I was wondering whether to dignify this with a reply, but I'm in a realtively good mood, so what the hell...
Originally Posted by
CONF iture
Why don't you take a rest Dozy, you're writing nonsenses one after the other.
Aah... I love the smell of
ad hominem in the morning - smells like, er,
ad hominem.
You fail 2 ADRs to switch to Alternate Law, not to simulate UAS.
Yes, and the TRE also failed the speed tape and altimeter on my PFD to simulate the conditions (the sim couldn't fail one or the other - only both), so I read the altitude from the standby. I wasn't giving Lyman an in-depth blow-by-blow account because I wrote about it in extensive detail on an earlier thread, I was simply giving an overall view.
Failing 2 ADCs switches to Alternate Law, as will a UAS event - that was the point I was making.
You understand nothing about Alpha Max, you understand nothing about the protections, you didn't read the Habsheim report, and obviously understand nothing about aerodynamics ...
But please comment further, I'm curious to know how deep you'll go in this nonsense.
Now let's see - Alpha Max isn't a protection, it's a variable value indicating the maximum AoA an aerofoil can reach before it stops generating lift (this is simplified, but you catch my drift). AoA is determined by the coefficient of lift, the formula for calculating which includes airspeed/Mach as a variable.
I hope I'm more-or-less right so far, and incidentally, damn you to hell for making me revise algebra for this.
Alpha Prot is a layer of protection within the flight control logic and is the first protection triggered as AoA approaches Alpha Max. This protection inhibits further pitch-up, retracts speedbrakes if deployed and limits bank angle to 45 degrees.
Alpha Floor is a protection within the autothrottle logic and is triggered at a predetermined point between the onset of Alpha Prot and arrival at Alpha Max, and primarily sets thrust to TO/GA.
Neither of these protections are a direct function of airspeed, purely that of AoA - but because airspeed is a variable used in the calculation of AoA there is an indirect relationship. In short, because you can increase your AoA by increasing pitch and by bleeding off airspeed, the relative pitch of Alpha Max (and the protection triggers) will decrease if you bleed off airspeed.
Alpha Prot and Alpha Floor both activate just short of Alpha Max, so when you state that the logic prevents Alpha Max from being reached you are technically correct. However, the reason for holding just short of Alpha Max is because it provides a safety margin. If Alpha Prot triggered at Alpha Max itself, it would take only a small gust to stall the aircraft and the protection would be much less effective.
Absolutely not. After the crash, EASA issued an AD, did it kill the 330 ?
Well no, but let's not ignore the fact that a significant percentage of the fleet had already had the SB work carried out prior to AF447. And it's not about "killing" a type, it's about airlines kicking up a stink because their aircraft aren't making money while they're on the ground.
Obviously the overkill has been to not treat the situation seriously enough before.
Your opinion, to which you are both welcome and entitled. In an ideal world I'd agree - but this isn't an ideal world. As I said, the risk posed by the Thales AA pitot tubes strikes me as considerably less than that posed by the 737 rudder PCU issue, and yet the latter was never deemed worthy of an AD with grounding to take effect immediately or otherwise.
Originally Posted by
CONF iture
No need to look, that's the first thing that will jump in your face : 2 yokes in that very unusual full aft position as soon as you enter the flightdeck.
Again with the presentation of your opinion as fact. A few posts back I listed four accidents just off the top of my head where the yoke cue was not acted upon. I'm not disputing that it *might* have helped, but it's a considerable stretch to claim it as a certainty (or an "elephant in the room").
I hate to use a driving analogy because it's not really the same, but when you've been driving for a while you rarely, if ever, *look* at the steering wheel. You're either looking out of the windscreen and reading the road, or glancing at your instruments - the latter of which causes you to look *through* the wheel, which after a time becomes automatic. I'd imagine it's the same for pilots, although they spent a much greater amount of time looking at the instruments and "through" the yoke, if there is one. I suspect this is one reason why there are so many incidents where the yoke position was not taken as a cue.
I'm genuinely curious as to why you think how he opened the door is so important.