Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Boroda on July 09, 2006, 09:50:14 AM
-
http://bort778.info/en.shtml
:(
-
When I caught it on the news wire last night, first thing I did was fire up FS2004 - low and behold - thunderstorms all over the place.
Tragic
-
So far passengers say that after almost stopping on a runway the engines roared and a plane ran forward, crashed into a "voyenstroy" fence, buring and killing 120+ people...
C'mon, fly Airbus computer-controlled planes, that turn on engines to take-off power for a go-around after a safe lading...
-
Damn sorry to hear of the crash. :(
-
tragic :(
i would wait abit before blaming computers tho.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
tragic :(
i would wait abit before blaming computers tho.
Computers are evil.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Computers are evil.
only american computers. europuters are goodness
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
only american computers. europuters are goodness
As a certified opertor of IBM System/360 I don't know what to say :(
-
Originally posted by Boroda
As a certified opertor of IBM System/360 I don't know what to say :(
so you admit it! you work for evil!!
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
so you admit it! you work for evil!!
I worked with OS/360 20 years ago. Oh... Sorry, 19 years ago, back in 1987.
I am happy that i don't have to use perforated cards now. But I know how to handle them ;) Just in case ;)
-
in case the line for TP is too long?
rofl
...is this really what happened, the engines went to full power for a missed approach, or is it too early to know. were any pilots amongst the suvivors?
-
Maybe the pilot hit the T/GA button. Or he decided he needed to Go around. Or he got confused on how the reverse works. I bet on the crew more than the plane.
Sucks to die from being almost stoped on the runway.
-
iffen it aint boeing, i aint going!!
ever since I saw that airbus disaster on tv from the french airshow where the pilot was trying to pull up and the computer was trying to land and the plane plowed into a forest mowing down the trees, crashing and blowing up.
I aint getting on one!
least not until they have a damn OFF SWITCH for teh ebil human killing,plane crashing computers!! :O
-
Airbus has said time and again that their software is perfect.
Therefore it must be!
-
WLDCRD thats actually a popular myth and not the reason the plane crashed.
You can look it up, the info's out there.
Actually crashed due to low, slow and the pilot was late putting power on.
-
If it ain't Boeing I ain'g going! Well, except for later this month when I fly back home to Wisconsin and any other time I fly on Frontier Airlines or any other airline that happens to be operating an Airbus for a flight I'm on. Again, if I should die from the plane exploding in mid-air due to it's use of the metric system, I'd like Saw to have all of my hermaphroditic midget pr0n...I know he's the only one here who would truly appreciate it.
-
Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
Maybe the pilot hit the T/GA button. Or he decided he needed to Go around. Or he got confused on how the reverse works. I bet on the crew more than the plane.
Sucks to die from being almost stoped on the runway.
I believe if you checked into it, you would find the T/GA switch just sets the flight director command bars to the optimum angle for climbout. And I have serious doubts a pilot flying a jet would forget how the T/Rs work.
-
Originally posted by Dago
I believe if you checked into it, you would find the T/GA switch just sets the flight director command bars to the optimum angle for climbout.
Depends on autopilot & auto throttle use/mode at the time of actuation.
-
"ever since I saw that airbus disaster on tv from the french airshow where the pilot was trying to pull up and the computer was trying to land and the plane plowed into a forest mowing down the trees, crashing and blowing up."
Was that the Paris airshow? I thought it was at Farnborough.
Anyway the Piot needed power but the computer overrode with the logic: uneconomic for the engines. So it got sort of uneconomic when buried in the forestbut it didn't think that far.
Cruise controls you see.....
-
Habsheim, France.
-
Habesheim was about Control Laws (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/boe202.shtml).
The pilots were making a low and slow-speed pass at an air show in Habsheim, France. The subsequent crash was captured on video. It shows the Airbus plane disappearing into trees, as if it were making a very slow landing. Then a huge cloud of smoke billows from the forest.
