Splash and Dash Searey Seaplane Delights                            Apr 29 10:07 Guest User - Request Membership Layout | Log In | Help | Videos | Site | Emails  Search:   Front Page Calendar Photos Add Photos News Add News File Cabinet Add File Cabinet History Add History * Searey Info * Add * Searey Info * Polls Add Polls Classifieds Add Classifieds Utilities Create a New Site  News View All News | Add News | Emoticons | Mark Unread Search News:      Category: 98,Accidents/Incidents Previous Item - Cool Canopy This will go to the previous thread in this topic.       Favorite option: If you want this item to be marked as a favorite, click on the black heart.   Flight 1549 ATC Recording & Transcript         Next Item - How Sullenberger Really Saved Flt 1549 This will go to the next thread in this topic.    Don Maxwell - Feb 05,2009   Viewers  | Reply     Here's an interesting report on the Airbus 320 Hudson River seaplane. Look for the red 'CLICK FOR RELATED CONTENT' text in the middle, then download the transcript pdf so you can read it while playing the audio: <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29033134?GT1=43001">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29033134?GT1=43001</a>          Kenneth Leonard - Feb 05,2009   Viewers  | Reply     Really makes you wonder if the ATC controller understood the gravity of the situation. Not that he could have done much. How the pilot kept his voice under control is beyond me.          Walt Bates - Feb 06,2009   Viewers  | Reply     A US Air A320 captain has confirmed to me that a bird into just the right place, covering just the right sensor ports, would indeed cause the engine control computer to drop the engine to idle speed and not allow throttle movement to bring it out of idle. Great system, huh?!?!<br />All witnesses (and there were three deadheading pilots in the back) agreed that the left engine was compressor stalling and spitting flames out of both ends. This would be consistent with major blade damage rendering the engine useless. But all also agreed that the right engine was completely quiet. This would be consistent with a computer controlled N2 roll back. It appears that had the pilots had Boeing (and Searey) style cable control they would have been able to fly this aircraft to an uneventful single engine landing that we practice regularly. Though bird damage was found on the right engine's nacelle it appears that the engine was quite capable of producing normal thrust.<br />We don't call this the 'scarebus' for nothin'          Jeff Arnold - Feb 11,2009   Viewers  | Reply     For years I had posed the difference between Boeing and Airbus in that if you look in a Boeing cockpit there is a big control wheel which is connected by cables to the control surfaces with hydraulic assist - like the power steering in your car. If you look in an Airbus cockpit, there is a side stick like a game controller. There are no cables, but rather, just wires which transmit electrical signals to a flight computer. Then I would pose the question: 'Which airplane would you rather be on if you were struck by lightning?'. The obvious answer is Boeing.<br /><br />Then I had the experience in November 2007 to be on an A340 and be struck by lightning. It was at night. There was a blue flash and sumultaneous kawack sound. Laura was looking at me to decide whether she should be scared. Lets just say that my senses went to 100% to see if everything was going OK. There was no apparant effect in the operation of the plane and we flew 8 hours to our intended destination.<br /><br />It occured to me to wonder what the response was by the flight crew. Was it 'Wholey s#!t' or 'Ho hum'?          Kenneth Leonard - Feb 12,2009   Viewers  | Reply     The Boeing C-17 has the advantages of fly-by-wire (computer limits on G, angle of attack and rotation angle with weight on wheels) with mechanical backup. Doesn't save money or weight but hey, that is one advantage of military aircraft. And of course, the first time you actually HAVE to revert to mechanical, it just paid for itself across the whole fleet.          Walt Bates - Feb 12,2009   Viewers  | Reply     Boeing started looking into the fly-by-wire thing in the 80s and put FBW spoilers on the 757 - sort of as an in-service test. That seemed to work OK (and the system is hardened against lightning / static discharges). They then committed the whole shebang to FBW with the 777. But even on it there is a touch of mechanical control. You have (very slow) stab trim and two inboard spoilers. That's it. The best we were ever able to do in the sim was to keep vertical rates within 2,000 fpm of zero and the bank angle to within 30* of level. Obviously, this capability is there only to buy you some time to get something else up and running. Unlike the 767's RAT, the turbine on the 777 does have an electric generator as well as a hydraulic pump. My gripe with the scarebus is that the engines are also controlled through this magic and that G and bank limits are built in. On the 777 the ailerons stiffen when you go through 35* of bank but you can roll the airplane if you need to. And while the Frenchies put in a 2.5 G limit the Boeings have none. Though you can override this it takes finding a rarely used switch on the overhead which you wouldn't have time for if your windscreen were suddenly filled with someone else's airplane.

	- About Searey.us -      - Contact Searey.us -	- Privacy Statement - - Terms of service -	Copyright © 2024 Searey.us & Brevard Web Pro, Inc. - Copyrights may also be reserved by posters and used by license on this site. See Terms of Service for more information.
	- Please visit our NEW Chapter Place Website at: chapterplace.com or Free Chapter Management Website at: ourchapter.org. Good for all chapters, groups or families.