Thread: Airline News

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I'm not quite sure what you mean. I clearly explained the difference between the two aircraft and why Boeing had to relocate the engines on their plane to bring a product to market that could compete with the NEO. That is not "bullshit" it's market forces, and it's why they did it.

Perhaps you were reading too much into this and reacted personally Harry. Not my gunfight.
The Boeing vs Airbus bullshit has been a constant stream of excrement [IMHO] since the advent of the A300... on many more platforms, flightdecks, bars and crewrooms than this forum. I've flown both, been a Captain for more than a quarter century [combined] on both, and a Type Rating Examiner. On both. I stand by my comment.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I'm all ears. Which ones crashed because of these "foibles"? AF447?

AF447?. Well that's an interesting example out of a number of Airbus crashes I could use to elucidate/educate. In the case of AF447, the 'ADR Disagree' fault which they experienced was a matter of record on a considerable number of occasions with other airlines prior. In my own company, at least two occasions. They and others did not lose control because they fortunately employed a 'workaround' : It is drummed into pilots, Power + Attitude = Performance. Basic Student Pilot technique and 100% valid in this scenario. Subsequent to these events, the 'Recommendation' [ note: not a Directive ] among others was to replace the Pitot heads with modified units. AF and some other companies elected not do this. The ADR Disagree foible remained for those operators. Unfortunately, after encountering the 'foible' the basic 'workaround' was not implemented in AF447's case. That is a matter of record and opens a whole other can of worms.

Originally Posted by bobfish

Perhaps you were reading too much into this and reacted personally Harry. Not my gunfight.
The Boeing vs Airbus bullshit has been a constant stream of excrement [IMHO] since the advent of the A300... on many more platforms, flightdecks, bars and crewrooms than this forum. I've flown both, been a Captain for more than a quarter century [combined] on both, and a Type Rating Examiner. On both. I stand by my comment.

You're welcome to stand by it, I was simply asking you to elucidate. If you simply mean Boeing don't like competition, that would sum it up neatly.

AF447?. Well that's an interesting example out of a number of Airbus crashes I could use to elucidate/educate. In the case of AF447, the 'ADR Disagree' fault which they experienced was a matter of record on a considerable number of occasions with other airlines prior. In my own company, at least two occasions. They and others did not lose control because they fortunately employed a 'workaround' : It is drummed into pilots, Power + Attitude = Performance. Basic Student Pilot technique and 100% valid in this scenario. Subsequent to these events, the 'Recommendation' [ note: not a Directive ] among others was to replace the Pitot heads with modified units. AF and some other companies elected not do this. The ADR Disagree foible remained for those operators. Unfortunately, after encountering the 'foible' the basic 'workaround' was not implemented in AF447's case. That is a matter of record and opens a whole other can of worms.

I picked that one because it was an almost identical scenario: Shitty equipment (Pitot tubes); irrational computer behaviour (turning off stall protection which confused the flight crew) and the pilots' inability to respond to the crisis.