Though the A320 was full of non-paying passengers, all but a few survived.
Lauber said the pilots were supposed to fly by with the gear down at about 100 feet. Instead, they came in at less than 30 feet off the ground. When the plane gets below 50 feet, the computer assumes the pilots are trying to land, Lauber said.
"The fact is, the plane did exactly what it was supposed to do," he said. Only it landed in the trees.
Airbus learned much from that incident, Lauber said.
Until the crash, he said, there was a "genuine psychology" around Airbus that it had designed a crash-proof airplane because of the hard protections.
"The repercussions from that accident continue to reverberate," Lauber acknowledged.
He and others at Airbus know that should one of the Airbus fly-by-wire planes crash in the United States, television will be showing endless video of the Habsheim incident, questioning whether Airbus has placed too much faith in computers.
When the pilot pushes the throttles up, the engines should spool up. Period.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Depends on autopilot & auto throttle use/mode at the time of actuation.
I am not familiar with the A310, but the later Airbus aircraft do not have auto-throttle. They have auto-thrust, and I dont believe (again not positive) that the A/GO button changes thrust, pretty sure it doesn't, but pitching the aircraft up, the FMGECs will not allow the thrust to remain insufficient for the pitch angle.
-
Originally posted by Dago
I am not familiar with the A310, but the later Airbus aircraft do not have auto-throttle. They have auto-thrust, and I dont believe (again not positive) that the A/GO button changes thrust, pretty sure it doesn't, but pitching the aircraft up, the FMGECs will not allow the thrust to remain insufficient for the pitch angle.
Duuuude when I took the CRJ to 410 dude we move the throttle and it opens up the carburetor and allows the go juice superfuel to mix with the air when the piston cranks the turbine and constant speed stator vane next to the tower shaft gearbox motorized dohickie.
Did you know that the A310 has 21,000 horse thrust shaft power?
You really say some goofball things sometimes Dago. If I give you a hair would you split it for me? Saying an airplane doesn't have autothrottles but it does have autothrust is fast approaching richard simmons silly.
FMGECs (F***ing Moronic Genius Envelope Computers) limit all sorts of things that you may or may not need should unusual situations not programmed into them are encountered. Would I be happy picking my way through thunderstorms and come up against a wall when my precious pitch attitude is more than the 30 some odd degrees or bank exceeds 60...something not hard to do. What then? Does the computer surrender and shut down so my joystick turns into an oh s#!* stick?
Keep hanging by the thread. Bottom line like Toad said: If a pilot pushes the power levers forward and the engines don't spool...it's a bad design.
-
I never flew Airbus but are you saying that in a Cat III they don't engage autothrust? Surely not. And if/when they hit TO/GA on a missed Cat III autothrust doesn't add power?
-
Three time's I've taken the Aeroflot flight from Moscow to Vladivostok, and three times back--each time on the same plane, an Airbus the good people of Aeroflot named 'Rachmaninov'. The plane rattled like a moracca as it took off, but, all in all, the flight went well. It helped immensely that I was able to bribe my way into business class for $100.
On two occasions, however, upon landing in Vladivostok, plastic panels from the cieling(different ones each time) came loose and fell onto the heads of passangers. No serious injuries, no serious issues with the aircraft as these components were just non-essential interior trim. It is, however, an indication of how well these planes are maintained.
Perhaps the problem isn't with the plane, or the pilots, but with the people taking care of (or not taking care of) the airframe and instrumentation.
Then again, it may just be faulty programming.
-
That's maintenance. The ceiling panels don't fall down on Airbus aircraft here. If they do, it'd be a rare occurance, as rare as that happening on a Boeing.
-
I've flown Siber twice - fun airline. Gotta wait to see what the CVR says. But since there was TSRA in the area, i'm gonna guess a long landing and failed go around complicated by hydroplaning.
Would help if the field had a wind shear detection setup for microburst detection - Estel, does it??
Wolf
-
Originally posted by Golfer
Duuuude when I took the CRJ to 410 dude we move the throttle and it opens up the carburetor and allows the go juice superfuel to mix with the air when the piston cranks the turbine and constant speed stator vane next to the tower shaft gearbox motorized dohickie.
Did you know that the A310 has 21,000 horse thrust shaft power?
You really say some goofball things sometimes Dago. If I give you a hair would you split it for me? Saying an airplane doesn't have autothrottles but it does have autothrust is fast approaching richard simmons silly.
FMGECs (F***ing Moronic Genius Envelope Computers) limit all sorts of things that you may or may not need should unusual situations not programmed into them are encountered. Would I be happy picking my way through thunderstorms and come up against a wall when my precious pitch attitude is more than the 30 some odd degrees or bank exceeds 60...something not hard to do. What then? Does the computer surrender and shut down so my joystick turns into an oh s#!* stick?
Keep hanging by the thread. Bottom line like Toad said: If a pilot pushes the power levers forward and the engines don't spool...it's a bad design.
This must be a troll, because a pilot who knew anything about advanced aircraft wouldnt speak such nonsense. Of course, a pilot with a clue doesnt fly into or near thunderstorms.
BTW a week ago I was standing inside the inlet of a 112 inch fan engine. Huge sucker.
And another BTW, the CRJ is just a primary trainer for jet pilots. Best wishes on arriving some day.
-
Originally posted by Toad
I never flew Airbus but are you saying that in a Cat III they don't engage autothrust? Surely not. And if/when they hit TO/GA on a missed Cat III autothrust doesn't add power?
Sure they engage autothrust. It is an integral part of the autoland system. With an autoland system flying any published approach, the FMGECs will send signals to the EEC to provide proper thrust for the appropriate airspeed for that segment of the approach. You can always choose to control thrust manually on an approach by operating the throttles manually, but that would be a rare situation as when the throttles are left in the climb detent with autothrust engaged the aircraft will fly the speeds dead nuts on all the way to the ground. No pilot would ever be as good at it.
-
Originally posted by SOB
....I'd like Saw to have all of my hermaphroditic midget pr0n...I know he's the only one here who would truly appreciate it.
YESSSS!!!! *starts putting pins in Airbuss model/doll*
-
Ooops... i must have walked in the wrong room and ended up at the FAA :D
Loads of expurts here :)
(bows and walks back out)
-
Dear god... so sorry to hear about that...
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Would help if the field had a wind shear detection setup for microburst detection - Estel, does it??
Wolf
No as I remember. It's an old one site.
For now there are 2 versions.
1. Hydraulics failure with step failure of reverse and brakes.
2. Crew error in setting revers levers.
-
Originally posted by Dago
This must be a troll, because a pilot who knew anything about advanced aircraft wouldnt speak such nonsense. Of course, a pilot with a clue doesnt fly into or near thunderstorms.
BTW a week ago I was standing inside the inlet of a 112 inch fan engine. Huge sucker.
And another BTW, the CRJ is just a primary trainer for jet pilots. Best wishes on arriving some day.
Well you're misinformed on a few counts. If faced with a squall the usual drill is to go around it. It's such a fluid and dynamic environment that's not always the only safe decision. I've got no problem picking my way through scattered thunderstorms with a working radar. If I'm flying in Florida then you pick the less of the evils and take the road with the least bumps. Air mass thunderstorms don't pack the punch of the ones you get in the midwest
Oh...well good thing I don't fly the CRJ, Pencil jet or guppy killers then, eh? The former was a dig at regional guys, you remember Pinnacle airlines crash in Jefferson City, right? Sure...you know everything so you must.
Exactly what class would you put a Lear 35, anyway? I mean you have of course never flown one, might know someone who has since there are a boatload of them out there and have a little heresay but that's it. What experience can you draw on to criticize...nothing? Oh, ok.
