Originally Posted by
Airhoss
Absolutely false ^^^^
They know pretty much exactly what happened and the airbus does not "reject" pilot inputs. That A-330 was doing exactly what the pilot was telling it to do. If at any point while still at recoverable altitude the PF would have lowered the nose they would have flown out of the stall. And if any point at a recoverable altitude the PNF would have taken stick priority from the PF and lowered the nose they would have survived.
Unlike yourself I am not speaking from a point of conjecture and "I done heard about it from some guy.." I've got several thousand hours of Airbus time both as an F/O and a Capt.
The A-320 is so "pilot proof" that it's got one of the worst safety records in the transport category fleet in fact in the history of jet airliners. That airplane has a ton of little I gotchas that will kill you if you don't pay attention and if you're not on top of your game.
The fact is Sky you have no experience on most of the types of aircraft you speak so "authoritatively" about, you also have never worked at, been hired by a major. Have you even interviewed at one single solitary major airline?
Yet you bloviate about like a seasoned old airline pro. Why?
That is great Hoss. I was only reiterating what I saw on the news report. Like I said I do not know much about Airbus. The news report suggested that the computer was going against pilot inputs or was giving false indications because it was confused. It was meant to give you some traction to against me in regards to computer driven planes.
Watch the news report please. You are attacking me for these concepts but they are all from the Nightline story from Wednesday last week. You know I love you guys but you like to swing at the flames and miss the fire. The airbus is a detail the debate is about how automation is robbing pilots of their value. I don't need to be an Airbus expert to see that.
Skyhigh