A380 Delayed Another 10 Months

[Gorilla]

Gorila ... after they laid the aa new york crash on the pilots I will bash them all i want... they refuse to be held responsible for anything.

One more arrogance nail in what I hope is their corporate coffin. They may be correct with the Queens accident; then again, they may be wrong. But their starting position is always "But Monsieur, eet cannot be our fault... we are AIRBUS! We are zee best."

Deleted - unnecessary 'bus insult :0

 

[JP4user]

I'll bash Airbus, and not be ashamed to do so. I've flown with Airbus fleet managers, and guys who worked intimately with the boys in Toulouse, and to a man they say the 'bus arrogance is overwhelming. It's never their fault, ever. Always pilot error. Manufacturing issues; it's their suppliers. Etc, etc, ad nauseum.

Reminds me of how they blamed their chief test pilot and Air France Captain when the A-320 went into the forrest at the Paris Air Show some time back.

 

[A350]

For you non-airbus flyers....and specifically JP4....they placed the blame squarely where it belonged in that A320 accident...the facts below.

The A320 has low speed protection....that is if any attempt is made by the pilot to fly at a speed lower than stall....there is an alpha-protection mode called "alpha floor". This commands full thrust regardless of autothrust mode, engagement status, or throttle position. This makes the aircraft in effect "stall proof". However, there is one wrinkle.

When the aircraft breaks 50' AGL (forgive me if the exact number is wrong), it assumes the pilot is landing the aircraft. You can imagine if while trying to land the jet the airplane entered alpha floor protection and added full thrust. The Captain of that flight briefed doing the slow flyby at an altitude of 150' AGL. He was flying the aircraft and pulled the thrust to the idle position and leveled out @ 30' AGL instead. He was showing the "alpha" protection mode....except that once he broke the 50' plane, this protection is no longer available. By the time he realized his mistake and added full thrust, the aircraft was way behing the power curve and with full thrust was only able to maintain level flight and perhaps if the trees at the end of the runway were lower or he had more time to accelerate, they might have gotten out of it.

However, the statement they blamed someone who was blameless is outright wrong. The pilot did make a mistake.

A350

 

[SennaP1]

I'm surprised at the A(irbus) v. B(oeing) arguments with pilots. I'd just be happy my airline would be getting any airplanes. A or B, now I prefer A just for the comfort, but not for some sad nationalistic reason.

I always laugh at the "if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going stickers" , even saw it on a current Dash8 drivers'. I always envision these were the same guys smashing Hondas and Toyotas with a sledge hammer in the 80s at football games. And now they are driving their fuel-efficient "made in America" Accords to the store.

Better yet, driving their "American-made" F150s to Wal-Mart.

We are pilots, how about worrying about flying the airplane (or letting it fly you ) and not about the business end of making them.

That A330 sure is shiny....

 

[Gorilla]

Maybe we like Boeing aircraft better because Boeing assumes we know how to fly, and gives less authority to an onboard silicon chip than airbus.

Maybe we dislike France, too. It makes for a nice combination.

 

[ableone]

For you non-airbus flyers....and specifically JP4....they placed the blame squarely where it belonged in that A320 accident...the facts below.

The A320 has low speed protection....that is if any attempt is made by the pilot to fly at a speed lower than stall....there is an alpha-protection mode called "alpha floor". This commands full thrust regardless of autothrust mode, engagement status, or throttle position. This makes the aircraft in effect "stall proof". However, there is one wrinkle.

When the aircraft breaks 50' AGL (forgive me if the exact number is wrong), it assumes the pilot is landing the aircraft. You can imagine if while trying to land the jet the airplane entered alpha floor protection and added full thrust. The Captain of that flight briefed doing the slow flyby at an altitude of 150' AGL. He was flying the aircraft and pulled the thrust to the idle position and leveled out @ 30' AGL instead. He was showing the "alpha" protection mode....except that once he broke the 50' plane, this protection is no longer available. By the time he realized his mistake and added full thrust, the aircraft was way behing the power curve and with full thrust was only able to maintain level flight and perhaps if the trees at the end of the runway were lower or he had more time to accelerate, they might have gotten out of it.

However, the statement they blamed someone who was blameless is outright wrong. The pilot did make a mistake.

A350

Actually you are not quite correct. I fly the bus as well and think it is a great plane but read the original accident report. The high speed flight idle that is selected with slat extension is a result of that accident. There were engineering issues that contributed to that accident.

On the other hand Boeing will always blame a pilot over a design flaw as well. No manufacturer has ever fallen on the grenade when there is a dead pilot who will do the job nicely.

 

[SennaP1]

Maybe we like Boeing aircraft better because Boeing assumes we know how to fly, and gives less authority to an onboard silicon chip than airbus.

Maybe we dislike France, too. It makes for a nice combination.

Yeah, I like Boeing too. Looking forward to seeing the 787 in the skies. Luckily Boeing isn't making them in Texas or Northern Florida (ah screw it, all of Florida).

 

[A350]

There may have been changes to the flight control software...but had the pilot made the pass at 150', the accident wouldn't have occurred. I am not debating the Boeing vs. Airbus thing as I think they both make fine airplanes and my personal preference has nothing to do with the thread at hand......

Pilots make mistakes....the manufacturers are tasked with designing airplanes that are easy to fly and hard to wreck.

A350

 

[typhoonpilot]

There may have been changes to the flight control software...but had the pilot made the pass at 150', the accident wouldn't have occurred. I am not debating the Boeing vs. Airbus thing as I think they both make fine airplanes and my personal preference has nothing to do with the thread at hand......

Pilots make mistakes....the manufacturers are tasked with designing airplanes that are easy to fly and hard to wreck.

A350

The most important point here is that if they had made the low pass in a Boeing the accident would not have happened. Boeing lets the pilots control the aircraft at all times, not this stupuid engineer deciding that an aircraft below 50 feet must be landing nonsense.


TP

 

[SkiFishFly]

Maybe we like Boeing aircraft better because Boeing assumes we know how to fly, and gives less authority to an onboard silicon chip than airbus.

Maybe we dislike France, too. It makes for a nice combination.

I'm with him. Go Boeing!!!