Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Airbus Planes to Use Computers In Crash-Avoidance Maneuvers

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
MOCHA HAGoTDI said:
I presume that it will have a bypass for close parallel approaches?

Hopefully it wouldn't respond to an TCAS RA in a manner contrary to breakout instructions given by the PRM controller... Not to mention the whole hand-flying the breakout requirement.

Our Company says to follow the vertical guidance of the TCAS RA if you get one during a PRM apporach and then follow the lateral guidance by the controller(since TCAS doesn't give any). The computer is less likely to screw up than a human, It sucks to say that, but it is correct.
 
There are certainly some details to work out. Spurious RA's have been reduced since RVSM required version 7.0 of the software to be made mandatory. They still occur though primarily when either the pilot handflying or in Flt Lvl Chg or the FMS in VNAV barrels through 1000 feet above or below leveloff altitude at >1000fpm. Eurocontrol apparently reports increasing incidences of this type.

Another problem to be addressed is the AFCS responding to a spurious RA close to the ground, whether or not on a PRM ILS.

Apparently too many pilots have been surprised by an RA and in the "adrenaline rush" have overcorrected and maneuvered too aggressively in response to an RA and intruded on the airspace of a third aircraft causing a more dangerous situation than the one they were originally responding to.
 
FL420 said:
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB114868117828864620-lMyQjAxMDE2NDI4NzYyODcxWj.htmlScott Pelton, Boeing's chief engineer for electronic systems on jetliners, said Boeing would remain "aligned with our fundamental philosophy," which "believes the captain is in charge."


As opposed to the fundamental philosophy airline management in general is aligned with: Captain's in charge when the shinola hits the fan or the feds come a-stalkin'; all other decision-making rests with the Duty Officer, the Chief Pilot, the Base Manager, the Station Agent, the Dispatcher, the Flight Controller, the MX Controller, and the MBA's.

Hey, maybe Boeing's onto something there! Whodathunkit?
 
Heck, handflying a TCAS RA is one of the more interesting things we get to do. The software is good. When the RA annunciates, it's not a "OMG quick quick disconnect AP, hurry hurry" thing. It's almost leisurely.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top