Airbus technology defects

[CONF iture]

Originally Posted by Clandestino

Can you, or for that matter anyone PPRuNeing, defend this flypast as being executed safely, even prior hitting the trees?

Absolutely not, and I don’t think anybody would argue on that.

But how responsible was it not to communicate to the pilots the following OEBs:
1- OEB 19/1: Engine acceleration deficiency at low altitude.
2- OEB 06/2: Baro-setting cross check.
Knowing that would have been a valuable input for MA not to go there !

Now instead of talking, let's practice a little exercise:

Link A (5 videos)
First video is known as the "Official video", the only one retained by the commission
Following 4 videos ... have been ignored by the commission

Link B (1 video)
That video is the same as the official one ... except for the soundtrack !

For the purpose of that exercise:
- crank up the volume
- take a timing between the yellow balloon … and engine spool up

Do the exercise on the official video from Link A
Do the same exercise on the video from Link B

And draw your own conclusion ...

In the doubt, compare with the remaining 4 videos from Link A and find out which video is the only one not to show the same timing for engine spool up.


Additional notes:

- Identify the differences of wording between official video from Link A and video from Link B.

- Note on official video from Link A the words “TRES BON” at time 0030
How can we ear: "TRES BON" ?
Where is it coming from ?
Who would dare saying "VERY GOOD" on the sight of a crashing aircraft ?

So, if the pilot is the only one at fault, and the airplane so clean ...
Why that need to modify the soundtrack !?