Ohhh well there are lots of clueless pilots out there flying for places like AirNet, FedEx and heck...American Airlines.
These Guys (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6886880938991195179&q=fedex+thunderstorm)
And not all of those airplanes are Fedex. Some are NorthWest, Delta, regional carriers and the like. Dear god!
-
Originally posted by Golfer
Exactly what class would you put a Lear 35, anyway?
Low end corporate jet. Just above the early Citations. Twenty years ago, it was a current market aircraft, but it is only a cheap ride now steered by those who would rather be in something bigger.
-
Originally posted by Golfer
Saying an airplane doesn't have autothrottles but it does have autothrust is fast approaching richard simmons silly.
BTW, do you really not know the differance? I don't have a handle on your level of experience with aircraft, so don't know if that was a lame joke or not.
-
Low end corporate jet. Just above the early Citations. Twenty years ago, it was a current market aircraft, but it is only a cheap ride now steered by those who would rather be in something bigger.
I didn't mean in size, I meant in flying qualities. The main quality:
Unforgiving. If you aren't a good pilot when you get into it...you will be when you get out.
Don't be under some illusion that everyone wants to fly the biggest airplanes around. Don't be under the illusion that everyone wants to be an airline pilot.
The next step for me is my last job. I'd say that makes where I am a pretty good place in life. As long as the pay meets standards, the QOL is right and the perks are good...I can dig it.
-
So you agree that if it were all coupled up, hitting TOGA would result in an automatic application of G/A thrust?
That was my point.
-
Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
Maybe the pilot hit the T/GA button. Or he decided he needed to Go around. Or he got confused on how the reverse works. I bet on the crew more than the plane.
Flight crew should disengage AT and AP on touchdown at the latest, which prevents auto features taking over on the ground. Although I'm not exactly certain on Airbus systems (particularly A300/310), I'm more familiar with how Boeing's work. Automation is somewhat different.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
C'mon, fly Airbus computer-controlled planes, that turn on engines to take-off power for a go-around after a safe lading...
AFAIK A310 isn't like A32S series with automation, but more like 'traditional' jet like B767. Which makes it all funny to read comments faulting the Airbus automation, like in the case of low flying A32S failure.
I'm quite certain that it was either mistake by the pilots or a mechanical failure, but not the automation failure like many suggests. Mechanical failure would be probably credited to poor maintenance or spare parts from the blackmarket.
-
Originally posted by Toad
So you agree that if it were all coupled up, hitting TOGA would result in an automatic application of G/A thrust?
That was my point.
I don't agree, as it depends on the design of the aircraft system. My experience is more with the A320/330 series aircraft, not experienced on the 310. On the 320/330 aircraft, you push the throttles to the TOGA position, and when you do that, the flight director command bars will be displayed. There is no "TOGA" button that I know of.
-
Originally posted by Dago
There is no "TOGA" button that I know of.
What's that little red button doing on the throttles then?
(http://p.airliners.net/photos/photos/7/7/6/0961677.jpg)
(http://p.airliners.net/photos/photos/2/7/5/0940572.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Golfer
What's that little red button doing on the throttles then?
(http://p.airliners.net/photos/photos/7/7/6/0961677.jpg)
(http://p.airliners.net/photos/photos/2/7/5/0940572.jpg)
That is the "Instinctive Disconnect Button" to disable autothrust. There is one on each throttle lever for whichever pilot is the pilot flying (PF).
There is a similar "Instinctive Disconnect Button" on the sidestick to disconnect that autopilot.
Nice try, but I know that cockpit pretty well.
-
Originally posted by Dago
On the 320/330 aircraft, you push the throttles to the TOGA position, and when you do that, the flight director command bars will be displayed. There is no "TOGA" button that I know of.
So when you're flying a coupled approach and push the throttles to the TOGA position, what does the autopilot do? Nothing? Or fly a G/A profile?
