-
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
24 error messages
- Thread starter moorfield
- Start date
- Thanks received
- 1
"would you ever get on a plane you team had developed the avionics software for"
"Of course, with my team I'd know they was no way it would get off the ground in the first place".
From BAe when developing FBW for the first Airbus' FBW programmes in the late 80s / early 90s (note: I wasn't working on this so it's likely anecdotal):
"Aye FBW - it means fly-by-wire - or, to give it it's full name - fly-by-wire-die-by-fire"
- Thanks received
- 182
Before you all jump on the The Lone Gunman I might remind you that some people here know what they're talking about and just like to make you nay sayers look like fools for the fun of it.
I suppose you are right, anyway we should not disturb him, he probably is liaising with Air France and also the French and Brazilian governments just now telling them why the plane crashed.
- Thanks received
- 38
Someone posted here that the aerodynamics on the Audi TT were pretty suspect for side winds and corners.
Someone else posted a comment much like yours, maybe it was you?
A few weeks later Audi did a recall and added rear wings...
- Thanks received
- 182
So becasue someone on here posted a prediction and was ( I don't know the story ) proven correct TLG is now correct?
In case you missed the interchange he said that the problem was either mechanical or software. Hardly a Columboesque moment.
- Thanks received
- 38
Well, as many seem to be bandying all the way from terrorism to a meteor strike, 'hardware or software' seems to quite narrow the set of possibilities in comparison.
- Thanks received
- 182
I'm sure we will never know. We don't need hysterical "all 330s should be grounded" posts from people who tell us they should know better.
Much cheapnedd, plenty quickness... http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/1559.asp
- Thanks received
- 102
Minestrone: I never said I know what happened to that aircraft.
I do know, and it is not hard to find the news stories, that there is a known problem with the A330 and the way it recognises its speed.
It may be a problem with its pitot tubes, it may be a problem with the electrics that connect those to the software, I doubt it is a problem with the software as they are retro fitting the tubes and electrics.
The software is subject to strict standards and testing to achieve its flight worthiness so again I would doubt it is the software, but someone may not have applied the standards and test properly or the actual scenario that brought it down may have been impossible to predict and therefore test for.
It is also well known that the engines have a narrow envelope of performance at high altitude. It is essential the plane flies within a certain speed criteria so the engines dont fail.
The pitot tubes are not the only on board system to decide speed. When there is a conflict the aircraft notes the difference and possibly (if serious) sends an automated signal to say there may be a problem.
I dont know what value you put on peoples safety, but I would suggest that the profits of airbus and the airlines are less important than the lives of the 200 odd people who died on this flight.
If there is any way at all that this known fault is the cause of the downing of this aircraft then they should all be grounded untill it is fixed.
But obviously if you dont value peoples lives.......
When I said it was either hardware or software it was referring to the pitot tube bit, not the failure that brought it down. I do not know which part of the pitot tube system is failing.
I do know, and it is not hard to find the news stories, that there is a known problem with the A330 and the way it recognises its speed.
It may be a problem with its pitot tubes, it may be a problem with the electrics that connect those to the software, I doubt it is a problem with the software as they are retro fitting the tubes and electrics.
The software is subject to strict standards and testing to achieve its flight worthiness so again I would doubt it is the software, but someone may not have applied the standards and test properly or the actual scenario that brought it down may have been impossible to predict and therefore test for.
It is also well known that the engines have a narrow envelope of performance at high altitude. It is essential the plane flies within a certain speed criteria so the engines dont fail.
The pitot tubes are not the only on board system to decide speed. When there is a conflict the aircraft notes the difference and possibly (if serious) sends an automated signal to say there may be a problem.
I dont know what value you put on peoples safety, but I would suggest that the profits of airbus and the airlines are less important than the lives of the 200 odd people who died on this flight.
If there is any way at all that this known fault is the cause of the downing of this aircraft then they should all be grounded untill it is fixed.
But obviously if you dont value peoples lives.......
When I said it was either hardware or software it was referring to the pitot tube bit, not the failure that brought it down. I do not know which part of the pitot tube system is failing.
Last edited:
23:26
- Thanks received
- 38
I reckon it is getting blocked by dirt, nothing more complicated than that. Why the dirt's getting in there is interesting.
Remember you read it here first.
threaded in "Lanchester-Prandtl" mode
