I think you mean there is a hierarchy of alerts, in which a DUAL INPUT alert is well below the priority of the STALL waring.

I think there is a bit more to it with the Airbus callout and what’s prioritised. AF447 stall warning went off over 70 times, that will take priority over the dual input from memory. They did get a dual input but that was much later toward the end.

Nice, Icarus2001. Nothing like a blunt answer. You mean, of course, passenger jets. Bet there's no sideways movement in a Stealth Fighter seat.

Yeah, I looked at (maybe) "that" video before I commented - Hence my comments about the "kinky" seat track.

Which (video), of course, substantiates exactly what I said. The seat moves sideways. Well, it couldn't move sideways if there was no space for it to move into. Which is exactly the point I was making. There is room on the outboard side on the seat, just as much as on the inboard side once the seat has moved over. So I suggest the sideways trick is redundant and unnecessary - unless of course, the problem is a lack of headroom outboard. Which may well be the case. I'm sure you'll inform me on that. Despite the fact that a tipping or pivoting seat back would probably be just as effective and a lot simpler and safer. That whole pilot seat looks weak and flimsy to me. Just like the switch and its cover. Can't see what attaches it to those rails, but I bet the passenger seats are much stronger - probably because, by regulation, they have to be. But which seats are the most important in the entire plane? Not the toilet seats, I guess.

And, thanks to Sailvi767, it would appear that there were / would have been alerts on AF447, but they were drowned out by all the multitudes of other alerts, which again goes to show that Airbuses may not really be any better than Boeings. Obviously, the alerts are not prioritised, just all rammed at the bewildered pilots at random. And that A330 crashed into the sea in a recoverable stall. At least the 787 recovered its own temporary control problem and landed safely, though it's apples and oranges. But what do I know, right Ic?

CNN actually interviewed the passenger who said the pilot had told him the instruments went blank (bit about the pilot is at 2:22 in the video):
edition.cnn.com/2024/03/12/australia/latam-airlines-flight-injuries-new-zealand-tuesday-intl-hnk/index.html

So it seems someone must have lied, either:

• the passenger
• the pilot
• the anonymous officials who allegedly briefed The Air Current journalist
• or the The Air Current Journalist

Boeing has issued a new advisory about 787 pilot seats but the advisory does not mention the LATAM flight.

🧐

Does my memory serve me:- that on the B747 crew seats there was a black button switch which needed pressing to pass power to the multi directional switch (up, down, fore and aft) for seat adjustment, this could be achieved by thumb on the button switch and finger movement of the multi.
Safety engineered?

Smiley, B747, we were not allowed to use the electrical seat adjustments during flight!
The noise of the seat actuator disturbed the passengers in the nose section, whom were either 1st class or the VIP bedroom occupants.

Were there dual inputs on AF447? I thought that the co-pilot in the RH seat was PF, and essentially all inputs came from his side-stick.

Yes. But no mention of the dual input alert.https://bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090...p090601.en.pdf

Thanks for that.

Yep, like I said MOST jet aircraft.

Obviously, nothing could be further from the truth. The alerts are prioritised and not random.

Sorry for the thread drift.

Screens going "blank' and seat moving? Mmmmm someone is telling porkies.

There isn't room on either side of the seat for a pilot to get in or out once the seat is positioned forward (ie the normal flying position). When the seat moves rearward, it moves aft and then outboard by a few inches to create enough room on the inboard side for the pilot to get in or out of the seat. The outboard side would normally be occupied by the pilot's nav bag.


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6f5f4b87ff.jpg
Photo with the seat fully aft and outboard. The space on the outboard side of the seat would normally be occupied by the pilot's nav bag.



https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....8a874f07c1.jpg
Photo with the seat fully forward.

Very little apparently.

Press coverage of seat issue
 

Looking at the photo of the seat fully forward… and assuming stick position is also fully forward. I suppose it would be possible for a porky pilot’s gut to push the stick forward as the seat rolls forward, uncommanded.

However if said pilot was not porky that does bring into play a number of salacious possibilities.

Maybe so. Exactly why I came here. To learn. Mission accomplished. Thanks to all who have assisted.

But that was back in the days when the company was focused on safety and engineering excellence not shareholder dividends.

When I think back to the days of getting systems agreed with Boeing for FANS1 and then look at today's issues I realise it's not just a different company it's a totally different safety and quality ethic.

Gne

Many aircraft have seats that move outboard at the aft end of their travel. The earliest one I'm familair with is the DC-10. However, the DC-10 seat had no controls on the back. They were all on the inboard side.

If you had been on the flight deck you would know that, without sideways travel, it would be unreasonably difficult to get into the seat.

Absolutely nothing, by the looks of things.

OK. Quite simply, when you look at an airliner from the front, it’s round, not square. When you look at it from on top, it’s narrower at the front. The manufacturers haven’t just arranged for inboard access for sh1ts and giggles.

So, in other words, it's pointy at that end.

Not since Concorde retired. :ok: