons to disconnect automated controls in favor of direct human inputs, that it would've produced that tragic result. In the early phases of F16 deployment; no small number became the USAF basis of the sad term "Lawn darts", until it was discovered that just some unpredicted fraying of wiring bundles was enough to bring them down, out of control. There's a lot to be said in favor of good old fashioned, cable actuated controls based on direct human input, at least to have as a backup...with which idea; I believe us to both be on essentially the same page. I've yet to see any computer equipped with a survival instinct..."H.A.L. 9000" not withstanding. 🙂

 

[EastUS1]

I want to see you do this some day: "Using all of his strength, the pilot pulled back the control stick..." what the heck is that???

Proof-positive that "the pilot" in question, seriously needs to spend some quality time at a gym? Well, if he needs "all of his strength" to pull back any control stick anyway. 🙂

 

[EastUS1]

A different interface didn't help the crew of 427 one bit.

Everything else is the same...

No particular control interface would provide inherent relief from an hydraulic/rudder actuator failure, such as Flt 427 tragically experienced.

"Everything else is the same..."..? Oh!...Really?: https://www.youtube....h?v=a5NXpar4Ouw

"Some days your skill and knowledge save you. Others, you get lucky." On THAT...we've not the slightest possible argument.

 

[Black Swan]

Nothing surprising about talks for orders. Those go on all the time, virtually continuous. It did get their stock price up a little. The RJs smaller than that need to go. The CSM is outrageous.

That isn't what our ALPA boys told us when they said the company needed them for " feed" about ten years ago. They were the latest and greatest.
The only one not stupid enough to buy into the scheme was Herb Kelleher and SWA
Wonder why SWA is pretty much the only continuously profitable airline year over year?

 

[EastUS1]

I believe you are correct. The underlying problem with Airbus philosophy is the engineered and computer driven safety functions.
A great idea in theory, yet obviously not always in reality. And now I believe so financially entrenched in the industry.... Virtually imposible to correct without a financial burden against someone, either Airbus or the carriers.

Well put sir.