Airbus crash/training flight
There is nothing wrong with Airbus or FBW technology, it does seem to me the interface between this technology is easier to understand and work with on a Boeing than an Airbus. How can anybody forget the early accidents on the A320, the Bangalore one, for example, where the crew were in 'open descent' with 'zero altitude' selected in the window. With an Airport elevation of 1800' they flew a perfectly serviceable aircraft into the ground, simply because they did not understand the mode they were in. I don't hate Airbuses I prefer Boeings.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: southwest
Age: 78
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enderby-Browne
I think it's you who is being a little naïve.
What is the difference between "for Airbus'/Boeing's sake" and for safety's sake?
How long do you think a company in this business would last if it got a reputation for doing less than maximum to ensure the safety of its planes? Product liability lawyers would descend on them like locusts and devour everything.
The company could spend 30 years building a business and reputation only to lose it, with all the customers, overnight. Bankrupt. No chief executive could risk it.
What is the difference between "for Airbus'/Boeing's sake" and for safety's sake?
How long do you think a company in this business would last if it got a reputation for doing less than maximum to ensure the safety of its planes? Product liability lawyers would descend on them like locusts and devour everything.
The company could spend 30 years building a business and reputation only to lose it, with all the customers, overnight. Bankrupt. No chief executive could risk it.
Sun worshipper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
freightmaster
I have also read about all the protections AB gives you, like stall over g etc. But nobody has mentioned it also limits roll rate and pitch rate. So say for instance the hypothetical flock of birds is dead ahead. A pilot given enough time might try to sharply turn to avoid. The airbus will turn just fine, but only at a certain roll rate, you want more? too bad. Is that a major concern? heck no, but its there, and that IMO is one of the reasons why the stick and rudder pilots are less happy with the AB FBW compared to the Boeing FBW.
As for avoidance, have a look into the BEA reports on a collision that was avoided near Montpellier between an A320 and a glider. The conditions were : The 320 under autopilot, descending toward the MPL pattern and suddenly a glider fills the windscreen ; the captain just punched the side-stick to the right to full deflection...roll rate achieved over 60°/s...the tip of the glider's fin nicked the outer underside of the A320 left wing and the glider pilot didn't even realise that he was millimeters from certain death.
Now put another type of airliner in the same situation, think of the effort needed to get out of A/P and the inertia of control cables, rods (you name it)...That exercise has been simulated and the result is exactly the opposite of your assertion.
The beauty of that set-up on the 'Bus is that the pilot can have a totally care-free handling of his aircraft within the limits of maximum performance, in the case above 67° of bank, without the hindrance of "increased yoke effort" some advocate as being the best solution.
Having flown both types, I certainly know where my preference is.
B737 roll rates?
Hmmmm.... er,... a roll rate in excess of 180 degrees a second probably would beat the A320, and we have recorded that off a B737 before today. Now, the aircraft was aerodynamically stalled and with a substantial yaw rate, but... there you go. 
Then again, the A320 has achieved some wild roll rates when the flight control laws got messed up a bit too, with the gain of the spoilers being incorrect for the TE flap configuration, the dreaded OEB 117 badness. Now it only got about 100 deg/sec on that, but still quite surprising.
just to put oil on the fire, the A320/330 have pretty nice controls, compared to the B737, most planes do. Heck even the B777 while possibly BAC's nicest equipment to date is not as nice on the control laws (in normal law) as the A330. System logic/crew interface is something altogether different.... 
. whatever floats your boat.
Then again, the A320 has achieved some wild roll rates when the flight control laws got messed up a bit too, with the gain of the spoilers being incorrect for the TE flap configuration, the dreaded OEB 117 badness. Now it only got about 100 deg/sec on that, but still quite surprising.
just to put oil on the fire, the A320/330 have pretty nice controls, compared to the B737, most planes do. Heck even the B777 while possibly BAC's nicest equipment to date is not as nice on the control laws (in normal law) as the A330. System logic/crew interface is something altogether different.... . whatever floats your boat.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lemurian
the captain just punched the side-stick to the right to full deflection...roll rate achieved over 60°/s...
