6 ms·

> the pilot’s action of pulling up the nose was an irrational thing to do Actually the inexperienced COPILOT did this. The pilot realized that was a problem ev

> the pilot’s action of pulling up the nose was an irrational thing to do Actually the inexperienced COPILOT did this. The pilot realized that was a problem eventually, but too late. And unfortunately the Airbus takes the average of both pilot inputs.

learc83 8y ago
>And unfortunately the Airbus takes the average of both pilot inputs Really? That's the best way to handle that?
- carlivar 8y ago
  Since I read that Popular Mechanics article, I think the exact same thing every time I board an Airbus plane.
  - richardhod 8y ago
    Airbus has since updated its flight control feedback systems
    - foldr 8y ago
      Source for this?
      - richardhod 8y ago
        I may be mistaken; I had thought I had read that Airbus had acted, but on checking up, I think not in ways which would make my brief implication useful.
- nolok 8y ago
  From what I read, it's a case of "can't do it the right way originally because of patents/legal/whatever; can't change it to the right way ever since because then every airbus pilot would need to requalify, every book rewritten, etc ...". Sounds like a terrible case of rotten legacy support.
- foldr 8y ago
  A dual input alarm sounds when that happens. The pilots should never both be trying to apply control inputs at once. There isn't really a good way of handling the situation where the pilots are not communicating and are trying to make conflicting control inputs.
js2 8y ago
After I read about that I was nervous flying on Airbus for a long time. My understanding is that on Boeing the two yokes are linked so it would be impossible for one pilot to nose up without the other having his yoke move too.
- neuronic 8y ago
  So it becomes a power struggle and assuming roughly equal strength of both pilots, we are still averaging ...
  - sokoloff 8y ago
    If that were the only factor, yes. The mechanical linkage though can help each pilot understand and discuss the actual inputs the plane is receiving, as well as being consistent with all the aircraft that they flew in primary civilian training.
  - refurb 8y ago
    Yes, but at least that gives a signal to each pilot what the other is doing. It wasn’t until a few minutes before Air France’s crashed that the pilot realized what the copilot was doing.
    - foldr 8y ago
      >It wasn’t until a few minutes before Air France’s crashed that the pilot realized what the copilot was doing. This is not true. See e.g. http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=772033&start=50#p11139241 http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=772033&start=...
      - refurb 8y ago
        2 minutes between captain returning to cockpit before he realizes the problem.[1] 02:11:43 (Captain) What the hell are you doing? [captain returns to cockpit] 02:13:40 (Bonin) But I've had the stick back the whole time! [At last, Bonin tells the others the crucial fact whose import he has so grievously failed to understand himself.] 02:14:29 - recording stops [1]https://www.tailstrike.com/010609.html https://www.tailstrike.com/010609.html
exidy 8y ago
Conflicting inputs are handled by averaging and an audible "DUAL INPUT" cockpit warning. In the case of AF447, the co-pilot used his "Priority Takeover" button which meant only his control inputs were in effect.
- iforgotpassword 8y ago
  The pilot doesn't get a notice in that case? Or was he just like "k what ever"
  - scarletham 8y ago
    There is both a visual and aural indicator. That being said, nobody (except Bonin) knew that the PF had his stick completely back until it was too late. You can see more here: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/themes/mh_newsdesk/documents/archives/dual-side-stick-inputs.pdf https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/themes/mh_newsdesk/docume...
    - iforgotpassword 8y ago
      That stuff is really interesting, I've been digging through random reports, documents and manuals for two hours now.
      - scarletham 8y ago
        Yeah, it really is. If you haven't already, check out the full BEA report - it's incredibly comprehensive and leads to lots of "jumping off" points for further research. https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp090601.en.pdf https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp09060...
  - exidy 8y ago
    The plane announces "priority left/right" and the pilot whose input is being ignored gets an indicator on their display.
weaksauce 8y ago
Iirc the problem was an iced pito tube that gave unreliable airspeed coupled with operating in a different reality (mode of flight control per airbus) coupled with differing inputs from both pilots coupled with the fact that the stall warning was disengaged below a certain airspeed. All too often these crashes are not one single cause but a series of unfortunate events.

