Originally Posted by
falconer1
we need no alternatives to pitot tubes..
just well heated ones..
Ok, but it's been nearly two decades that the EASA has been issuing airworthiness directives to replace Pitots by Pitots: the problem is still here and seemingly worsening, more and more frequent. If it was just about augmenting the efficiency of the heaters of the Pitot probes, why hasn't it been done in two decades ? When the responsible of the EASA is being asked why the last Pitot replacement was not mandatory, he suggests that there is no point to replace Pitots by other Pitots which will not offer any improvement over the previous ones. And even after Air Caraibe or the AF447, the Pitot replacement is not mandatory (even given the suspected consequences of a loss of the flight assistances and alternate law 1 or 2). About responsabilities: when air transport companies ask their aircraft manufacturers about more resilient Pitot probes, the manufacturer answers that their probes are up to the specifications and even beyond. They don't improve their products in that direction since they are already compliant to the spec. : isn't it the responsability of the regulatory bodies (EASA, BEA,...) ?
When an inconsistancy is detected on air references (a doubt arises), what about testing the authority of control surfaces as previously suggested ? It does not require any new instrument (or the instrument is the entire airframe)
Jeff