-
"Instinctive" disconnect? I think Boeing just calls them "disconnect". But "instinctive" does sound kewl.
-
Dago, I believe if you checked into it, you would find the TOGA mode might not be like you think.
As far as your comment about TSRA, pardon me but it's bordeline lame. I do agree that Private pilots have no business around TSRA, but in the cargo business we are pretty tight on departure/arrival times. Granted we are not going to land in a level 5, but if we kept out of the legendary 20 miles, we would be out of business.:D Hey, that's why that several level of thunderstorms hehehe.
Anyway:
ORDER: 8400.10
APPENDIX: 4
BULLETIN TYPE: Flight Standards Information
Bulletin (FSIB) for Air
Transportation (FSAT)
BULLETIN NUMBER: FSAT 95-13
BULLETIN TITLE: Recurrent Training on the Hazard of
Attempting to Counter Autopilot
Commands by Manual Control Forces
when the Airbus A-300/310 Series
Airplane Is Being Flown
with the Autopilot Engaged in the
Land or Go-Around Mode.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 05-15-95
TRACKING NUMBER: NTSB Recommendation A-94-164
------------------------------------------------------
1. BACKGROUND. The National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB) issued a safety recommendation to the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) that would require
operators of the Airbus A-300 and A-310 series airplanes
to provide immediate and recurrent training to
flightcrews on the hazard of attempting to counter
autopilot (AP) commands by manual control forces when the
airplane is being flown with the autopilot engaged in the
land or go-around mode.
A. This recommendation was made because of an accident
involving a flightcrew that may have attempted to
override the autopilot while it was engaged in the
COMMAND mode. This may have resulted in a out-of-trim
condition between the trimmable horizontal stabilizer
(THS) and the elevator.
B. After reviewing accident data, the NTSB expressed
concerns regarding certain A-300 autopilot systems, since
the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) transcript indicated the
flightcrew did not understand why the airplane failed to
respond to their control inputs. Apparently, the
flightcrew did not realize their manual control inputs
were causing the autopilot to trim to an out-of-trim
condition in the airplane nose up (ANU) direction.
C. The NTSB believes certain features of some A-300
autopilot/flight directors (AP/FD) may have contributed
to the crew's confusion:
(1) The A-300 operating manual indicates that above
1,500 feet AGL, a force on the control column of about
33 pounds will result in the disengagement of the
autopilot. However, when the airplane is below
1,500 feet AGL and the autopilot/flight director is in
the land or go-around mode, the autopilot cannot be
disengaged by a force on the control column; AND, if a
pilot input force is applied to the control column at
this time, the input may result in the THS moving in a
direction opposite to the input, thereby possibly
creating an out-of-trim condition.
(2) The operating manual for the airplane provides that,
except during the glideslope and localizer capture phase
of the land mode (when the "Supervisory Override
Function" permits the pilots to make control movement
inputs to assist the autopilot to make a smooth capture),
pilots should not attempt to override the autopilot.
(3) The A-300 is not equipped with an out-of-trim
warning light.
(4) During manual flight, use of the control wheel pitch
trim switches result in an audible "whooler" sound; but,
when the autopilot is engaged, autotrim movement of the
trimmable horizontal stabilizer has no such audible
signal.
(5) In most autopilot/flight director modes, activation
of the control wheel pitch trim switches disengages the
autopilot - BUT, in the land or go-around mode, the pitch
trim switches neither disengage the autopilot nor move
the trimmable horizontal stabilizer.
2. INDUSTRY-ISSUED BULLETINS. Airbus Industries issued
Service Bulletin (SB) A-300-22-6021 which provides for a
modification to the flight control computer to change the
software control laws for the A-300-600. This
modification provides for the disengagement of the
autopilot when a force of about 33 pounds is applied to
the control column in the land or go-around modes above
400 feet AGL. Below this altitude, the autopilot cannot
be disengaged by a force on the control column. The
manufacturer provides that below 400 feet, only slight
inputs on the control column would be needed to refine
the approach. Additionally, if a pilot tried to counter
the autopilot inputs, the control forces should not
become very high prior to landing. However, the
possibility for unintended pilot-induced trim movement
and maximum stabilizer up or down trim still exists.
