PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AF447 wreckage found
View Single Post
Old 16th Aug 2011, 15:34
  #2936 (permalink)  
RetiredF4
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 776
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Safety Concerns

I am sorry but this is now becoming stupid. Reading some comments here you would think aviation safety has just taken a nose dive.
It is not mine. But in my time we looked at the matter and adressed safety issues wether we lost one aircraft in 10 years or 5. If you get lazy and look at an accident as an acceptable and necessary loss, you will loose more.


F4 you are only doing the opposite of those who oppose your view. Its no different.
As you might have observed, i´m mostly reading. But when things are being posted wrong /like adding up dual SS input and selling that as advantage and at some other occasions i feel the need to contribute. I try not to side with AB or Boing or Fokker or any other manufacturer, i dont care who is building the aircraft. I do exactly what you challenge, its for safety, as my job with the airforce as chief standeval of a wing brought it with.

The starting point in any discussion like this should be safety. Not one of you has provided a safety case. You have only posted emotive comments.
That is your point of view, but you have no emotive motivation?

iceman50

RetiredF4

Whilst I agree with some of what you have said in your post, here you say
Quote:
Your statement suggests, that the PNF observed large SS inputs in the roll channel and tells the PF to make them smaller,

whereas in reality PNF adresses the PF to touch the lateral controls (in this case those would be ailerons and rudder) as little as possible, meaning to focus on other important things like pitch. That is quite different to your altered terminology.

I think you are making interpretations as from the BEA Interim report, he may have been making the calls due to the roll he was experiencing and seeing on the PFD.
You are correct, it is my personal conclusion (like DozyWannabe might have his own), i should have told so. IMHO it makes sense though, PNF primary concern was pitch and altitude and he was looking for the reason why PF was falling way behind this task. And i think we agree that PF was spending too much time with lateral control.

Finally we dont know for sure.

franzl

Last edited by RetiredF4; 16th Aug 2011 at 15:37. Reason: correcting PF to PNF
RetiredF4 is offline