That being said, it does not mean I share the view expressed by fr8tmastr in his last comment.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since geese fly in formation at same exact altitude, to slipstream the one ahead, a sharp bank upon seeing a gaggle ahead would double the chance of one engine eating some, while reducing the chance of a multiple engine strike to near zero. Seems like a good gamble, if the FAs don't get upset.
GB
GB
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Switzerland
Age: 70
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello,
Dunno wich Mirage fly Lemurian .. but for the Mirage 2000 .. 60°/S roll rate is peanuts
Regards. 
Are you flying a Mirage ... Lemurian ?
The aircraft has a redundant fly-by-wire automatic flight control system, providing a high degree of agility and easier handling, together with stability and precise control in all situations. Fighter's Airframe is naturally unstable, and so it is coupled with FBW commands to obtain the best agility; however, in override mode it is still possible to exceed a 270 deg/sec roll rate and allows the aircraft to reach 11 g (within the 12 g structural limit), instead of nine when engaged. The system is reliable with no known losses due to its failure.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NotPilotAtALL
Dunno wich Mirage fly Lemurian .. but for the Mirage 2000 .. 60°/S roll rate is peanuts
It does not really help a demonstration when numbers are over exaggerated.
I have not much respect left for the BEA but not sure they would write such thing ...
Sun worshipper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
or the Mirage 2000 .. 60°/S roll rate is peanuts
a roll rate in excess of 180 degrees a second probably would beat the A320, and we have recorded that off a B737 before today. Now, the aircraft was aerodynamically stalled and with a substantial yaw rate, but... there you go
Since certain recent Airbus FBW 'events' appear to have been caused by shoddy maintenance organisations not following correct LRU installation requirements, would the ability to provide 'Direct Law on Demand' actually work under such circumstances?
Perhaps there needs to be some form of 'idiot proofing' to make it physically impossible for maintenance people to replace FBW LRUs incorrectly?
Perhaps there needs to be some form of 'idiot proofing' to make it physically impossible for maintenance people to replace FBW LRUs incorrectly?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lemurian
For D-cate in particular, this piece, written by the US-ALPA with the help of NASA could be an eye-opener. Please note that on all these manoeuvres, the Airbus showed a better performance than the Boeing, but for "subjective reasons", the test pilots still prefer the Boeing...Go figure.
Not looking for an equipment which does miracles but just something that behaves with consistency, something easy to read, nothing more.
Said many times before : Put on the market a more humble version of the 320 and you’ll have a fantastic equipment.
And if FBW Airbus was that ultimate tool that Bernard Ziegler always claimed it was, it would show immensely in the accident / incident database …
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since certain recent Airbus FBW 'events' appear to have been caused by shoddy maintenance organisations not following correct LRU installation requirements
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: PARIS FRANCE
Age: 77
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
about Are you flying a Mirage ... Lemurian ?
The roll rate of the A320 in normal law is 15 degrees per second
That is with sidestick fully to the side. And only below 250 knots because as speed builds up above Va the full authority is progressively reduced. Luckily the A320 which met a glider was at 250 knots and flight level 80 or thereabout.
The captain used full rudder to increase roll rate and that probably helped a lot, but the plane never could exceed 15 degrees of bank per second. Which is quite fair for an airliner.
The problem which could happen (and did not in that case) would be the pilot flying deciding to bank left while the Captain taking over in a reflex action banks right…not much time for a briefing in those circumstances…maybe it is easier when you see those big hairy paws jumping on the yoke, instead of those unseen subtle movements behind the scenes…
The roll rate of the A320 in normal law is 15 degrees per second
That is with sidestick fully to the side. And only below 250 knots because as speed builds up above Va the full authority is progressively reduced. Luckily the A320 which met a glider was at 250 knots and flight level 80 or thereabout.
The captain used full rudder to increase roll rate and that probably helped a lot, but the plane never could exceed 15 degrees of bank per second. Which is quite fair for an airliner.
