AF 447 Thread no. 4

[RR_NDB]

Redundancy concept

What other a/c does it any other way ?

The 777 has exactly the same number of identical pitots, also feeding an airdata and FBW system that can go wrong in exactly the same way (pitch-up in cruise - uncommanded in this case - losing speed to point of stall) when fed bad air data.

infrequentflyer789, Please refer first to my post here made when answering to A33Zab

There's been a lot of discussion about alternatives to pitots, but none of them are ready for production or without engineering problems.

Why not to have before (Laser AS meters*) hotter Pitot´s?

When A and B and every other mfr are doing it exactly the same way, it is probably becuase there is (as yet) no other credible alternative.

Not necessarily as i am sure you know. IMHO A and B are wrong in this important design aspect.

I will provide a hint: Redundancy works when you have elements failure. AFAIK the Pitot´s in all registered UAS cases didn´t fail. The parts (P/N#) were used in the subsequent legs/flights.

(*) Airbus SAS filed patent(s) on that as showed and posted earlier.

I am not against A or B. IMHO there is a wrong application of the Redundancy Concept for a very important parameter, the AS.