3 ms·
Could they have had multiple sensors, but then fed them through software that determined which one(s) to tell the pilot about, without requiring the additional
by downandout 7y ago
Could they have had multiple sensors, but then fed them through software that determined which one(s) to tell the pilot about, without requiring the additional training? Like perhaps if they had 2 AoA’s on each side, and the software would take a reading that was agreed upon by 3 of the 4 sensors, and would alert the pilots to a failure of the system if 2 agreed and 2 disagreed.
- salawat 7y agoThe problem there is you don't train for when everything works. You train for when things don't work. The more complex you make the plumbing, as it were, the easier it is to clog it all up. Plus, there have been instances where a majority Ocala sensors have frozen in the same position, and outvoted the last remaining functional one. At the end of the day, software can only be considered an automation aid. The human pilot must be able to make a reasonably safe go of flying the plane alone. Even Airbus planes have this quality in direct law. They are still stable, there are just fewer safeguards to keep you from doing something daft. And even with airbus' approach, there's a case to be made that overreliance on the computer to safely operate the plane degrades basic piloting skills through atrophy or complacency.