Airbus
12-13-2006 | 10:35 AM
#2
AAmerican Way for AA Pay
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,617
Likes: 0
From: B-737 Pilot
On the contrary, I think it would have been easier for the hijackers to fly Airbuses. There just are'nt many Airbus training facilities in the US, and the cost is more than Boeing products.
12-13-2006 | 10:58 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
(1) Microsoft Flight Simulator at the time only offered Boeing airplanes in their product, it is not until MFS X that they decided to include the Airbus 320.
(2) The Boeing planes (767,757) were bigger than most airbus planes owned by American Airlines (UAL, AA) which are much smaller (319,320), the only airlines who at the time had a bigger airbus, was NW,and US air, (330), but why bother, when their was a handful of 767 and 757s comming from the east to the west with a full tank of gas.
(2) The Boeing planes (767,757) were bigger than most airbus planes owned by American Airlines (UAL, AA) which are much smaller (319,320), the only airlines who at the time had a bigger airbus, was NW,and US air, (330), but why bother, when their was a handful of 767 and 757s comming from the east to the west with a full tank of gas.
Last edited by favila008; 12-13-2006 at 01:46 PM.
12-13-2006 | 11:15 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 0
You guys think too much...The plan for 9/11 evolved - its started as a job involving crop dusters. Atta was denied a loan to buy some cropdusters so he made the decision on his own to shift to hijack commercial planes and use them instead. OBL didn't care or even knew what was happening - he had other manage / take to fruition operational plans. Once the decision was made - the muscle was recruited / trained / and send to the US to assist in the operation.
BTW - OBL and company doesn't abandon an idea until it is made to work. In 1996 they tried to blow - up a plane using liquid explosives. They will not stop until they do it. We should be more concerned about preventing that than wasting time on why they didn't use an Airbus.
BTW - OBL and company doesn't abandon an idea until it is made to work. In 1996 they tried to blow - up a plane using liquid explosives. They will not stop until they do it. We should be more concerned about preventing that than wasting time on why they didn't use an Airbus.
12-13-2006 | 01:13 PM
#6
No one's home
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
And you can now discount your sources as being unreliable and uniformed about 'Busses.
12-13-2006 | 01:21 PM
#7
No one's home
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 0
You may be confusing the envelope protection with the ability to hit the planet. You can not exceed the pitch limits so no, you can not dive a FBW Airbus at 60 degrees... limits are 30deg nose up, 15deg nose down, 67deg bank angle.. in NORMAL Law. You would have to fail some systems to go outside the normal envelope to get to Alternate or Direct Law control and to do that requires knowledge that is beyond many of the guys who routinely fly the 'Bus.
And the main thing was they had trained on Boeings and wanted a big airplane (mass) with lots of fuel (heat potential) to create the bomb to destroy the Towers.
12-13-2006 | 01:39 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
To add and clarify what III Corps mentioned:
On all Airbus planes other than the older A300 and A310, computers prevent the pilot from putting the plane into a climb of more than 30 degrees where it might lose lift and stall. The maximum bank or roll allowed is 67 degrees. The plane's nose-down pitch is limited to 15 degrees. There are protections against overspeed.
And the computer won't allow the plane to make any extreme maneuvers that would exceed 2.5 times the force of gravity.
So I guess, I was wrong, you can crash an Airbus, as long as you don't go beyond its limits. However no one can disagree, that it (crashing/911) was much simpler in a Boeing, and the terrorist knew this.
On all Airbus planes other than the older A300 and A310, computers prevent the pilot from putting the plane into a climb of more than 30 degrees where it might lose lift and stall. The maximum bank or roll allowed is 67 degrees. The plane's nose-down pitch is limited to 15 degrees. There are protections against overspeed.
And the computer won't allow the plane to make any extreme maneuvers that would exceed 2.5 times the force of gravity.
So I guess, I was wrong, you can crash an Airbus, as long as you don't go beyond its limits. However no one can disagree, that it (crashing/911) was much simpler in a Boeing, and the terrorist knew this.
Last edited by favila008; 12-13-2006 at 01:45 PM.
12-13-2006 | 03:05 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,724
Likes: 0
From: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
you're barking up the wrong tree:
Boeing's scary new autopilot patent
...once activated, removes all control from pilots to automatically return a commercial airliner to a predetermined landing location.
...the system has its own power supply, independent of the aircraft’s circuit breakers. The aircraft remains in automatic mode until after landing, when mechanics or government security operatives are called in to disengage the system...
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...+hijacked.html
Cheers
George
Boeing's scary new autopilot patent
...once activated, removes all control from pilots to automatically return a commercial airliner to a predetermined landing location.
...the system has its own power supply, independent of the aircraft’s circuit breakers. The aircraft remains in automatic mode until after landing, when mechanics or government security operatives are called in to disengage the system...
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...+hijacked.html
Cheers
George
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
