On Jul 28, 1:03 pm, Stealth Pilot <notranspon...@aeroplanes.com.au> wrote:
> >is it possible to assume with any correctness that during cruise, an > >aircraft can only be at *a* particular ground speed at *a* particular [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > elevator trim position. each different combination of thrust and trim > position will result in a different speed. oops, okay.
> in all of aviation the experience has been that a properly maintained > minimal component count in the systems has resulted in better [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > you just have to accept that at the leading edge of a technology you > sometimes find leading edge problems that no one has an answer for. I'm very sure that being an experienced pilot, you know exactly what you're talking about. I look at it all only from the (admittedly uneducated and possibly naive) outside and what I see makes me want newer and better technology all the time. I cite two recent examples, both involving the A340 and incorrect Vr, both curiously involving Emirates, one in Jo'burg and the other recently in Melbourne. In both the cases, but for the inbuilt cutting-edge technology that prevented rotation earlier than prior to attaining an adequate enough airspeed, the aircraft would've tried a lift-off with potentially catastrophic consequences. And then there's the wonderful TCAS - who knows how many mid-airs have been averted singularly by it?
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a major event that's occurred *because* of the cutting-edge automation.
> for those moments you just hope that the guy up front has a name like > Bartels or Sullenberger or the thousands of other pilots who are just > as capable but havent been called on to become famous. Excellently put.
Ramapriya
|