Airbus In-flight Performance is changing again!
 

Airbus, Are you freaking kidding me?

Should we familiarize ourselves with this new method, or should we just wait to the next one?

Make up your mind!

:*

Any specifics?

Very informative.

Come on microburst , expand, define!!!

Perhaps another landing distance change?

Statistically speaking, you can expect a cluster of changes in any complex software system of this age. One only needs to glance at the bevy of changes that IBM enacted in the OS of their mainframes... After about 25 years of operation.

What needs discussion - and discussion that doesn't degrade into an Airbus vs. Boeing slugfest - is whether or not there are little-known flaws in Airbus flight laws.

Again, statistically, it takes many years and numerous operating hours for these pernicious little bugs to reveal themselves.

Referring back to IBM, there was a tiny, insignificant code error in the 360 Operating System which would overwrite some data which had been archived. When it was discovered, IBM had to basically "ground" the operating system until that particular code error could be fixed.

Don't read this wrong - I'm not suggesting that any Airbus needs to be grounded.

I'm simply saying that, given a few recent incidents, maybe they should be looking at their code.

Perfect never, ever happens. But maybe they can refine and research a bit.

Statistically speaking.

Not a pilot, not anti-Airbus. Merely saying that a complex system might have flaws that only reveal after a large number of operations.

they will change a lot of stuff in the new FPE. New matrixes, computation of LD for single or no failure and for several failures… It seems rather complex although after so many methods.

I think it is just best to use the computer

Wasn't that the case for a long time now? I have to say i prefer the iPad version over the windows crap, but of course to each his own.

Some of us are still doing it on paper.

even with computers or iPads we have to be familiar with the QRH performance.

So many changes makes me thing bad of Airbus. How can I trust anything they do if they keep changing things all the time?

Exactly Microburst. Much better never to improve anything so no one has to learn anything new.

The changes are for the better. Enough said.

What you forget Micro is that Airbus have had their 320 out for what... 27 years and they STILL haven't got their Performance act together. In my tenure on the frogmobile they've had 4 (yes FOUR) major Performance calculation changes, and certainly don't believe for a minute this will be the last change.... :rolleyes:

Truer words never spoken. Have a double FAC failure and see how that bloody Toulouse crowd respond...

'Zis is very unusual, you are ze only airline that has ever reported zis problem...."

Dunno what the big issue is, there is an ECAM procedure for that, follow it and do the usual stuff. Covered during type rating and in the normal three year sim cycle.

The big issue Denti was instead of coming back and saying they'll have a full investigation of how it could happen, the :mad: frogs instantly blamed the pilots instead. :*

Apparently you refer to the aftermath of an actual case.

I just went by the normal training schedule and procedure. As it is available it is a "normal" non normal that was apparently thought of as possible by the designers of the airplane (or at least of the ECAM procedures), otherwise it wouldn't exist. It doesn't even carry a LAND ASAP caption which allows us quite a few options to deal with it and as it doesn't even drop one into direct law anymore with gear down (on sharklet equipped aircraft) it is a non issue flying wise.

Try landing an A320 in alternate law and report back...

The new A320 family aircraft have the normal flare law in alternate law and thus do not revert to direct law.