Milarity
9th Apr 2005, 15:12
I have some questions about fault detection devices that I hope will give me a better understanding of the infamous 3-engined B747 thread. It is not my intention to stir the pot, so please don't turn this thread into another row. You will see from my personal details that my experience in this area is minimal, so please don't come out with all guns blazing if my questions appear naive.
Rainboe makes a compelling case (I admire his resolve), but uses the comparison of a B747 on 3 with a tri-jet or twin that is fully serviceable. Using a systems approach to remove emotion and subjectivity, this comparison does not hold up. It would be better to think of the aircraft in question as a system with a known fault versus fully serviceable systems. The emotional proponents argue that the fault cannot be absolutely determined without a physical examination on the ground, leaving sufficient room for doubt if flight continues.
This argument is countered by those that know the B747 best. I can only assume that their confidence comes from the quality of information available in the cockpit. Or is it the build quality and multiple redundancies? Apart from the fire wires mentioned in the thread, what other indications do you have?
With the miniaturisation and cheapness of cameras these days, would optical coverage of the aircraft be useful?
Is kapton insulation a thing of the past? (Random question and nothing to do with the above).
Thanks for any answers, these things prey on the mind when the back of a Boeing is like a second home.
Rainboe makes a compelling case (I admire his resolve), but uses the comparison of a B747 on 3 with a tri-jet or twin that is fully serviceable. Using a systems approach to remove emotion and subjectivity, this comparison does not hold up. It would be better to think of the aircraft in question as a system with a known fault versus fully serviceable systems. The emotional proponents argue that the fault cannot be absolutely determined without a physical examination on the ground, leaving sufficient room for doubt if flight continues.
This argument is countered by those that know the B747 best. I can only assume that their confidence comes from the quality of information available in the cockpit. Or is it the build quality and multiple redundancies? Apart from the fire wires mentioned in the thread, what other indications do you have?
With the miniaturisation and cheapness of cameras these days, would optical coverage of the aircraft be useful?
Is kapton insulation a thing of the past? (Random question and nothing to do with the above).
Thanks for any answers, these things prey on the mind when the back of a Boeing is like a second home.