MRA4 Shelved?
Registered User **
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are correct Safeware. However, MRA4 is not a fast jet. I would draw your attention to CS25 Para 1309, and the following excerpt:
Now the MRA4 is not a commercial large aeroplane, but I suspect it could be argued that CS25 would represent best practice.
Safety_Helmut
The aeroplane systems and associated components, considered separately and in relation to other systems, must be designed so that - Any catastrophic failure condition (i) is extremely improbable (ii) does not result from a single failure
Safety_Helmut
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: A 1/2 World away from Ice Statio Kilo
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what is the scuttle on the mean machine? MMA is forecast to start to replace the P3 fleet in 2015 did I say 2025?
I heard the delays were due to having to defrost the BAES flight test crew, due to them being frozen when not required to prolong life
. They were old lads when I was a young' un and I ain't so young no more. I'll wager even Mr F, the bub of the crew has to have his tomatoes started now
.
Or maybe it has more to do with the Trannie bar in the North Lancs resort, that gorilla put them on to, taking up their time
.
Charlie sends
I heard the delays were due to having to defrost the BAES flight test crew, due to them being frozen when not required to prolong life
. They were old lads when I was a young' un and I ain't so young no more. I'll wager even Mr F, the bub of the crew has to have his tomatoes started now .Or maybe it has more to do with the Trannie bar in the North Lancs resort, that gorilla put them on to, taking up their time
.Charlie sends
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: On the outside looking in
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S_H,
Mr Airbus obviously wasn't going along with this idea then:
http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safet...0previous.html
Whereas FJ have the single pilot issue, heavy aircraft have only one rudder.
sw
The aeroplane systems and associated components, considered separately and in relation to other systems, must be designed so that - Any catastrophic failure condition (i) is extremely improbable (ii) does not result from a single failure
http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safet...0previous.html
Whereas FJ have the single pilot issue, heavy aircraft have only one rudder.
sw
Registered User **
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Safeware, considering the time you've taken to find this, it's a shame your research has fallen short. AA587 didn't just lose its rudder, it lost the entire tail fin (vertical stabiliser). Now, I don't believe for one moment that the clause of the standard I quoted was conceived to cover a major structural failure. Have a read of the full report and I think you will find that the accident was considered to be more than just a case of "pilot error"> Have a read of the FAA's report, and also this analysis: www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Reports/CrashOfAA587.pdf
Safety_Helmut
Safety_Helmut
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: On the outside looking in
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S_H,
We are being picky today.
Since your last post, I've actually been working somewhat heavily on current issues rather than researching old ones.
:
I never said that it was 'just a case of pilot error' and the reference to 'heavy aircraft have only one rudder' was back to the original point about an SPOF in the MRA4 rudder.
Do you consider then that the pilot reaction, weather, training, culture etc etc come into the CS25 definition at para 1309 as 'other systems' then?
sw
We are being picky today.
Since your last post, I've actually been working somewhat heavily on current issues rather than researching old ones.
:I never said that it was 'just a case of pilot error' and the reference to 'heavy aircraft have only one rudder' was back to the original point about an SPOF in the MRA4 rudder.
Do you consider then that the pilot reaction, weather, training, culture etc etc come into the CS25 definition at para 1309 as 'other systems' then?
sw
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: On the outside looking in
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't think that it was a daft question - I don't agree, but there are those out there that do, and try to use it in safety arguments.
Just wondered where you stood.
sw
Just wondered where you stood.
sw
In response to the previous request, please see below...
(Assuming it works and the picture actually comes up on the screen...)
[IMG]D
Pictures\Aircraft Pics\MRA4[/IMG]
Which it didn\'t.. Carp... Anyone want to be sent some pictures of the MRA4 and post them up for me.....?
(Assuming it works and the picture actually comes up on the screen...)
[IMG]D
Pictures\Aircraft Pics\MRA4[/IMG]Which it didn\'t.. Carp... Anyone want to be sent some pictures of the MRA4 and post them up for me.....?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't AA587 essentially a series of problem?
Two aeroplanes too close together (wake turbulence)
The Airbus turning too early and hitting vortices
Pilot over controlling the rudder
Poor training by AA
Over sensitive rudder on the Airbus
No real "single point" there in my view, but a combination of factors that could occur on most aeroplanes in one way or another.
Two aeroplanes too close together (wake turbulence)
The Airbus turning too early and hitting vortices
Pilot over controlling the rudder
Poor training by AA
Over sensitive rudder on the Airbus
No real "single point" there in my view, but a combination of factors that could occur on most aeroplanes in one way or another.
Registered User **
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moggiee
Agreed.
Safeware
It was an odd question in that CS25 is "Certification Specification for Large Aeroplanes", it does not describe the requirements of a SMS.
Safety_Helmut
No real "single point" there in my view, but a combination of factors that could occur on most aeroplanes in one way or another.
Safeware
Do you consider then that the pilot reaction, weather, training, culture etc etc come into the CS25 definition at para 1309 as 'other systems' then?
Didn't think that it was a daft question - I don't agree, but there are those out there that do, and try to use it in safety arguments.
Safety_Helmut
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Latin Flyer´s Airport Bar upload here.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: northern ireland
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the last 20 years what has the Nimrod done for us? Since wasting millions with the AEW Nimrod we seem to be walking a familiar path yet again.
However, This might mean that we can finally surgically remove an underachieving and talentless apendage of pilots. Not only are they wasting our flying pay but they are eating their way through enough food to feed half of Sudan!!
I have a piece of advice to all of you Kinloss aircrew........... Do you want fries with that?
However, This might mean that we can finally surgically remove an underachieving and talentless apendage of pilots. Not only are they wasting our flying pay but they are eating their way through enough food to feed half of Sudan!!
I have a piece of advice to all of you Kinloss aircrew........... Do you want fries with that?