Such a situation could result in a stall or the airplane
landing in a nose-down attitude.
A. The A-300 models affected by the SB are the B4-601,
B4-603, B4-605R, B4-622, B4-622R, and C4-620. A similar
SB has been issued for the A-310.
[B}3. AUTOPILOT DISCONNECT DIFFERENCES. The autopilot
disconnect systems in the Airbus A-300 and A-310 are
significantly different from the disconnect systems
provided in other large transport-category airplanes.
The lack of a stabilizer-in-motion warning appears to be
unique to the Airbus A-300 and A-310. Pilots may not be
aware that under some circumstances the autopilot may
create an out-of-trim condition if they try to manually
control the airplane. The A-300 and A-310 do not have
the autopilot disconnect safety features to alert pilots
that the THS is moving to oppose their manual control
inputs. The accident may have been prevented if the
autopilot had disconnected as the pilot pushed forward on
the control column or if an alert had been provided to
the pilots that the THS was in motion.[/B]
4. POLICY. Principal operations inspectors (POI) whose
carriers operate Airbus A-300 and A-310 series aircraft
should immediately share the information contained in
this FSIB with their carriers.
A. POI's should ensure that the operators of the
affected Airbus A-300 and A-310 series airplanes provide
immediate and recurrent training to flightcrews on the
hazards of attempting to counter autopilot commands by
manual control forces when the aircraft is flying with
the autopilot engaged and in the land or go-around mode.
B. POI's should ensure that their operators' initial,
upgrade, transition, and recurrent training programs
include training on acceptable corrective actions which
include disconnecting the autopilot with the control
wheel disconnect button or through mode control panel.
Training should also emphasize that if the autopilot has
not captured the stabilized approach, the pilot can
disconnect the autopilot and "hand" or manually fly the
approach if recoverable, or can initiate an immediate go-
around.
C. POI's should ensure that their carriers operating the
affected Airbus A-300 and A-310 series aircraft comply
with the requirements of Airworthiness Directive (AD) 94-
21-07, "Airbus Model A310 and A300-600," effective
November 2, 1994.
5. INQUIRIES. This bulletin was developed by AFS-210.
Any questions or comments should be directed to AFS-210
at (202) 267-3718.
6. EXPIRATION. This bulletin will expire on 05-31-96.
David R. Harrington
-
Toad, they do call it the "instinctive disconect":)
Disconnect A/THR:
Ø Press instinctive disconnect pb on thrust levers
Ø Place both levers to idle detent
Ø Press off the A/THR pb on FCU when system active (green light goes out)
Ø Set one thrust lever beyond MCT or both beyond CL detent when RA is below 100’
US Airways training notes (http://www.chipsplace.com/helpful/Airbus/Airbus320TOC.htm) , check auto flight system
-
Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
Dago, I believe if you checked into it, you would find the TOGA mode might not be like you think.
As far as your comment about TSRA, pardon me but it's bordeline lame. I do agree that Private pilots have no business around TSRA, but in the cargo business we are pretty tight on departure/arrival times. Granted we are not going to land in a level 5, but if we kept out of the legendary 20 miles, we would be out of business.:D Hey, that's why that several level of thunderstorms hehehe.
Anyway:
ORDER: 8400.10
APPENDIX: 4
BULLETIN TYPE: Flight Standards Information
Bulletin (FSIB) for Air
Transportation (FSAT)
BULLETIN NUMBER: FSAT 95-13
BULLETIN TITLE: Recurrent Training on the Hazard of
Attempting to Counter Autopilot
Commands by Manual Control Forces
when the Airbus A-300/310 Series
Airplane Is Being Flown
with the Autopilot Engaged in the
Land or Go-Around Mode.
