Airbus prepares safety warnings following A321 incident
 

BBC reporting as follows:
Airbus is drafting a worldwide safety warning about electrical problems on some of its aircraft.

The company is investigating a fault that temporarily affected primary cockpit displays and computer controls on a BMI flight from Khartoum to Beirut in August.

The standby instruments on the A321 plane did operate normally.

The pilots eventually regained control of the aircraft - but by that time it was 20 miles off its course.

The pilots reported that without warning the aircraft began to shudder, banking steeply on its own - failing to respond to pilot commands over a period of several minutes.

The twin-engined jet with 49 people aboard was cruising at 36,000ft.

The crew said they were bombarded by a stream of warning messages before cockpit screens turned grey and then went blank.

The aircraft's left wing suddenly dropped without any input from the crew.

For years, safety investigators have been concerned about electrical system glitches resulting in dangerous shutdowns of flight control computers.

But such incidents are hard to understand and replicate. Airbus says it is helping both the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) and the BEA in France with the inquiry.

But it has been reported that investigators have already urged Airbus to alert all operators of its A319, A320 and A321 planes about the potential hazards stemming from such electrical faults.

A321 out of control after generator fault
 

AVHerald reports an A321, G-MEDJ of BMI, flight BD996, went out of control after having electrical problems with its generator #1: Report: BMI A321 over northern Sudan on Aug 24th 2010, electrical problems

Quite a serious incident imho.

thanks for this interesting post.

Us old retired graybeards tried to tell you this years ago.

Have they any suggestion as to what the airlines might do?

For those who are interested...the respective AAIB Bulletin:

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...0%20G-MEDJ.pdf

Regards,
ihg

Yes, stick another OEB in the back of the QRH, to join all the others, another page in abnormal procedures and hope for the best.

Sorry to add yet another biased view of a confirmed luddite, but is anyone over the age of, say 40, truly surprised by this.
Too clever is TOO clever and this is yet another incident, that, had it happened at a different altitude or place ,would have joined the list of, at least partially, unexplained airbus whoopsies, headed ignominously by the AF A330.

Hi,

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...ml#post6056913

Agreed! That worries me - I was hoping that deviant electrons fleeing a faulty GEN would automatically be trapped by at least one of the thousands of logic gates.

ECAM actions for GEN 1(2) FAULT usually calls for turning the GEN off then on again, and if it still doesn't work, turn it off & leave it. You loose the main galley and CATIII Dual - no big deal. No mention in the FCOM about what effects may be caused by a system that half works.

I'm curious though, if the crew followed the ECAM, they would have turned off GEN1 & kept if off if they knew it was faulty, unless the other faults e.g. side-stick fault jumped the queue (being more critical failures) thereby masking the real cause of their problems. Was it a condition with a remote possibility of reoccurrence, or is this an example of when the ECAM logic was inappropriate?

I really hope that this "deviation from design objectives" doesn't get swept away to OEB heaven, and that maybe just perhaps it will work it's way to the italic notes below the GEN 1 FAULT procedure in FCOM3.
................
Oops, just read the link above and the report http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...0%20G-MEDJ.pdf
Riveting stuff.

Imagine this happens on an arrival or departure in a mountainous area. Can see the TRE's working this into the next sim check scenarios :ouch:

A former A330 driver told me a decade ago that the airbus aircrafts have many traps and the Airbus techies were generally very overconfident; he reckoned that there would be many accidents/incidences caused by those traps caused by transient electrical problems which can not be proved or even replicated. Even in labs and bench tests, a lot of electrical or electronic transients cannot be replicated. Looked like we have the Air France A330 off the African coast and many more which might not make the big headlines........we are all very lucky so far.

People and techies who think a world of themselves ( airbus supporters ) keep burying their heads in the sand. Likewise people who debunks every anecdotal evidence of cell phones usage in aircrafts which lead to the occasional electromagnetic transients which combine with right circumstances can cause great harm to other vital electronics. try as they may, the lab boys cannot never replicate every circumstance surrounding an accident/incident.:ugh::ugh::{

So thank goodness the computer remembered to alert to a duff generator. Hats off to FBW!! Let's don't be hasty, let's wait for the final report.

Passe: "What's it doing?".

Now: "What am I doing?"

Next: "101101 10 01101 101?" (What's he doing Now?)

bear

Flying out of Reagan one night in a Lear Jet in a 30 degree bank to clear the prohibited area had the voltmeter peg out as the left generator went off line. I shut off the right generator and the left one picked up the load with normal voltage. Later I looked through our checklist and found no procedure for our fault. The overvoltage on the right generator kicked off the good left generator. We would have probably fried everything if we had not done what we did. We had some high level Hollywood celebs on board so it would have been interesting if we had followed the checklist.

Tho I am no fan of Airbi aircraft and B4 this goes the normal A vs B routine....
I am reminded of the Boeing/ FAA; "hey jeepers folks, the 737's that intermittently roll over and auger in, well they are perfectly safe, nothing to see here, move along."

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...0%20G-MEDJ.pdf

"The aircraft manufacturer has indicated that a reset of the Flight Augmentation Computer (FAC), caused by an electrical power interruption, may cause a small incremental offset in the rudder trim. Multiple electrical power interruptions can result in multiple increments which could, cumulatively, produce a significant rudder trim input."

:uhoh:

Does anybody else think 20 miles off course insignificant? That takes a lot of rudder trim.

Depends how long the trim goes unnoticed whilst the crew were sorting out the other problems.

Always thought this was a weird foible of the little Airbus, on power up the trim is never zero and usually some random number. Would've thought that was something that could have been engineered out in all the year its been in service.

To read some of the posts here anyone would think aircraft only started to crash (or at least do something unexpected) when Airbus put their name on the side. :rolleyes:

Last time I read the phrase "a stream of warning messages" was in relation to the Air France accident.

Hi,

Certainly not .. aircrafts crashed in the past and will crash in the future no need of Airbus for keep this going ......
The probs is that Airbus planes (with all their rings and bells) were announced (or believed) to be protected of crashing .... you know .. like the Titanic can't sink ...
Pure arrogance ......