Originally Posted by grounded27
Damn Airbus, seems like both pilots were more concerned with interpreting ECAM failures than flying the damn plane??????Don't think this would happen with analog pilots in an analog aircraft or simply an analog pilot reverting to simple piloting skills.
Why Airbus in particular? Are modern flight decks on other types much different? Did "analogue" flightdecks provide better information in unreliable airspeed situations, for example?
I'm sure I'll be labelled an Airbus "fanboy" by some but, as someone outside the industry, I guess I'm just having difficulty understanding why an incident with a FBW Airbus prompts so many to crawl over the entire design to find fault while similar incidents involving other types (e.g. inappropriate reaction to stall warning, loss of air data) result in more focus on crew actions. Oh well, I'm here to learn.
Originally Posted by grounded27
Having said that, I suspect the pitot's froze up due to insufficent heating, possibly as a result of insufficent pitot heat. Wiring, pitot elements.. I question??
I can't vouch for this particular series of threads but elsewhere the discussions seem to indicate that the Thales pitots used on AF447 met certification standards but not by as much of a margin as the later Thales and the Goodrich pitots. It's also my understanding that there was no indication of any electrical fault.