Interview with Captain of Qantas 72 (A330 - 2008)

bLizZuE said:
I like it.

The recommendation here has always been to maintain CA displays.

Except- is this an extra step? Now I have 1 and 2 off, and to get 3 displayed I have to select it. Right?
Click to expand...

ADR 3 data will go to one side automatically when the other two are not available but I'm not sure which it would end up on first -- I think the normal operations way is that the computers 'vote' which goes where but in this case only #3 is left. But it does show up on one side right at the outset of turning 1+2 off.

Hopefully never have to use it. :eek:
 
I still think pilots should have a mechanical link to their primary flight controls, even if it makes my job more difficult. I've been working on some airplanes that don't and, honestly, they make me nervous. A pilot needs to be able to strip away all of the automation and fly the airplane when things get sideways. Obviously fighters are a different breed, but I suppose that's why they have ejection seats.
 
This person writes like a high school freshman. Interesting article, though, for sure. I always think it's a bit humorous that people are willing to casually attribute every improvement in safety in the last 30 years or so to automation, as though nothing else has changed. They also often then proceed from this dubious conclusion to the totally unsupported conclusion that if some is good, more is better.

Also, "As the plane drops, it literally flings into orbit people not belted into their seats." I'll get out my telescope, maybe they'll wave as they go by.
 
knot4u said:
I still think pilots should have a mechanical link to their primary flight controls, even if it makes my job more difficult. I've been working on some airplanes that don't and, honestly, they make me nervous. A pilot needs to be able to strip away all of the automation and fly the airplane when things get sideways. Obviously fighters are a different breed, but I suppose that's why they have ejection seats.
Click to expand...

There aren't many 121 jets left that have a direct link to the control surface, even in a reversionary mode. Others than the 717, you'd have to go back to the 1980s probably.
 
BobDDuck said:
There aren't many 121 jets left that have a direct link to the control surface, even in a reversionary mode. Others than the 717, you'd have to go back to the 1980s probably.
Click to expand...

EMB-175 still has control cables for the ailerons. Just like a cessner!

The rest of it not so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BobDDuck said:
Pretty sure those cables connect to a computer controlled, hydraulically actuated PDU.
Click to expand...
To the best of my knowledge, the aileron cables are connected to a set of hydraulic PCUs, but there are no higher-level functions associated with those particular PCUs. So they're computer monitored, but as far as I know, not at all computer-controlled.

As far as I am aware, the Embraer flight control systems are not full-authority; they are "direct drive" with some computerized trims* thrown in for higher-level functions. If you pull back on the yoke, you will get elevator deflection in any flight regime. It just might be a little more or a little less than it would be in a different flight regime.

If anyone has a different take on the Embraer flight control system, and if I'm wrong, I'd welcome correction.

-Fox
* - "trim" in the electronics sense, not the control surface.
 
BobDDuck said:
There aren't many 121 jets left that have a direct link to the control surface, even in a reversionary mode. Others than the 717, you'd have to go back to the 1980s probably.
Click to expand...

727 was hydraulically powered with cables, but with no hydraulics you could still control the ailerons and rudders by flying the control tabs. It's super sloppy though.

JordanD said:
Which is why, if I remember right, flying the plane on RAT power was quite an arm workout in all axes.
Click to expand...

huh?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2017-05-14 at 2.31.50 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2017-05-14 at 2.31.50 PM.png
    133.5 KB · Views: 70
  • Screen Shot 2017-05-14 at 2.32.04 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2017-05-14 at 2.32.04 PM.png
    289 KB · Views: 70
Acrofox said:
To the best of my knowledge, the aileron cables are connected to a set of hydraulic PCUs, but there are no higher-level functions associated with those particular PCUs. So they're computer monitored, but as far as I know, not at all computer-controlled.

As far as I am aware, the Embraer flight control systems are not full-authority; they are "direct drive" with some computerized trims* thrown in for higher-level functions. If you pull back on the yoke, you will get elevator deflection in any flight regime. It just might be a little more or a little less than it would be in a different flight regime.

If anyone has a different take on the Embraer flight control system, and if I'm wrong, I'd welcome correction.

-Fox
* - "trim" in the electronics sense, not the control surface.
Click to expand...

You lose all the cool stuff that makes you hella smooth in direct law. Such as pitch control for adding power.

I just lol everytime I stick my head in the wheel well and see the aileron control cables.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
When was the last time a transport category airplane lost control surface effectiveness? Sioux City?
 
bLizZuE said:
When was the last time a transport category airplane lost control surface effectiveness? Sioux City?
Click to expand...
Only other one that comes to mind was the DHL A300 that basically did the same type of landing after they got hit with a SAM in Iraq.
 
bLizZuE said:
When was the last time a transport category airplane lost control surface effectiveness? Sioux City?
Click to expand...
Allegiant a few months ago. Actually more recent than that some charter operator that had a similar thing and ran off the end of a runway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top