The problem which could happen (and did not in that case) would be the pilot flying deciding to bank left while the Captain taking over in a reflex action banks right…not much time for a briefing in those circumstances…maybe it is easier when you see those big hairy paws jumping on the yoke, instead of those unseen subtle movements behind the scenes…
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
".....the pilot flying deciding to bank left while the Captain taking over in a reflex action banks right....."
Interesting question. Who wins in a conflict like that? The strongest, or does the Captain's sidestick have priority?
Interesting question. Who wins in a conflict like that? The strongest, or does the Captain's sidestick have priority?
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Gloucestershire, UK
Age: 61
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Narval stated:
"The problem which could happen (and did not in that case) would be the pilot flying deciding to bank left while the Captain taking over in a reflex action banks right…not much time for a briefing in those circumstances…maybe it is easier when you see those big hairy paws jumping on the yoke, instead of those unseen subtle movements behind the scenes…"
I think your logic is self defeating. In an airbus the standard procedure for taking control, and ensuring that you have control, is to press the red button and keep it pressed (whilst stating "I have control"). You then have absolute control and you decide which way you are going to turn. In a Boeing I would suggest that control would be dictated by whoever had the biggest biceps attached to those hairy paws! Could be a costly battle if they didn't agree which direction they were going don't you think?!
It is dis-appointing that threads such as this one have become another forum for the constant airbus v boeing slagging matches. This thread is about a serious accident where people have died. Instead of debating this in a factual way it becomes a forum for anonymous posters to display their prejudice. Could we not acknowledge that both Boeing and Airbus build generally excellent aircraft. Whilst they may have a different design philosophy they each have lots of strengths and fortunately very few weaknesses.
Some of the level of debate on this thread further erodes the credibility of Pprune as a forum for professional pilots. In order that each posting gains the appropriate credibility perhaps each poster could add their experience on type(s) before commenting. It might help separate the wheat from the chaff.
night_flight99
10,000 hours
(Current on 757 with 7,500 hours on 320 series).
"The problem which could happen (and did not in that case) would be the pilot flying deciding to bank left while the Captain taking over in a reflex action banks right…not much time for a briefing in those circumstances…maybe it is easier when you see those big hairy paws jumping on the yoke, instead of those unseen subtle movements behind the scenes…"
I think your logic is self defeating. In an airbus the standard procedure for taking control, and ensuring that you have control, is to press the red button and keep it pressed (whilst stating "I have control"). You then have absolute control and you decide which way you are going to turn. In a Boeing I would suggest that control would be dictated by whoever had the biggest biceps attached to those hairy paws! Could be a costly battle if they didn't agree which direction they were going don't you think?!
It is dis-appointing that threads such as this one have become another forum for the constant airbus v boeing slagging matches. This thread is about a serious accident where people have died. Instead of debating this in a factual way it becomes a forum for anonymous posters to display their prejudice. Could we not acknowledge that both Boeing and Airbus build generally excellent aircraft. Whilst they may have a different design philosophy they each have lots of strengths and fortunately very few weaknesses.
Some of the level of debate on this thread further erodes the credibility of Pprune as a forum for professional pilots. In order that each posting gains the appropriate credibility perhaps each poster could add their experience on type(s) before commenting. It might help separate the wheat from the chaff.
night_flight99
10,000 hours
(Current on 757 with 7,500 hours on 320 series).
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: southwest
Age: 78
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DC-ATE
When someone posts "does the Captain's sidestick have priority?", I wonder where they have been these past 30 years.
You now have the answer.
The Airbus FBW family has sold 5 times as many as the your darling "fly-by-cable" DC-8, and it's now the industry standard, along with the latest Boeings. All those 777 (soon to be 787) pilots will agree. Wake up.
.
You now have the answer.
The Airbus FBW family has sold 5 times as many as the your darling "fly-by-cable" DC-8, and it's now the industry standard, along with the latest Boeings. All those 777 (soon to be 787) pilots will agree. Wake up.
.
Last edited by Dysag; 6th Feb 2009 at 21:01.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dysag -
"When someone posts "does the Captain's sidestick have priority?", I wonder where they have been these past 30 years.
