Maybe, maybe not.
www.politico.com
How is a panel that includes the brother of an ET302 crash victim considered ‘independent”?
Which issues has Airbus had that you consider to be of comparable type? And which very significant issues has Airbus had that you think eclipse Boeing's MCAS fiasco?
Keep in mind that not everyone assigns 100% of the responsibility for MCAS to Boeing. That being said, there were those who attributed the AF447 crash to Airbus' A330 human factors and handling qualities, even pointing out the perceived superiority of Boeing's control schema. Looking farther back, many still insist the A320 crash at Mulhouse-Habsheim was due to a flight control problem that was then covered up by Airbus. These don't necessarily eclipse the MAX issues, but they do point out the judgement based on rumor and innuendo despite facts and the public's short memory.
MIT has lecturers and doctoral graduates that actually work in areas relevant to the panel, why didn't they choose one of them?
Yes, many prefer flights of fancy to an icy plunge into a pool of cold hard facts. I'm not certain how that relates to Bell206's post.
Someone in a cubicle probably had a spreadsheet showing it was cheaper to have the sub on site to fix.
From NYT: “When people say I changed the culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so it’s run like a business rather than a great engineering firm,” Mr. Stonecipher said in 2004. “It is a great engineering firm, but people invest in a company because they want to make money.”
www.nbcnews.com
Don't feel bad. I thought it was funny.
anybody that knows the airbus control system knows that is total bs
A kid lost his favorite shirt. That's traumatizing!Looks like the lawyers are at work again...I always thought one must suffer damages to be sued for damages..
Passengers sue Boeing, Alaska Airlines for $1 billion over midair door panel blowout
The "preventable incident" endangered scores of lives both on the plane itself and others flying Max 9 aircraft, the suit alleges.
I think it falls under the legal theory of, "This was an unusual event and someone freaked out, so it MUST be worth some insane amount of money!!!!!!11!!!!1!!"Looks like the lawyers are at work again...I always thought one must suffer damages to be sued for damages..
Passengers sue Boeing, Alaska Airlines for $1 billion over midair door panel blowout
The "preventable incident" endangered scores of lives both on the plane itself and others flying Max 9 aircraft, the suit alleges.
The A380 production issues are one. And for the same reasons as Boeing is being accused for. Yet it never became global headline like Boeing. Helps when the media is “controlled” to limit any impact felt by the EU’s principal baby.
The alpha floor issues for one. Even though Airbus has said they have fixed the problem(s)… some say their fix was to simply inhibit the alpha floor protection trigger points to reduce the potential for inflight upsets. And even when there were human factors involved in those upsets as with the MCAS incidents, the Airbus side never gets hammered in the same manner as Boeing.
I thought the "judgement based on rumor and innuendo despite facts" part was sort of an important part of the post you quoted.
Airbus has certainly engaged in plenty of bribery and corruption, but those sins, as I understand them, are related to selling airplanes and not designing and certificating them. I'd like to learn more.
I don't know either control system. But just read the accident report on AF447 and the part about the two pilots putting opposite inputs into their side sticks and cancelling each other out kinda freaked me out. Doesn't seem like a sensible setup.
It has always impressed me that the size of an organization does not prevent it from forking up some very simple things. In some perverse way, the blinders get bigger.
i dont know the version of software in that plane, but in that situation now the plane will be saying "DUAL INPUT" also if one person holds the disconnect button down, it disables the other side stick.
Boeing (and their 767 control scheme) say hi.
Wonder what full opposite stabilizer deflections would do in cruise flight?
In the case of Egypt Air 990, it caused them to crash and die. But according to the NTSB, that was a suicide, with the Co-Pilot and Captain fighting for the controls. Whereas with Air France 447, they were unaware they were cancelling each other out.
Wasn’t really referring to the bribe/corruption side as that is more of SOP on that side of the pond. But was nice to see Airbus get called out for a few nickels. Too bad they can’t catch their helicopter guys doing the same.
While I don’t know what you mean by “scandalous,” but I think having a yard full of A380 front and aft fuselage sections that can’t be assembled because the wiring was too short and had to be completely rewired as “scandalous.” Or maybe the loss of $33B from the 380 program could be considered scandalous since the entire design/production program was developed from mostly taxpayer fund loans with repayments based on delivery performance. No deliveries, no payments. Imagine the headlines if Boeing did that.
Definitely need to use the advance search functions with Google as it can be very “shallow” in its search and biases in the first 5-10 pages. Or perhaps go to the EASA website and search for reports? Most of the reports I saw and used were via specialized search engines.
You alleged that Airbus has committed acts of malfeasance comparable to Boeing's MCAS scandal, and further, that Airbus aircraft were subject to some sort of alpha floor problem that was even more egregious than MCAS. I asked for specifics; you replied with generalities. I asked for links to reports/documents/findings that might support your claim that Airbus has committed acts of deceit equivalent to Boeing's MCAS debacle; you suggested that I learn how to use a search engine.Wasn’t really referring to the bribe/corruption side as that is more of SOP on that side of the pond. But was nice to see Airbus get called out for a few nickels. Too bad they can’t catch their helicopter guys doing the same.
While I don’t know what you mean by “scandalous,” but I think having a yard full of A380 front and aft fuselage sections that can’t be assembled because the wiring was too short and had to be completely rewired as “scandalous.” Or maybe the loss of $33B from the 380 program could be considered scandalous since the entire design/production program was developed from mostly taxpayer fund loans with repayments based on delivery performance. No deliveries, no payments. Imagine the headlines if Boeing did that.
Definitely need to use the advance search functions with Google as it can be very “shallow” in its search and biases in the first 5-10 pages. Or perhaps go to the EASA website and search for reports? Most of the reports I saw and used were via specialized search engines.
However, 2 alpha floor incidents come to mind: one had the alpha floor trigger in cruise flight causing loss of 4000 ft before the crew caught it; and one where they were test flying a 320 and the alpha floor failed to engage and the crew lost control and crashed. I believe with that one the AOAs were compromised causing signal issues. Hmm, sounds similar to the Lion 610 flight?
No ”allege” about it. I merely shared my personal experiences on the topic. Whether you believe those experiences or not is totally on you. And will I spend my time and effort to recreate “reports/documents/findings” given to me by others to convince you? Not hardly.
Nor am I going to rehash the MCAS here. There are a number of threads on PoA where my opinion and views on the matter are well stated. But it's suffice to say, if your theory was correct, then the Lion flight should have crashed on the previous day. But it didn’t. And so on.