|
Originally Posted by BoldPilot
(Post 2952436)
The problem faced when people talk about this issue is that they assume computers of today are flying the airliners. Computers are being designed now to think and problem solve. A completely new era for technology will emerge. There will come a day somewhere in the far future when computers will have greater intelligence than man. Therefore a pilotless airliner is plausible.
|
Originally Posted by High on sky
(Post 2952352)
The only thing malfunctions induce is a corrective action. The corrective action can either be appropriate or not.
There are exceedingly few scenarios where a malfunction, if properly responded to, might still result in aircraft damage/hull loss. So, in my opinion, an incorrect response to a malfunction is actually a greater threat to the safety of the aircraft than the malfunction itself in 99% of cases. Therefore, if there is an accident due to improperly followed procedures, I would say it was human induced/human error/pilot error. Whatever you want to call it. The malfunction is almost meaningless at that point. If someone steps on the wrong rudder during an engine failure and plants it in the dirt, was it the malfunctioning engine that caused the crash or improper response? If you think it’s the former, then please stay away from my flight deck. |
Go read QF32 if you think pilotless airliners are coming or are plausible.
|
Originally Posted by cadetdrivr
(Post 2951100)
^ ^ ^
FWIW, that A320 is doing exactly what the pilot commanded. Is there any pilot out there, except perhaps for the one who was flying that day, who thinks full stall demonstrations are a good idea at very low altitudes? Every single Boeing ever made would have also ended up in the trees. Not sure where you got the idea they were doing stalls. ID |
Originally Posted by Inside DEENA
(Post 2952551)
Ummm, they were executing a flyby (in full landing configuration) , and when they tried to actually go around the computer overrode them and drove them into the trees.
Not sure where you got the idea they were doing stalls. ID Not exactly. Yes they were doing a low approach, but they got way lower than planned, didn’t realize (they weren’t charted) that there were big trees at the end of the runway. The power was in the bucket and the spool up time was too late plus they were behind the power curve. Have you actually flown the bus? Under no circumstances will the computer “override” a TO/GA commanded thrust. Yes, I have had instances where the motors “seemed” like they weren’t responding because they were spooling down and it took a second to get them going again in the other direction but it will never override anything you do within the realms of the flight envelope protection (pitch, roll and speed/AOA). If anything the motors feel stuck at max thrust in TOGA lock after a wind shear escape if you hit Alpha prot. |
Originally Posted by Inside DEENA
(Post 2952551)
Ummm, they were executing a flyby (in full landing configuration) , and when they tried to actually go around the computer overrode them and drove them into the trees.
ID They had all the power they needed all they had to do was manually push the throttles up to Flex or TOGA. They thought that the auto thrust system was going to maintain selected speed for the fly by. They got so low that the auto thrust system went into landing mode. If they had flown the pass with the auto thrust system turned off they would have had normal manual throttles. If they would have shut off the auto thrust with the throttle switches or the auto thrust button the thrust would have immediately jumped up to commanded throttle position. By time they figured out that the auto thrust system was no longer providing commanded speed it was to late. If you watch the video the engines come up to full power just as the airplane starts to eat the trees. Also if you watch the you tube video with the narrator that talks about the first fully automated airplane.. Everything he says is technically and factually incorrect. The “computer” did not and cannot override manual throttle movements once moved out of the auto thrust engagement range. |
Originally Posted by Airhoss
(Post 2952623)
Absolutely false.
They had all the power they needed all they had to do was manually push the throttles up to Flex or TOGA. They thought that the auto thrust system was going to maintain selected speed for the fly by. They got so low that the auto thrust system went into landing mode. If they had flown the pass with the auto thrust system turned off they would have had normal manual throttles. If they would have shut off the auto thrust with the throttle switches or the auto thrust button the thrust would have immediately jumped up to commanded throttle position. By time they figured out that the auto thrust system was no longer providing commanded speed it was to late. If you watch the video the engines come up to full power just as the airplane starts to eat the trees. Also if you watch the you tube video with the narrator that talks about the first fully automated airplane.. Everything he says is technically and factually incorrect. The “computer” did not and cannot override manual throttle movements once moved out of the auto thrust engagement range. This At every point in the sequence the airplanes did EXACTLY what the pilots commanded. |
Originally Posted by Airhoss
(Post 2952623)
Absolutely false.
They had all the power they needed all they had to do was manually push the throttles up to Flex or TOGA. They thought that the auto thrust system was going to maintain selected speed for the fly by. They got so low that the auto thrust system went into landing mode. If they had flown the pass with the auto thrust system turned off they would have had normal manual throttles. If they would have shut off the auto thrust with the throttle switches or the auto thrust button the thrust would have immediately jumped up to commanded throttle position. By time they figured out that the auto thrust system was no longer providing commanded speed it was to late. If you watch the video the engines come up to full power just as the airplane starts to eat the trees. Also if you watch the you tube video with the narrator that talks about the first fully automated airplane.. Everything he says is technically and factually incorrect. The “computer” did not and cannot override manual throttle movements once moved out of the auto thrust engagement range. It has never ceased to amaze me how Airbus pilots time and time again absolutely butcher the Habsheim crash. Your post is no different. The ENTIRE bolded portion is patently false and did not happen as you describe it. You are misinformed on how that crew made that approach and what position the throttles were in. |
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
(Post 2952653)
It has never ceased to amaze me how Airbus pilots time and time again absolutely butcher the Habsheim crash. Your post is no different. The ENTIRE bolded portion is patently false and did not happen as you describe it. You are misinformed on how that crew made that approach and what position the throttles were in.
|
Originally Posted by Hatesheavys
(Post 2952724)
Lol Airhoss is a keyboard expert on all things aviation, he has like 4000+ post, how dare you disagree with him!!
Just FYI I’m one of the few guys on here that will admit when I make a mistake. You are welcome to disagree with me. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:36 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands