Originally Posted by
infrequentflyer789
Second:
I don't think stopping autotrim would have affected this accident. I know you've argued that had the nose gone down they'd have diagnosed the stall, but I'm not so sure.
I fail to remember reading a suggestion that "recognizing the stall" was a reason for the autrim to be detrimental. It was rather making the elevators NU even more effective, and the elevators ND less effective, and thus making overall a lot more difficult to get out of the stall.
Someone mentioned the stall incident, and recovery of the Tarom A310 approaching Orly, and pilot action on Manual Trim, and I've read that as a case, in which the pilot recognized early that the angle of the THS will affect how he can get out of the stall, and acted on it.
When the a/c did pitch down in stall what was the reaction ?
Pull-up, hard...
That brings up another problem caused by the behavior of the machine.... They had the Stall Warning sound coming back each time, so under pressure and confusion, they went back to the controls input that silenced that.
Changing something one way to "fix" one accident may make things worse in other cases and end up killing more people.
The cautionary attitude should not overwhelm the technical understanding of the problem.
Originally Posted by
CONF iture
I note that limits for the 320 electric trim and manual trim are different.
It is apparently not the case for the 330 ?
I am really curios to see the answer to this. I sense that someone, maybe a group, involved in deciding that, have been asked questions quite a bit by now.
Were the A320 limits on autotrim always that way? Did ever a change been introduced by an upgrade?