4 ms·
Exactly this. People are blaming the pilot, Lion Air, SE Asia, but ultimately a Boeing aircraft decided that it was very important to pitch down and dive into t
by anjc 8y ago
Exactly this. People are blaming the pilot, Lion Air, SE Asia, but ultimately a Boeing aircraft decided that it was very important to pitch down and dive into the sea. How many backup sensors and alternate systems have to fail/pass before this course of action is taken? Does the angle of attack sensor not check what a backup sensor is saying, and then what the altimeter is saying, airspeed sensor, and on and on. If a single sensor failing can make this happen then the sensor shouldn't exist.
- A2017U1 8y agoSensors fail daily on hundreds of planes. Virtually everything down to radios is able to be switched off at the circuit breaker level. The responsibility is on the pilot to identify and switch off anything malfunctioning.
- linuxftw 8y agoYes, it's truly a case of inadequate engineering IMO. If an automated system designed to prevent crashes (stalls, as I understand it) merely changes the failure mode into something harder to detect and correct manually, it's a poorly designed system. A sibling comment mentioned that the sensors fail constantly. Seems that it might be possible to operate such a system with a significant number of critical inputs in a degraded state which could lead to unknown effects IMO. In many ways, automated driving is much more complex than successfully piloting an aircraft in regulated airspace.
- unionemployee 8y agoThe previous flight had PIC stick shaker activation for the entire flight. PIC gave control to SIC. PIC realized the trim would stop moving with the STAB TRIM switches to CUTOUT. Flew the rest of the flight with manual trim and no autopilot, stopping at FL280 for RVSM.