German Wings A320 crashed

I don't know bro, but bagging on a plane built in 1965 that had a more than 40 year useful life is a little… well, goofy. How many planes with similar roles lasted even a half that long?

Few.
 
pullup said:
Didn't you post this in another thread recently? If not, then I'm having some serious déjà vu.
Click to expand...
Probably. It bears repeating.

The FAA certificated my former airplane's prop control system, which had a rather glaring single point of failure, under the assumption that the probability of failure would be "extremely remote," which was in turn defined as 1 in 10e5.

And then the little airplane rolled over one fine day into a Georgia hayfield.
 
Derg said:
The whole Boeing versus Airbus thing is "Atari versus Commodore".

Pay rates, days off, the seat I'm sitting in. Meh, everything else doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Well, I mean, there are things that I would like to fly out there. There are airplanes that are really cool. Like I think a DC9 or an MD80 would be freaking awesome, or an the A319 or A320 in the "big plane world." In the little airplane world the MU2, the 1900 (and KA350), and (of all things) the Brasilia get me riled up among t-props, and in the light jet world there are 20 and 30 series Lears and Gulfstream IIs and IIIs.

In terms of working airplanes, Twin Otters and Pilatus Porters excite me almost viscerally. The turbine otter on floats is another bucketlist airplane for me.
 
ppragman said:
Well, I mean, there are things that I would like to fly out there. There are airplanes that are really cool. Like I think a DC9 or an MD80 would be freaking awesome, or an the A319 or A320 in the "big plane world." In the little airplane world the MU2, the 1900 (and KA350), and (of all things) the Brasilia get me riled up among t-props, and in the light jet world there are 20 and 30 series Lears and Gulfstream IIs and IIIs.

In terms of working airplanes, Twin Otters and Pilatus Porters excite me almost viscerally. The turbine otter on floats is another bucketlist airplane for me.
Click to expand...
I think you need to take a break. Sounds like that post is getting you awfully riled up.
image.jpg
 
Derg said:
Well, sure, but do you know where FOQA stated people get themselves burned during high energy visual approaches? High speed, diving with the (comically useless) speedbrakes and ending up smokin' through 1000 feet fast, somewhat configured and on a ill-fated mission from god to get the jet on the ground.

AMARITE, @PeanuckleCRJ?

This really deserves it's own thread.
Click to expand...

That's true when in close on virtually any plane in our fleet. On normal descents, the 320 is the 757's twin. Flaps are a lift device until you get to 2.... the only way you're coming down faster is via the speed brake. In fact, on all descents the 320 is the 757's twin! For the high energy visual it is identical as well.
 
dustoff17 said:
And yet they killed themselves and many others. If this is a tenet to your argument, you might want to re-think you stance.

The truth is they did NOT determine the root problem even as water forced it's way into their seats. It was, in fact, (I think it to be a flaw) of the "law" programing that led to their death.

Regardless, having 0 time in a particular airframe does not automatically negate ones opinion. Unless you have a predisposed mindset against the supplier of said opinion.
Click to expand...

Wrong... wrong wrong wrong. The fact is that the pilots were trained to be button pushers instead of actual pilots.

They proceeded to pitch to 17 degrees nose up at FL350. You had a cruise pilot that was trained to be a button pusher. DL(or NW) had the exact same malfunction in China, but they went "huh... this isn't right" and held 2.5 nose up and around 88% power and they were fine. We teach the same to every pilot that comes through the program.

That Asiana 777 had the same issues- the CA was a button pusher. No one spoke up and let him drag the thing in when he had no clue what the plane was doing.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Well, you HAVE been here for years. And years. And years.

Back to coloring.
Click to expand...


I'd say stick with coloring, but if you make the sky purple, 1) don't let it out on your next physical and 2) maybe my 5 y/o daughter needs to give you a lesson on coloring. She already has set aside some time to give you dual on aircraft systems.

:stir:

#itsgoodtobetheking(air)
 
Derg said:
This guy makes my scalp itch: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/pilot-flew-obama-weighs-airbus-a320-crash-article-1.2161077
Click to expand...

Even the Captain of the "Hope And Change Express" isn't a fan!

Of course it's important to disregard the Asiana 777, the missing Malaysian 777, the Turkish 737 at AMS that wrecked because the RA was malfunctioning.....
Danziger, who flew 737s, 757s and 767s, says he's not a fan of Airbus planes. An Airbus A320 plane is seen under construction in Hamburg, northern Germany.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
Probably. It bears repeating.

The FAA certificated my former airplane's prop control system, which had a rather glaring single point of failure, under the assumption that the probability of failure would be "extremely remote," which was in turn defined as 1 in 10e5.

And then the little airplane rolled over one fine day into a Georgia hayfield.
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the Brunswick crash, the prop control part that failed was not the one the FAA certified. Hamilton Standard changed the manufacturing process of the torque tube and failed to notify the FAA. If they had done so, additional testing would have determined the new harder metal would eventually wear down the splines on the tube which led to the failure.

A decision made by a bean counter to save money, which cost people their lives. Same with the Carrolton crash. Hamilton Standard changed the process to refurbish the blade spines without notifying the FAA, to save money, and killed people.

Yes, I was a CASC volunteer and ALPA accident investigator for ASA when I worked there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top