Emergency landing Cathay A330-300
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can you say it's not an irrational aeroplane?
Any aeroplane that you might have to engage the autopilot to get you out of trouble is irrational to me.
A recent Airbus fatal runway excursion in South America was caused by the thrust lever system design.
Too many Airbuses are going off doing their own thing.
Any aeroplane that you might have to engage the autopilot to get you out of trouble is irrational to me.
A recent Airbus fatal runway excursion in South America was caused by the thrust lever system design.
Too many Airbuses are going off doing their own thing.
Motorola;
Well, if you can provide us with your notion of "too many" by citing Airbus accidents that support your claim that the airplane is indeed 'irrational' and doing its own thing in spite of a flight crews' best efforts to deny the airplane its 'will', I will concede your point. I accept that the example of QF72 may qualify but so far that is a once-off. In your argument you need to keep in mind that there are roughly an equal number of counter-examples of other types which have been in accidents and there is the much larger set of counter-examples which includes all types in the multi-millions of transport flights which never made headlines and which instead completed their missions uneventfully.
For your statement to be true, you need to show that Airbus is a distinct outlier in the accident record and then you need to show that the cause of such accident(s) was specific to the Airbus design and that such cause did not occur in any of the counter-example accidents.
I don't think this is possible because the published accident record will not support the point.
If I may, it is this kind of uninformed, off-handed anti-Airbus sentiment that motivates this response, not a "pro-Airbus" bias or stance which claims the Airbus can do no wrong. I have flown both types for years and they both work extremely well. Both Airbus and their design may warrant strong criticism (and I have done so in other venues and while flying them), but here at least, any criticism must be both informed and clearly stated.
Over to you.
PJ2
How can you say it's not an irrational aeroplane?
Any aeroplane that you might have to engage the autopilot to get you out of trouble is irrational to me.
A recent Airbus fatal runway excursion in South America was caused by the thrust lever system design.
Too many Airbuses are going off doing their own thing.
Any aeroplane that you might have to engage the autopilot to get you out of trouble is irrational to me.
A recent Airbus fatal runway excursion in South America was caused by the thrust lever system design.
Too many Airbuses are going off doing their own thing.
For your statement to be true, you need to show that Airbus is a distinct outlier in the accident record and then you need to show that the cause of such accident(s) was specific to the Airbus design and that such cause did not occur in any of the counter-example accidents.
I don't think this is possible because the published accident record will not support the point.
If I may, it is this kind of uninformed, off-handed anti-Airbus sentiment that motivates this response, not a "pro-Airbus" bias or stance which claims the Airbus can do no wrong. I have flown both types for years and they both work extremely well. Both Airbus and their design may warrant strong criticism (and I have done so in other venues and while flying them), but here at least, any criticism must be both informed and clearly stated.
Over to you.
PJ2
Any aeroplane that you might have to engage the autopilot to get you out of trouble is irrational to me.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PJ2,
My last post was not a critic of the airplane, not this time at least
but merely a neutral comment.
When time permits, it could be interesting to hear more about your false warnings experience on the 330 ... ?
On the Fragant Harbour side, it seems we're not at the end of the story yet ...............
My last post was not a critic of the airplane, not this time at least
but merely a neutral comment.When time permits, it could be interesting to hear more about your false warnings experience on the 330 ... ?
On the Fragant Harbour side, it seems we're not at the end of the story yet ...............
CONF iture, I hasten to add, nor did I see it that way - my response was just a way of 'carrying on the dialogue', as it were. ;-)
Believe me, there is much to criticize in the Airbus design but no other manufacturer gets off lightly either, although I do like Boeing's bread-and-butterness...Wonder what the B787 will be like in this regard?
Will pm the rest. Will also take a look at Fragrant Harbour, thank you. - PJ2
Believe me, there is much to criticize in the Airbus design but no other manufacturer gets off lightly either, although I do like Boeing's bread-and-butterness...Wonder what the B787 will be like in this regard?
Will pm the rest. Will also take a look at Fragrant Harbour, thank you. - PJ2
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
does it make sense to do some sort of engine response functional check during the descent, say prior to 10,000' agl?
at least if the engine didn't respond, you would have a few more seconds to look for a place to land.
at least if the engine didn't respond, you would have a few more seconds to look for a place to land.
pth...
re your comments about adding thrust at some point during descent -- didn't that become SOP in certain situations for Trent powered 777s after BA038? Or am I imagining again...?
Anybody?
re your comments about adding thrust at some point during descent -- didn't that become SOP in certain situations for Trent powered 777s after BA038? Or am I imagining again...?
Anybody?
Last edited by grizzled; 15th Apr 2010 at 15:37.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UTC + 5.30
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Super job by the flight crew.
Cathay have corrected their previous statement and said that the right Rolls Royce trent 700 was at idle during the entire approach and the left one was stuck at 70%.Also at no point were both engines shut down during flight.
From some posts that I have read lets not make this into another Airbus bashing forum
Cathay have corrected their previous statement and said that the right Rolls Royce trent 700 was at idle during the entire approach and the left one was stuck at 70%.Also at no point were both engines shut down during flight.
From some posts that I have read lets not make this into another Airbus bashing forum
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ANOTHER . . Failure of an AIRBUS A 330
Airbus’s beleaguered A330 - has had yet another, failure !!
This time in Hong Kong. Thanks to the skills of the two Aussie Boys upfront, they got this, heap of . . "airplane", down safely.
The Air France A330 that crashed into the South Atlantic has not been located.
The tragic crashes, incidents and shortcomings of this lemon just keep happening.
- FlyBoy737800
This time in Hong Kong. Thanks to the skills of the two Aussie Boys upfront, they got this, heap of . . "airplane", down safely.
The Air France A330 that crashed into the South Atlantic has not been located.
The tragic crashes, incidents and shortcomings of this lemon just keep happening.
- FlyBoy737800
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm! Not shutting down the troubled engine to land at 230 knts for an EVAC. Am I missing something here? 
Fatfish
One engine was stuck at sub-idle power from TOD and the other was stuck at 70% power. What would be the point of shutting any engine down? You shut the one down at 70% and you are ditching. You shut the other down and you are depriving yourself of a source of bleed, hydraulic and electrical power. You are only complicating things when you eliminate a source of these services. Think spoilers, flap speed, gear speed etc.
One engine was stuck at sub-idle power from TOD and the other was stuck at 70% power. What would be the point of shutting any engine down? You shut the one down at 70% and you are ditching. You shut the other down and you are depriving yourself of a source of bleed, hydraulic and electrical power. You are only complicating things when you eliminate a source of these services. Think spoilers, flap speed, gear speed etc.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go to the "Fragrant Harbour" page for more details
Whatsit Doingnow
I think you will find CX pilots don’t think that at all and the two gentlemen that landed our A330 the other day would be embarrassed by those comments.
I think you will find CX pilots don’t think that at all and the two gentlemen that landed our A330 the other day would be embarrassed by those comments.