[QUOTE=Evan;n1121090]True. But what aircraft does that?[/[quote]
None, but mine was not an A vs B rant or anything oike that. Not comparing airplanes, just analyzing how automation / technology played a role.
As I recall, it wasn't. The first time that the TL were touched was at the TOC when the stall warning came out and they responded by firewalling and pulling up. As I recall... (I can be wrong)
Again, not comparing airplanes.
How is FD not automation? It absolutely is. It is not autopilot but it is automation. It converts the bias of the expected performance vs the actual performance in attitude command cues to be followed by the pilot (human or automatic). It is much easier to keep the FD crossbar centered than to keep the crossbar of the ILS centered, for example, because the FS is already telling you the pitch and bank needed to capture and track the GS and LOC. Without the FD, a pilot needs to look at the deviation of the needle and the trend, estimate what correction is needed in heading or vertical speed, adjust the attitude for that heading and vertical speed, and constantly change those targets as you approach the center else you overshoot. The same if you want to keep an altitude and ground track. All that process is automated with the FD, you just keep the attitude where the FD tells you.
Well, it is loss the of automatic envelope protection.
Ok, not automation, but technology that will need to be taken into account if you want single pilot ops at cruise.
None do yet, but I think this is a must for single pilot ops at cruise.
I think / hope that Maximus will make the link between AF447, technology/automation, and single pilot ops.
None, but mine was not an A vs B rant or anything oike that. Not comparing airplanes, just analyzing how automation / technology played a role.
As I recall, the thrust lock was recognized and removed before the stall. Anyway, the pitch maneuver is what caused the stall.
True, but what aircraft turns off FD's in this situation? Anyway, that's not automation.
How is FD not automation? It absolutely is. It is not autopilot but it is automation. It converts the bias of the expected performance vs the actual performance in attitude command cues to be followed by the pilot (human or automatic). It is much easier to keep the FD crossbar centered than to keep the crossbar of the ILS centered, for example, because the FS is already telling you the pitch and bank needed to capture and track the GS and LOC. Without the FD, a pilot needs to look at the deviation of the needle and the trend, estimate what correction is needed in heading or vertical speed, adjust the attitude for that heading and vertical speed, and constantly change those targets as you approach the center else you overshoot. The same if you want to keep an altitude and ground track. All that process is automated with the FD, you just keep the attitude where the FD tells you.
(protection / stall warning) Certainly, but that is not automation.
(alternative independent airspeed source)Ditto.
I have always agreed with that. All airliners should have automated response to UAS to remain in the speed envelope until the crew can assess and take over. But none do.
I think / hope that Maximus will make the link between AF447, technology/automation, and single pilot ops.
Comment