All well and nice cut and paste, but how is this relevant to the discussion?
They weren't flying in the TOGA condition, they were on the ground in rollout. The discussion started about whether they might have inadvertantly pushed the TOGA button and caused the aircraft to go to full thrust. I still dont know if the 310 has a TOGA button, or if TOGA is selected by throttle advancement as on later model Airbus models. I doubt if selecting TOGA on a 310 would cause full thrust response.
-
According to this accident report the A300/310 does have a TOGA mode which causes throttle response, the details of the system might be there:
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19940426-0&lang=en
http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Incidents/DOCS/ComAndRep/Nagoya/nagoyarep/nagoya-top.html
-
To wrap up though, if you activate the Go Around mode what the airplane does is dependent on the autopilot mode in conjunction with the autothrottle/autothrust mode.
Which is what I said way up thread.
-
Originally posted by Toad
So when you're flying a coupled approach and push the throttles to the TOGA position, what does the autopilot do? Nothing? Or fly a G/A profile?
The couple approach is disengaged, and if a G/A profile or heading had been put in during the approach, it will be followed. (as I remember it anyway).
-
Exactly.
If the G/A profile is in the Flight Management Computer...or whatever name it has on the Airbus side... and you're fully coupled throughout, the aircraft will fly that profile and make the necessary thrust changes.
The names may be different but the systems have to do the same things in order to comply with the regs. If you activate the Go Around mode what the airplane does is dependent on the autopilot mode in conjunction with the autothrottle/autothrust mode
-
Originally posted by Toad
Exactly.
If the G/A profile is in the Flight Management Computer...or whatever name it has on the Airbus side... and you're fully coupled throughout, the aircraft will fly that profile and make the necessary thrust changes.
The names may be different but the systems have to do the same things in order to comply with the regs. If you activate the Go Around mode what the airplane does is dependent on the autopilot mode in conjunction with the autothrottle/autothrust mode
Don't lose track of the fact that the aircraft I am discussing drops the coupled approach and thrust is added because you have pushed the throttles to full power (TOGA detent position), it isn't like hitting a button. Thrust management and flight profile are then controlled by the Flight Management Guidance Envelope Computers (FMGECs).
Someday I may explain to golfer the differance between autothrottles and autothrust. :D
-
Someday I may explain to golfer the differance between autothrottles and autothrust
Oh thank heavens...now I'll finally know what those little bumps are when you move the throttles in an XLS and what they do.
-
Originally posted by Dago
Don't lose track of the fact that the aircraft I am discussing drops the coupled approach and thrust is added because you have pushed the throttles to full power (TOGA detent position), it isn't like hitting a button. Thrust management and flight profile are then controlled by the Flight Management Guidance Envelope Computers (FMGECs).
In the end it sounds exactly like pushing a button, only the "button" is the throttles.
Flight management comes from a computer and thrust setting comes from a computer. There may be some differences in the sourcing and execution but the end result is the same. The aircraft flies the missed approach profile.
-
Yngh.. A320 and A310 are quite different in regards of flight management computer and how it acts with autopilot. Let alone that this issue doesn't have anything to do with the crash - unless it was a pilot error and the pilot DID NOT disengage autopilot on rollout, which is rather unlikely. Or if the pilot (again a pilot failure) executed missed approach too late and the downwards momentum nicely brought down the plane on the runway, but with full throttle instead, which again would lead to an another pilot error.
So what's the point of this GA discussion again?
-
The point is that what the aircraft does..either the 310 or the 320... is dependent on the level of automation in use and what modes are selected at the time of G/A activation.
It's really true of any of the Cat III capable aircraft regardless of brand. The methodologies may be slightly different but the end result has to be the same to meet Cat III regs.