Originally Posted by
G0ULI
The older type vacuum-driven attitude indicators have bank limits of approximately 100° to 110°, and pitch limits of 60° to 70°. These limits are imposed by the mechanical construction of the gyroscope. Modern designs frequently exceed these limits.
Electrically driven gyros can be designed to display 360° movement in any axis.
Limits are important, but not germane. What would be more instructive would be “lag” (response) of the instrument in dynamic maneuvering...
My exception would be using the instrument’s reading at impact to support (or defeat) a “conclusion” of attitude at RR impact....we are left with the photo of the embankment, and wildly discrepant witness testimony.
So. Why would CAB report “when it ceased functioning” instead of reporting “at second impact”? Is that the case? It leaves open a conclusion that it was somehow relevant to a discussion of initial impact. Sloppy.
It also opens the discussion of bias. When did the boost unit “cease functioning?” We are given a
conclusion that it was damaged by fire, a rather obvious statement, but it biases the readers to a conclusion that fire alone damaged the boost unit,
after impact.