You now have the answer.
The Airbus FBW family has sold 5 times as many as the your darling "fly-by-cable" DC-8, and it's now the industry standard, along with the latest Boeings. All those 777 (soon to be 787) pilots will agree. Wake up."
It just so happens I've been retired for nearly twenty years, and know absolutely nothing about the Airbus fleet. So, please don't tell me to "wake up". I thought my question had some merrit for someone who does not know.
Sorry if I offended you.
"When someone posts "does the Captain's sidestick have priority?", I wonder where they have been these past 30 years.
You now have the answer.
The Airbus FBW family has sold 5 times as many as the your darling "fly-by-cable" DC-8, and it's now the industry standard, along with the latest Boeings. All those 777 (soon to be 787) pilots will agree. Wake up."
It just so happens I've been retired for nearly twenty years, and know absolutely nothing about the Airbus fleet. So, please don't tell me to "wake up". I thought my question had some merrit for someone who does not know.
Sorry if I offended you.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: southwest
Age: 78
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very sorry DC-ATE, I just hope I make it to 20 years in retirement. We need the experience of guys like you.
My beef is more with youngsters who think the 737 is modern. When we were young we reached for the stars, even if we fell short. Now the kids are very happy with the old junk.
Seems I owe you a beer, or three. By the way, I loved the DC-8, second only to the Convair 880/990.
But, seriously, FBW is now the standard, love it or hate it. It's the old fly-by-cable which is exotic.
.
My beef is more with youngsters who think the 737 is modern. When we were young we reached for the stars, even if we fell short. Now the kids are very happy with the old junk.
Seems I owe you a beer, or three. By the way, I loved the DC-8, second only to the Convair 880/990.
But, seriously, FBW is now the standard, love it or hate it. It's the old fly-by-cable which is exotic.
.
Last edited by Dysag; 6th Feb 2009 at 20:44.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dysag -
"Very sorry DC-ATE, I just hope I make it to 20 years in retirement. We need the experience of guys like you.
Seems I owe you a beer, or three. By the way, I loved the DC-8, second only to the Convair 880/990.
But, seriously, FBW is now the standard, love it or hate it. It's the old fly-by-cable which is exotic."
Thanks for the offer. Wish I drank beer...I'd collect!
Don't know 'bout that..."...loved the DC-8, second only to the Convair 880/990." The 990 was certainly the fastest over the fence! But, to each his own. I got my foot stuck between the armrest and the wall on an 880 on the way down as it depressurized. Fuselage, was kinda skinny!
I'd still like to know, being as how the side sticks are not 'connected', what happens when one pushes one way and the other guy pushes the other.
Thanks.
"Very sorry DC-ATE, I just hope I make it to 20 years in retirement. We need the experience of guys like you.
Seems I owe you a beer, or three. By the way, I loved the DC-8, second only to the Convair 880/990.
But, seriously, FBW is now the standard, love it or hate it. It's the old fly-by-cable which is exotic."
Thanks for the offer. Wish I drank beer...I'd collect!
Don't know 'bout that..."...loved the DC-8, second only to the Convair 880/990." The 990 was certainly the fastest over the fence! But, to each his own. I got my foot stuck between the armrest and the wall on an 880 on the way down as it depressurized. Fuselage, was kinda skinny!
I'd still like to know, being as how the side sticks are not 'connected', what happens when one pushes one way and the other guy pushes the other.
Thanks.
DC ATE
If one pushes left and the other pushes right the result is zero.
I also believe that if they both push half left the result is the equivalent of one pilot pushing full left. The system sums the input of both controllers.
There is a sidestick priority button where by one pilot can override the other. It works on the basis that the last person to press the button gets priority.
SW
If one pushes left and the other pushes right the result is zero.
I also believe that if they both push half left the result is the equivalent of one pilot pushing full left. The system sums the input of both controllers.
There is a sidestick priority button where by one pilot can override the other. It works on the basis that the last person to press the button gets priority.
SW