EASA grounds the 7X

[JJET44]

EASA Grounds Falcon 7X, FAA Action To Follow
The EASA today grounded the Dassault Falcon 7X, via an emergency Airworthiness Directive, following a runaway pitch trim event experienced in one of the trijets yesterday during descent. According to the EASA, the crew successfully recovered the aircraft to a stable flight profile and performed an uneventful landing. However, the incident prompted Dassault to ask the EASA to ground the 7X “out of an abundance of caution.” An FAA spokeswoman told AIN that the U.S. agency is “looking at issuing something similar” to the EASA emergency AD, though it has yet to actually do so. “Dassault Falcon’s preliminary analysis of information downloaded from quick access recorder and the fault history database confirms the event but did not enable us to determine its origin,” the French aircraft manufacturer said in a statement. “Dassault has dispatched a team of experts to research the cause and to create a solution, both of which will require further investigation.” The 112 Falcon 7Xs in the worldwide fleet have accumulated more than 75,000 flight hours, and Dassault said this is the first event of this nature that’s been reported since the aircraft entered service in 2007. A posting on a professional pilot message board indicated that the incident occurred in Malaysia, but neither the FAA nor Dassault would confirm this to AIN

 

[SCT]

It looks like G200 might be going on a paid vacation!

 

[jet2work]

Zeees iz not possible!!! Eeeet must be zee stooopid Americahn pilots trying to hand fly our magneeefeecent Falcon.

FBW????????? Who has NOT had an electrical component on an aircraft crap out on them in the last 3 months? When is the last time you had a control cable snap our a hydraulic servo completely fail? I will wait patiently for this technology to mature, or for bizjets to come equipped with ejection seats:beer:.


I know, I know .... Airbus.. It's a joke!:laugh:

 

[Flyingdude]

Zeees iz not possible!!! Eeeet must be zee stooopid Americahn pilots trying to hand fly our magneeefeecent Falcon.

FBW????????? Who has NOT had an electrical component on an aircraft crap out on them in the last 3 months? When is the last time you had a control cable snap our a hydraulic servo completely fail? I will wait patiently for this technology to mature, or for bizjets to come equipped with ejection seats:beer:.


I know, I know .... Airbus.. It's a joke!:laugh:

Haha, that is actually a pretty accurate phrase from a Frenchman. Now, I am not defending the fly by wire, since I am still not convinced it is the way to go for everything. I have flown aircraft with FBW, so I do have some perspective in my opinion. As far as letting it mature, you may have to find a new argument since it has been in service for atleast 37 years, as the F-16 was FBW and it came out in 1974. You may disagree with the different applications by the manufacturers that use it but saying your waiting for something that has been around for more than a third of a century to further mature is a little odd.

 

[jet2work]

You missed the last line where I mentioned the Airbus. That was a nod to the fact that FBW is indeed a mature technology on something without an ejection seat. As for the F-16, it does have an ejection seat.

I just could not resist the urge to take a poke at the French. I used to fly a French made aircraft, and I was amused by the way their manuals were written. Something to the effect of:

"Our genuis French engineers have designed it as a fail-proof system, however in the unlikely event that you manage to be so stupid as to somehow cause it to fail......"

 

[JJET44]

*****
EMERGENCY AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE
www.faa.gov/aircraft/safety/alerts/
DATE: May 27, 2011
AD #: 2011-12-51
Emergency airworthiness directive (AD) 2011-12-51 is sent to owners and operators of Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes.
Background
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2011-0102-E, dated May 26, 2011 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products.
EASA has advised that a Model FALCON 7X airplane experienced an uncontrolled pitch trim runaway during descent. The crew succeeded in recovering a stable situation and performed an uneventful landing. Analysis of the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) and Fault History Database (FHDB) confirmed the event, but did not identify the cause of the pitch trim runaway. This condition, if not corrected, could result in loss of control of the airplane.
To address this unsafe condition, the EASA AD prohibits, from the effective date of the EASA AD, any flight operations of FALCON 7X airplanes.
FAA’s Determination
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
AD Requirements
This AD requires that, as of receipt of this AD, operation of Model FALCON 7X airplanes is prohibited.
Interim Action
We consider this AD interim action pending the outcome of the investigation currently being carried out by the manufacturer. We may consider further rulemaking when additional information is available.
Authority for this Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority.
1
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
Presentation of the Actual AD
We are issuing this AD under 49 U.S.C. Section 44701 according to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator.
2011-12-51 Dassault Aviation: Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-108-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This Emergency AD is effective upon receipt.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.
Subject
(d) Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27: Flight controls.
Unsafe Condition
(e) This AD was prompted by a report of an uncontrolled pitch trim runaway during descent. We are issuing this AD to prevent loss of control of the airplane.
Compliance
(f) Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Flight Prohibited
(g) As of receipt of this AD, operation of the airplane is prohibited.
Special Flight Permit
(h) Special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199), are not allowed.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, International Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
2
3
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in the Related Information section of this AD. Information may be e-mailed to: [email protected].
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
Related Information
(j)(1) For further information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-227-1137; fax: 425-227-1149; e-mail: [email protected].
(2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2011-0102-E, dated May 26, 2011, for related information.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 27, 2011.
Original signed by:
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.

 

[LegacyDriver]

you missed the last line where i mentioned the airbus. That was a nod to the fact that fbw is indeed a mature technology on something without an ejection seat. As for the f-16, it does have an ejection seat.

I just could not resist the urge to take a poke at the french. I used to fly a french made aircraft, and i was amused by the way their manuals were written. Something to the effect of:

"our genuis french engineers have designed it as a fail-proof system, however in the unlikely event that you manage to be so stupid as to somehow cause it to fail......"

+1

lol!

 

[AA717driver]

I don't think people have a problem with FBW. It's how the engineers "instruct" the aircraft to "interpret" pilot inputs to the flight controls.

If I want to yank on the stick and stall the airplane, that should be my decision. I don't need some desk-bound engineer to tell me I only get to pull back so far before the airplane says "nope".

I may need to clear the top of that hill and worry about the stall recovery on the other side.

TC

 

[need2fly]

I don't think people have a problem with FBW. It's how the engineers "instruct" the aircraft to "interpret" pilot inputs to the flight controls.

If I want to yank on the stick and stall the airplane, that should be my decision. I don't need some desk-bound engineer to tell me I only get to pull back so far before the airplane says "nope".

I may need to clear the top of that hill and worry about the stall recovery on the other side.

TC

Sorry...But that's a poor example. This is exactly where FBW excels. With a FBW aircraft, when I pull full aft the computers will allow me to go to an AOA just below the stalling AOA. At that AOA I am producing the maximum amount of lift from the wing, getting the most performance that the wing is capable of with out stalling. How sure are you that you won't enter the stall on this side of the hill, or that you will have enough altitude to recover from your stall on the other side. The only way to recover is to lower the AOA and now the ground is rushing back up at you.

I would much rather be in a FBW aircraft when performing a wind shear or GPWS escape maneuver!

N2F

 

[LegacyDriver]

We live and die with redundancy. Fbw is fine but give us mechanical reversion.