PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AF 447 Thread No. 6
View Single Post
Old 8th Oct 2011, 02:37
  #1160 (permalink)  
CONF iture
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DozyWannabe
Before the crash, you can bet the airlines would have balked.
Why would they have if it can help them to avoid a latent unsafe condition ?

Also, my understanding is, and people with knowledge will correct me, an AD is on the manufacturer’s arms, but a SB is for the airline … ?


ChristiaanJ,
The only thing is that the Goodrich model has proved to be much more resistant to ice crystals than the Thales ones.
Why weren't the standards changed, after the first UAS incidents due to hi-alt pitot tube icing occurred?
As early as 1999 the German BFU had recommended to modify the certification criteria for the pitot probes. But the EASA has been waiting AFTER the accident to go ahead.
Also Air Caraibes did an excellent job to report their events to Airbus. What did Airbus ?
Nothing.

Excellent presentation : AF 447 : l'accident expliqué selon le modèle de REASON

Last edited by CONF iture; 9th Oct 2011 at 02:49.
CONF iture is offline