Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AJ Goes Airbus

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I dunno....

    ...you post a fun youtube video....

    ...and everybody comes over all defensive and starts talking technical.

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

    Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.........

    THIS.......IS.......JUST........FOR........FUN.......OK?

    http://youtu.be/vdXLUstL3Io

    OH yes....to AJ, Don't even 'effing THINK about it !! I know how you Aussies like a race !
    Last edited by brianw999; 2012-08-01, 16:03.
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
      I think I've posted this before but what the hell....here it is again.....Try surviving this in a Boeing !!!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKBAB...e_gdata_player
      Ask these guys about the computer deciding what is better for you

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEH7OpnA-I4

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by W7PSK View Post
        Ask these guys about the computer deciding what is better for you

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEH7OpnA-I4
        That happened nearly a quarter of a century ago ( 1988 ) and was caused by a mixture of pilot error and misunderstanding of the computer control system. Whether or not you believe the official report, times and technology have moved on since then to prevent that happening again.

        Boeing 737's were falling out of the skies in those days as well, often due to a jammed rudder actuator. Should we ban mechanical/hydraulic systems ?

        I posted the video for a bit of fun, trouble is, I forgot that the anoraks would come out of the drainholes as a result !!
        If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by W7PSK View Post
          Ask these guys about the computer deciding what is better for you

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEH7OpnA-I4
          I don't know what "these guys" think, but if they think something it's because they are alive, and they should thank "the computer" for that.

          They made the flyby too low (it was supposed to be done at 100 ft).
          They made it too slow.
          The engine thrust was set too low.
          They started to go-around too late.
          By then they had no speed to trade for altitude, no engine power to provide the required thrust, and no time to get that thrust: the too low thrust setting meant a delay in getting the needed thrust do to time it takes these engines to spool-up when starting from a too low setting.

          And "the computer" had nothing to do with all of the above.

          The pilot still wanted to climb, something that was physically impossible, but he insisted and pulled up hard. This is the only part where "the computer" decided from them. It said "I won't let you raise the nose past this much".

          If "the computer" would have let the pilot do what he decided to do, he would have stalled the plane likely crashing with worse consequences.

          Most persons on this plane survived this crash THANKS to the computer deciding for the pilot.

          --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
          --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
            times and technology have moved on since then to prevent that happening again.
            No. It would happen again. The computer can override some pilots' actions that would put the plane outside the flight envelope, but they won't for example prevent a 9/11.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
              THIS.......IS.......JUST........FOR........FUN.......OK?
              Sometimes a fun post goes serious.

              Sometimes a serious post goes silly.

              It's a sign of a healthy forum.
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
                I dunno....

                ...you post a fun youtube video....

                ...and everybody comes over all defensive and starts talking technical.

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

                Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.........

                THIS.......IS.......JUST........FOR........FUN.......OK?

                http://youtu.be/vdXLUstL3Io

                OH yes....to AJ, Don't even 'effing THINK about it !! I know how you Aussies like a race !
                It is very clear that the Boeings do not have that "envelope protection" BS. I also find the parking maneuer amazing- Gabriel at those speeds, would the tail not provide more weather-vaning and suppress the ability to do the "tail spin".
                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                  No. It would happen again. The computer can override some pilots' actions that would put the plane outside the flight envelope, but they won't for example prevent a 9/11.
                  Cue up the circular argument...dry silicone semiconductor computer monitors the wet carbon semiconductor computer, or vice versa...and, who has the final authority and when? And do we dilute classical aerodynamics, or emulate them?
                  Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    AJ, is the position with JetStar?

                    Also, I don't know if you can answer this here (or feel comfortable doing so), but will this help you move up the line (to other, larger aircraft), sooner?

                    Before long, may we well see you on A380s, seeing that you have the training, 787s (if ever they do arrive)?

                    Also, now that you have the training, where is there (and for what types) the greatest demand for pilots (and for what types) within the Qantas group?
                    Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      No. It would happen again. The computer can override some pilots' actions that would put the plane outside the flight envelope, but they won't for example prevent a 9/11.
                      Gabriel...Please tell me you typed that with your tongue very firmly wedged in your cheek ? !!

                      PS. I'll whisper this very quietly because we don't want too many people to know do we but since 9/11 Airbus have fitted to new, and retrofitted to old aircraft a self destruct mechanism that can be remotely activated from Toulouse in the event of an Airbus being used in a 9/11 type incident.
                      Apparantly it can be made to look like a terrorist missile attack. Saves an awful lot on insurance payouts dont'cha know.
                      If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        And now...getting back to the subject in hand. Well done AJ on the promotion. I assume you're moving across to Jetstar ?

                        Re: the A380 ? Am I right in saying that the step up is actually not that technically hard as many Airbus systems are used across the range. Seems blase' to say it but really the A380 is just bigger and has two more engines ?
                        I would imagine your next promotional step up would be to the A330 ?
                        Last edited by brianw999; 2012-08-02, 08:58.
                        If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
                          PS. I'll whisper this very quietly because we don't want too many people to know do we but since 9/11 Airbus have fitted to new, and retrofitted to old aircraft a self destruct mechanism that can be remotely activated from Toulouse in the event of an Airbus being used in a 9/11 type incident.
                          Apparantly it can be made to look like a terrorist missile attack. Saves an awful lot on insurance payouts dont'cha know.
                          Shhhhh! But now that you mention it, since Airbus (and all) has fitted and retrofitted a reinforced cockpit door with en electronic key and strict secure protocols to open that door in flight. That, combined with the Flight Deck Officer program (where voluntarily signing pilots, and there are many of them, carry a gun and are trained to defend the cockpit), the awareness of the passengers and the flight attendants, that are willing to fight a disturbing passenger let alone a terrorist, the Air marshal program (where armed Air Marshals fly undercover in random flights, stricter check-in security, and better ATC and Air Force readiness to respond to shut down a plane if necessary, WILL very likely prevent another 9/11.

                          What I meant, and I'm sure that you understood, is that nothing in the A310, A320, A330, A380, B777, or B787 incorporated in the technology since that accident will prevent it if the pilots do what they did then, or if run out of fuel, or if they fly into a mountain, or if they land too long and fast and overrun, etc.

                          --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                          --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            AJ,

                            I wish you much success.

                            All the best !
                            Erez.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Thanks to those who said nice things!

                              Foxtrot, I've actually been a pilot for 22 years!

                              AA 1818, yes, it's with Jetstar, there is little to no upward movement in Qantas, and this is unlikely to change.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                A318 and steep approach could be interesting...
                                "The real CEO of the 787 project is named Potemkin"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X