learc83 8y ago

>And unfortunately the Airbus takes the average of both pilot inputs Really? That's the best way to handle that?

carlivar 8y ago
Since I read that Popular Mechanics article, I think the exact same thing every time I board an Airbus plane.
- richardhod 8y ago
  Airbus has since updated its flight control feedback systems
  - foldr 8y ago
    Source for this?
    - richardhod 8y ago
      I may be mistaken; I had thought I had read that Airbus had acted, but on checking up, I think not in ways which would make my brief implication useful.
nolok 8y ago
From what I read, it's a case of "can't do it the right way originally because of patents/legal/whatever; can't change it to the right way ever since because then every airbus pilot would need to requalify, every book rewritten, etc ...". Sounds like a terrible case of rotten legacy support.
foldr 8y ago
A dual input alarm sounds when that happens. The pilots should never both be trying to apply control inputs at once. There isn't really a good way of handling the situation where the pilots are not communicating and are trying to make conflicting control inputs.

js2 8y ago

After I read about that I was nervous flying on Airbus for a long time. My understanding is that on Boeing the two yokes are linked so it would be impossible for one pilot to nose up without the other having his yoke move too.

neuronic 8y ago
So it becomes a power struggle and assuming roughly equal strength of both pilots, we are still averaging ...
- sokoloff 8y ago
  If that were the only factor, yes. The mechanical linkage though can help each pilot understand and discuss the actual inputs the plane is receiving, as well as being consistent with all the aircraft that they flew in primary civilian training.
- refurb 8y ago
  Yes, but at least that gives a signal to each pilot what the other is doing. It wasn’t until a few minutes before Air France’s crashed that the pilot realized what the copilot was doing.
  - foldr 8y ago
    >It wasn’t until a few minutes before Air France’s crashed that the pilot realized what the copilot was doing. This is not true. See e.g. http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=772033&start=50#p11139241 http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=772033&start=...
    - refurb 8y ago
      2 minutes between captain returning to cockpit before he realizes the problem.[1] 02:11:43 (Captain) What the hell are you doing? [captain returns to cockpit] 02:13:40 (Bonin) But I've had the stick back the whole time! [At last, Bonin tells the others the crucial fact whose import he has so grievously failed to understand himself.] 02:14:29 - recording stops [1]https://www.tailstrike.com/010609.html https://www.tailstrike.com/010609.html

exidy 8y ago

Conflicting inputs are handled by averaging and an audible "DUAL INPUT" cockpit warning. In the case of AF447, the co-pilot used his "Priority Takeover" button which meant only his control inputs were in effect.

iforgotpassword 8y ago
The pilot doesn't get a notice in that case? Or was he just like "k what ever"
- scarletham 8y ago
  There is both a visual and aural indicator. That being said, nobody (except Bonin) knew that the PF had his stick completely back until it was too late. You can see more here: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/themes/mh_newsdesk/documents/archives/dual-side-stick-inputs.pdf https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/themes/mh_newsdesk/docume...
  - iforgotpassword 8y ago
    That stuff is really interesting, I've been digging through random reports, documents and manuals for two hours now.
    - scarletham 8y ago
      Yeah, it really is. If you haven't already, check out the full BEA report - it's incredibly comprehensive and leads to lots of "jumping off" points for further research. https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp090601.en.pdf https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp09060...
- exidy 8y ago
  The plane announces "priority left/right" and the pilot whose input is being ignored gets an indicator on their display.

weaksauce 8y ago

Iirc the problem was an iced pito tube that gave unreliable airspeed coupled with operating in a different reality (mode of flight control per airbus) coupled with differing inputs from both pilots coupled with the fact that the stall warning was disengaged below a certain airspeed. All too often these crashes are not one single cause but a series of unfortunate events.