PDA

View Full Version : Airbus FlutterBugs and FlibbertyGibbets


Belgique
19th Sep 2002, 16:10
Can anyone help me out here? (ratbags remain in limbo pls). Seems to be (prima facie) yet another case for CCTV inside and outside.

Request Received

Request for comment
I am hoping they will adress the unresolved issue of no feedback and not tell me they're using stronger attachment fittings. The seminal issue here is absence of feedback. Shades of departing vertical fins, what?

Here is an Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) report on an incident involving an A319 in which the flight crew was not aware of vibration or flutter. If memory serves, the A319 followed the A320 and therefore is a FBW aircraft. At any rate, I'd appreciate any comments/insights you or your colleagues might have. I'd like to present this case in the next issue. If a response could be generated in the next 5-6 days, I can run it in our Sept. 30 issue. The acronym RVDT seems to translate variously to Rate variable displacement transducer or Rotary Variable Differential Transformers (or any permutation thereof). LVDT is Linear Variable..... Someone's getting confused by their own acronyms.
Much appreciated, J

ASRS report:
On aircraft twice in two weeks. The left aileron panel between aileron and rear spar broke causing major damage in both incidents (there is an AD note pertaining to this problem). I bring this incident up to reflect on how it was discovered. Both of these incidents were reported by passengers. The cockpit crew neither felt nor observed anything amiss with the aircraft. Had this not been a 'fly by wire' aircraft, a vibration would have been felt on the control wheel and reported, thus minimizing the damage and increasing the safety factor. However, because of the 'fly by wire', the computers compensated for the flutter and vibration that occurred, and did it so well the cockpit crew knew nothing about what was happening to their aircraft. There would be no warning until a complete failure occurred and then a possible catastrophic event could occur I believe this could be prevented if we were to reprogram the onboard computers utilizing the existing RVDT's that report to the onboard computers. When the computers sense abnormal movement or vibration, a warning would be sent to the cockpit. I believe this would bring the situation to the attention of the crew and it would then be checked out and repaired before the damage would reach a major stage. At present there's no telling what the preamble symptom to failure time was.

Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: The reporter stated this airplane XYZ had two reports of passengers observing the left aileron to wing upper panel vibrating and fluttering which incurred damage to the aileron and panel was cracked. The reporter stated the carrier had three other events of this panel vibration or flutter on other airplanes in this fleet. The reporter said an airworthiness directive has been issued by the FAA to install heavier nut plates and fasteners on the panel. The reporter stated the flight-crews were unaware of the vibration as no feedback was felt in the controls - and no flight control warning was annunciated. The reporter said it may be possible to modify the flight control units to trigger a flight control warning when a control surface or fairing panel is fluttering or vibrating.

m&v
19th Sep 2002, 18:12
I'm not too sure of your question,but this aspect of 'no feed back'from fly by wire has been a definite concern since the Beginning.The most notable 'incident' was the training flt by AirFrance at the Nimes airport.The 'new'320'was being used for circuits.The flt was recalled to Paris for an evening Revenue flt.The final dept from nimes,the crew used the overrun(which was covered with a skif' of snow).Upon applying Takeoff' thrust the Tar covered surface lifted into the tail feathers..Upon rotation the a/c vibrated,the crew suspected Airframe ice.The vib's settled out and the engineer(extra crew )went aft to see if there had been damge sustained.He immediately advised the crew to level off and slow down as the Stabalizer/elevators units were badly damaged.Upon arrival Paris,only 40% of one remained,and 60% the right side.The French pilots union were very dismayed that this incident recieved very little Publicity-and that the flight controls indicated no concerns in the Cockpit...:confused:

Belgique
19th Sep 2002, 22:04
M&V
Basically you have answered the question. i.e.

a. It is a problem

b. There seems to be no ready solution short of external surveillance.

c. Airbus seems to be unconcerned

d. passengers must watch out internally for terrorists and externally for flutterbugs, flibbertygibbets and instant excrescences.... and be ready to intervene in each instance. (This should be written into the passenger briefing card: "Pilot will be unaware of any bits shaking off the airplane so please annotate, sign and tear off the notification card at the bottom of this page and send directly to the pilot if you note any parts coming adrift or shaking violently")

e. A reward system should be in effect for any passenger "saves".

M&V
Would you have some idea of the date of this Nimes incident (or failing that, the year pls?). And thanks for your able assistance.

Flight Detent
20th Sep 2002, 10:22
It's getting really tiresome having to say this, over and over:

"IF IT AIN'T BOEING, I AIN'T GOING!"

what else can one say..........really!!

Cheers

capt waffoo
20th Sep 2002, 15:08
Belgie, my dictionary defines Flibbertigibbet as, "Gossiping, flighty, frivolous or feckless person."

Do you think this is in fact a cabin crew problem after all?

Belgique
20th Sep 2002, 15:59
Waffoo
I guess I might consider a cabin crew-member to be a flighty person. In the aftermath of the British Midlands 737 accident at Kegworth, I also don't mind if they're a bit gossipy and feeling a bit feckless - as long as they aren't afraid to speak up or take on board something a passenger notices. In fact, in the aftermath of the 11th Sep 01 experience, any passenger who decides not to participate actively (in addressing any apparent anomaly) probably has a death-wish.

No-one's about to change the status quo with respect to the Airbus idiosyncrasy addressed here, so it's another area where passengers and cabin crew need to be observant. An observant passenger is another set of eyes and ears working towards a safer operation. An observant and inquiring mind is a prerequisite for cabin crew-members, but they are far outnumbered by the passengers.... so, in my view, they're all oarsmen back there.