Falcon 10X

[BoeingBobby]

Baby, can't you just leave the room?!

Guess the 2 week suspension didn't teach you anything. Not that I expected it to.

[kent olsen]

Yes automated systems are great and cover some abnormals, but. Back in the 90's when I was flying the 747 we had a trip from ORD to ANC. A night trip under a high overcast and crossing Canada, so very dark. The hydraulic ailerons are operated by a shuttle valve, which on this trip stuck with just a tiny bit of left turn,(this had happened 3 times before, reported to Boeing, but those cases where during the daylight). My crew didn't see it until the autopilot couldn't hold anymore up elevator and the autopilot tripped off and the aircraft rolled into a split 'S'. They recovered in the proper manner but the airspeed went up to M1.06 on the recovery. They diverted to Fargo North Dakota where Boeing inspected the aircraft and replaced all the fiberglass parts that blew off.

Then, ANC to Hong Kong. Very strong winds out of ANC. Aircraft hit by a big gust that yawed the aircraft and the #2 engine pylon failed. The engine left and took all of the leading wing back to the main spar out to the #1 engine. Again the crew did a fantastic job of flying the aircraft, manually, and returned to ANC safely.

Two more AD's from Boeing.

My point is sometime in our careers the unusual happens and our experience and knowledge are required to safely return. We can't expect the new systems available today to catch something like these cases. We are pilots and as I always told my crews "I don't see any feathers on your arms, so you are up there by the grace of God". Learn everything you can about flying and don't be afraid to hand fly them once in a while.

[Evan]

We can't expect the new systems available today to catch something like these cases.

Why not? Systems could catch the roll departure you describe sooner than a crew would. The Airbus FBW matches control commands with actual results and makes adjustments as needed. It knows attitude. If there is a control surface issue, it could compensate just as effectively as a crew, but with perfect consistency.

The same goes for the pylon departure. Just because the (relatively primitive) systems on the 747 lack these capabilities doesn't mean they can't be introduced.

The absolute need for a human pilot comes in if the systems themselves fail entirely. But this has never happened.

[Gabriel]

The absolute need for a human pilot comes in if the systems themselves fail entirely.

In the future, maybe. Today there is no plane whatsoever with the capability to identify and correct or compensate for anywhere close to all abnormalities short of a full system failure.
Even easy things like an airspeed disagree cannot be handled by current systems.
Even the GA planes that have the new "safe return" capability to handle pilot incapacitation can't handle technical issues. They are called "bad pilot - good plane" for a reason.

[Evan]

In the future, maybe. Today there is no plane whatsoever with the capability to identify and correct or compensate for anywhere close to all abnormalities short of a full system failure.
Even easy things like an airspeed disagree cannot be handled by current systems.
Even the GA planes that have the new "safe return" capability to handle pilot incapacitation can't handle technical issues. They are called "bad pilot - good plane" for a reason.

Yes, I'm referring to what can be achieved with current technology, not what has been achieved. We are talking about the future here.

[3WE]

Pilots bad.

[3WE]

***until the autopilot couldn't hold anymore up elevator and the autopilot tripped off and…***

Seems to me this happens often enough that we need a nice gentle warning: “Um guys, Otto here, I’m HOLDING some fairly significant inputs here, and MIGHT give you the plane back in a rather phugoided-up state if things continue.”

Now, it seems, “the plane sneaks over to a 35 degree bank and then BAM- RAPID ROLL, YOUR PLANE, HAVE FUN.”

[Evan]

Seems to me this happens often enough that we need a nice gentle warning: “Um guys, Otto here, I’m HOLDING some fairly significant inputs here, and MIGHT give you the plane back in a rather phugoided-up state if things continue.”

Now, it seems, “the plane sneaks over to a 35 degree bank and then BAM- RAPID ROLL, YOUR PLANE, HAVE FUN.”

This is because autopilot has always been provided as a tool for good, attentative pilots, not an automated stand-in for lazy ones.

As capabilites increase, this 1960's mentality has to change. In upset situations, the transition from autoflight to manual flight should be blended, not abrupt. But really, autoflight alone should be able to handle any upset situation.

[3WE]

But really, autoflight alone should be able to handle ANYupset situation.

What’s my favorite phrase, Gabriel? (That is favorite AFTER aggressive pull ups should be carefully measured and monitored and it’s hard to stall at healthy attitudes and air speeds)

[TeeVee]

who coined this phrase here, "oh the ironing?"

[Gabriel]

What’s my favorite phrase, Gabriel? (That is favorite AFTER aggressive pull ups should be carefully measured and monitored and it’s hard to stall at healthy attitudes and air speeds)

Not sure... The one about absolute statements, about riding a bicycle, or about squids? (oops, wrong forum)

[3WE]

Not sure... The one about absolute statements, about riding a bicycle, or about squids? (oops, wrong forum)

Expeletive-laden, ban-worthy, personal flame attack! Squids are not_my favorite topic (by a long shot) and bike riding is very narrow (Evan has never done it).

Absolute statements are almost always wrong!

[Evan]

But really, autoflight alone should be able to handle any upset situation.

Just curious, can anyone think of an exception to this "absolute" statement when an autoflight system has redundant internal attitude reference and power level data as well as redundant static air data and radar altitude data, and GPS and an internal terrain database and full control surface authority from the very moment the upset begins?

[3WE]

Just curious, can anyone think of an exception to this "absolute" statement when an autoflight system has redundant internal attitude reference and power level data as well as redundant static air data and radar altitude data, and GPS and an internal terrain database and full control surface authority from the very moment the upset begins?

*A aircraft malfunction resulting in control reversal.

*Slats retracted on one wing with no indication during a critical, minimum-speed engine-out climb out.

*An engine shreds your hydraulic lines, giving you only the power levers for control.

Hey everyone, join in, this is fun!

[Evan]

*A aircraft malfunction resulting in control reversal.

On FBW? No.

*Slats retracted on one wing with no indication during a critical, minimum-speed engine-out climb out.

On a proper FBW system, there would be indication and compensation.

*An engine shreds your hydraulic lines, giving you only the power levers for control.

This hasn't occurred since hydraulics were redesigned to be more redundant. However, an autoflight system could be programmed to degrade to power-levels-only control.

Hey everyone, join in, this is fun!

Indeed!