DrPepper’s last post on this forum was 27 July 19:23

DrPepper’s last post on this forum was 27 July 19:23.

He is silent even to a PM I sent.

I guess it’s ‘shovel time’ – dig chaps:rolleyes: DrPepper’s succumbed either to the PIL/FIL or he had a heart attack on the post permission ‘job’.:D

I don’t advocate everything our transatlantic cousins do but….

I don’t advocate everything our transatlantic cousins do but they seem to use domestic waste disposal units (Tweenies).

Very popular there – not very common here – reasons I am apologetic but don’t know.

Maybe it’s because their drains are bigger in handling capacity – like all things American:D

Tweenies can considerably reduce the waste the useless bureaucratic Councils in the UK have to cope with. Wonder what would happen if they were dis-allowed Council offices and chairs to sit on would that help them get out and solve more urban and rural issues? Probably not as they’d take permanent sick leave I guess and do nothing as normal.:rolleyes:

Someone’s become an I-Robot fan obviously (I liked the Audi concept car but the rest is as yet SciFi):D

Giving rights to machines? Jay, you really need to get out more.

Regards,

kev35

Hi Kev35 you missed my closing comment in the opening post (see above) 😀 – the rest of my opening post in the thread was directly from the journal article on the debate not my sentiments:eek:

Having said that debates such as these are good fun and remind me of college days when we had inter collegiate debates (partly great for the opportunity of meeting the female opposition team and supporters of course). Topics such as “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world”. It was I guess a subtle way of training to be lawyers, politicians:eek:, etc

Kind regards:)

These last two posts made me go back and create a short summary

These last two posts made me go back and create a short summary from this thread and IMO these are the ones that came through –

In this same thread
Post 108 nJayM
The Controversy, Technology – advocates, Technique – advocates, Conclusion

Post 117 27vet
2nd paragraph

Post 124 27vet
Quotes article from Flying Magazine
Did Flight 447 experience a deep stall?
The short answer is no. It was deeply stalled, but it was not in a deep stall.

Post 130 nJayM
Some quotes from a very concise and responsible article from Flightglobal

Post 133 nJayM
Where some of the improvements may and could come from.

Post 134 27vet
Capt Sullenberger’s comments

Post 170 nJayM
4 vids that are compelling viewing.

See my post 182 – RR told me so but maybe they weren’t as knowledgeable a syou

See my post 182 – RR told me so but maybe they weren’t as knowledgeable as you.:)

I am happy to keep an open mind and simply wish to see aircraft F35, or foreign built, UAVs, UCAVs and helis equip those two aircraft carriers.

The engines for the F35C are delayed or is that another story that is questionable in your opinion?;)

http://www.rolls-royce.com/defence/products/combat_jets/rr_liftsystem.jsp

http://www.rolls-royce.com/defence/products/combat_jets/f136.jsp (snafu352 – please note terminology I used is/was used by RR namely describing F35c as CV – this is a General Discussion thread on Aircraft Carriers)

Update Press Release from BEA 03 August 2011

Update Press Release from BEA 03 August 2011

http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.af.447/pressrelease03august2011.en.php

“Since this morning the integrity of the BEA’s investigation has been called into question following reactions to the publication of articles mentioning a modification made to the Confidential Draft Report, which had been sent to the advisers appointed by the operator, the manufacturer and the SNPL as well as to the investigation authorities participating in the investigation.

This working document contained a draft recommendation relating to the functioning of the stall warning. This draft was withdrawn because it appeared to BEA investigators that the recommendation was premature at this stage of the investigation. In fact, this subject will have to be explored more fully by the « Airplane Systems » group and completed by the work of the « Human Factors » working group, whose creation was announced during the press conference on 29 July.

This new working group, which will be made up of specialists in cognitive sciences, ergonomics and psychology will have to examine all aspects linked to man-machine interactions and to the pilots’ actions in the last few minutes of the flight.

Only after all of this work has been completed and included in the Final Report will it be possible for a recommendation on the functioning of the stall warning to be made, based on reasoned scientific analysis, work in which EASA will participate.

The current controversy focuses on a recommendation that corresponds to the functioning of the stall warning in a situation where the airplane reached an extreme angle of attack that is never encountered in flight tests, or even considered.

Finally, it should be noted that the warning sounded uninterruptedly for 54 seconds after the beginning of the stall, without provoking any appropriate reaction from the crew. This fact must be analysed as a priority by the working group.

The report published on 29 July is an Interim Report. Its publication was necessary in order to issue several Safety Recommendations. The causes of the accident will be made known with the publication of the Final Report during the first half of 2012.”

The question is in the meantime do similar Fly By Wire aircraft go without an increase in hands on intensive pilot training? Yes expensive but so is the loss of a reputable aircraft (badge of manufacturer and wasted lives)
Waiting yes for as good facts from a report is one thing but pro active training by competent pilots, flying instructors and simulator instructors should surely gain momentum rapidly.

I repeat can I please advocate all ‘softies’ and software analysts (and armchair psychologists) fly the ‘jump seat’ and experience things for real. Leave your computer screens and comfortable offices behind and experience for real the conditions up there before you attempt to simulate and plan for more Fly By Wire. Please, please also plan for rapid disengagement (isolation) of multiple interacting systems when they get possibly doubtful error messages. Go do it – share the pain and then plan your systems.

I repeat what I have said successful cluster configurations that I helped architecture (late 1990s now bettered) and implement had 5 working network cards in each server just to avoid the cross errors when a problem occurred. Each checked the other component of cluster/s and only failed over (Isolated) if when and if there was a genuine technical reason. Milliseconds with the right hardware, firmware and optimised software of course. Isolation of a failing instrument/s is all that is required and re-absorption of early manual control of auto pilot and auto thrust by trained pilots may save many technical cross connecting errors from compounding skilled logical humans brains from taking rapid life saving rational decisions.