Qf72. Do Airbus Must Stop Their A330/a340 Fleet.
 

Hello,


I wondering this evening if Airbus Should or Should not stop their A330/A340 fleet after the disclosure of the causes of Qantas flight QF72 accident or incident.

I think that an aircraft that starts pitching down almost 9º degress with the A/P disconected has a severe problem, more if it follows the signals of a transient failing ADIRU.

I have recieved de O/B regarding this accident today, and I scared a lot when reading at the end of it:

PROBABLE CAUSE: UNKNOW.

CORRECTIVE MEASURES: TO BE DETERMINED

It just says if this happen to you check the ADIRUs and the ATT sources, and isolate the failing one.

Neat. What a solution. I am feeling safer now.

Scarebus rules!

All you can do is limiting your exposure time by applying what I would call a new "memory item" but if you're unlucky enough it could always hit before you move ...

I answer your troll with another - if QF keep breaking 747s and you want the A330s grounded what exactly are they meant to fly longhaul?

A-380........:E

Rainboe - The only problem I have with your game plan is: If this is a fault of the equipment but cause unknown could it happen on short finals?

Murphy can raise his head at any time...

One can only presume that Rainbow would obviously be happy to put his wife and kids on a flight in Indonesia with Garuda then!?

Rainboe - The only problem I have with your game plan is: If this is a fault of the equipment but cause unknown could it happen on short finals?

It can't happen on take-off or short finals since AoA protection doesn't work on this phases of flight. At least, that's what Airbus said...

Check Six krueger...

Thank god we've got the heroes out there still !

So, I'm guessing your the one that sits there with one hand on the stick and the other on the thrust levers.....AT ALL TIMES ?

What a load of nonsense this entire thread is:ugh:

Better not breathe in case someone poisons the air - well, it's happened before:E

Maybe I missed something from the ATB....but I was not aware that the causality had been determined? Therefore, until then only directives can be given on how to better deal with such a situation should it occur again....oh and buckle up ;)

To suggest a grounding of the fleet is ludicrous!:ugh:

Rainboe, I'm guessing that's your real name??? I'm glad you lived through all those unfortunate aviation abnormalities, but your attitude towards them is quite blinkered ! Think outside your(percieved) tough guy world......It doesn't take a "professional pilot"(I'll leave you wondering) to realise the other options, in regards to addressing the problems..... actually, that's what professional pilots should do..........

Q A330 fitted with Northrop- Grumman ADIRU's. Honeywell equipped aircraft not included.

Back in the 50s they grounded the Comet.......
The British Overseas Airways Corporation temporarily suspended all Comet jet services following the crash off Rome while checks were carried out.
It was difficult to establish the exact cause of the crash because most of the wreckage was lost under water. But modifications were made and the Comet went back into service.
Then another Comet fell into the sea after leaving Rome on 8 April 1954, killing all on board. Comets were grounded again.

dazdaz,.you can't compare an in-flight incident like the one under discussion to the comet crash! Firstly it was the worlds first commerical jet airliner, therefore in those days, I suppose any accident that catastrophic in a new age of transportation would demand such a response. Secondly, there has been no crash of the A330 due to this incident or the factors involved before. The A330 has accumulated many thousands of flight hours and in-service experience of over 15 years. The comet had only 3 years of in-service life before the incident you mention. But also note that the comet had a few 'minor' incidents before the Rome crash (failure to get airborne and also aborted take off with injuries) that did not warrant the fleet to be grounded.

I suppose you also consider that all B777s should now be grounded until the full investigation of the BA crash is complete?

Nothing in the real world stops at the behest of isolated, individual faults - that is not limited to aviation at all.

If you cannot see how the real world works at all, arcticfan, you should get off the PC and see more of it, before you make sweeping judgements.

For example:

- A lorry driver's tyre fails, causing him to swerve and crash. Do you (a) ban all lorries on that tyre from driving on the road until a full and complete investigation has taken place, or (b), assess the likely causes of the tyre failure, establish it was an isolated incident, and issue advice to all operators of such tyres to minimise the likelihood of the crash being repeated, until such time as the scientific investigations are complete and it is established that the entire tyre fleet is safe.

Now, in considering your reply, think that no other tyres have ever failed and caused a crash, no deaths occurred, 20,000 lorries use that tyre, and those lorries carry $500,000 of goods each, daily. That equates to $10bn per day, or $3,650bn per year. The investigation will take a year.


Welcome to reality...

This scenerio is just not in the same category as the metal fatigue situation on the Comets.
The fly-by-wire Airbus fleet has accumulated millions of flight hours.And this occurance could be dealt with by the pilots(as demonstrated by the crew)even while a good fix is worked out by the manufacterer.

There are quite a few people out there(including some actually flying A/C)who think that the job requirement is just to mug up the SOPs and apply them in a mindless fashion.This understanding of a job description,actually insults even ground jobs in aviation.
So in their mind obviously any situation not contained in the SOPs should not arise,and if it does ground the fleet.
Becuase then they would actually have to use a sound understanding of the a/c design and the external environmental factors(if any) to figure out what is going on and shape an appropriate response.As was done by BA 747 Capt Moody and his crew in response to the volcanic ash encounter near Indonesia.
All i can say to them is that when a/c in service stop throwing the odd curve ball and SOPs become all encompassing there would beno need for pilots,just a software programme(containing SOP autoapplication!) would suffice.
Meanwhile i wish these whinners/alarmists find other more suitable vocations if any

The AD is http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/over/a330/A330-095.pdf
Strongresolve, I guess that this is what you are referring to. Armed with this knowledge, any future upsets are likely to be corrected even more rapidly, and probably without having to experience a bunt. I fail to see how this could be a grounding issue.

This was a relatively minor thing in the overall scheme of things, no loss of Life or Aircraft.

If Airbus and/or the Authorities didn't ground A300/A310s after the loss of the tail, or the A320s after several crashes, then they will not be grounding A330s over this incident.