3 ms·

> several Airbus crashes have been a result of their illogical control system, with two disconnected, additive-input joysticks. Example please? I’m fairly well

> several Airbus crashes have been a result of their illogical control system, with two disconnected, additive-input joysticks. Example please? I’m fairly well read on aviation incidents and I can’t recall a case of an accident being caused by this in particular.

Alupis 2y ago
Air France 447[1] went down in no small part due to conflicting pilot stick inputs (with neither being aware of the other's actions). As with all aviation tragedies, there never is one single failure, but here the stick control scheme played a non-trivial part. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447
- HL33tibCe7 2y ago
  I wouldn’t say that this incident was “the result of” the sidestick issue. The fact that the airplane was in an upset at all was the result of prior miscommunication and pilot error, and while the sidestick confusion hampered the recovery, the crew should have realised what was going on, especially considering the “dual input” warning. I do agree the Airbus sidestick setup is stupid, and certainly contributed to this incident. But it’s a different order of stupid to Boeing’s recent malfunctions. I don’t think it makes sense to equivocate here.
  - Alupis 2y ago
    I disagree only slightly. In a more traditional control arrangement, both controls are slaved together to provide immediate feedback on input. With all of the confusion going on in that cockpit at that time, audible warnings likely were not as effective as it would have been to feel the stick move in an unexpected way. But yes, aircraft crashes are rarely if ever the result of a single point of failure. It's always a cascade of failures that leads up to the crash.
  - dredmorbius 2y ago
    Multiple reports cite the controls issue as contributing to the incident, e.g.: CBS News aviation and safety expert Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger explained that he believes that the disappearance would have been less likely to have happened if the plane had been a Boeing instead of an Airbus. This is because the control wheels are larger and more obvious. <https://web.archive.org/web/20130608033135/http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-33816_162-57587193/four-years-later-lessons-from-air-france-flight-447 https://web.archive.org/web/20130608033135/http://www.cbsnew...> (More in the previously-linked Wikipedia article.)
- Arnt 2y ago
  Oh, there are more. The first dozen A380s built are said to be different than the later ones. That doesn't mean that Boeing now has its QA in order, or that Boeing's current state proves that anyone else is equally bad. It's just whataboutism.

Alupis 2y ago

Air France 447[1] went down in no small part due to conflicting pilot stick inputs (with neither being aware of the other's actions). As with all aviation tragedies, there never is one single failure, but here the stick control scheme played a non-trivial part. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447

HL33tibCe7 2y ago
I wouldn’t say that this incident was “the result of” the sidestick issue. The fact that the airplane was in an upset at all was the result of prior miscommunication and pilot error, and while the sidestick confusion hampered the recovery, the crew should have realised what was going on, especially considering the “dual input” warning. I do agree the Airbus sidestick setup is stupid, and certainly contributed to this incident. But it’s a different order of stupid to Boeing’s recent malfunctions. I don’t think it makes sense to equivocate here.
- Alupis 2y ago
  I disagree only slightly. In a more traditional control arrangement, both controls are slaved together to provide immediate feedback on input. With all of the confusion going on in that cockpit at that time, audible warnings likely were not as effective as it would have been to feel the stick move in an unexpected way. But yes, aircraft crashes are rarely if ever the result of a single point of failure. It's always a cascade of failures that leads up to the crash.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  Multiple reports cite the controls issue as contributing to the incident, e.g.: CBS News aviation and safety expert Captain Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger explained that he believes that the disappearance would have been less likely to have happened if the plane had been a Boeing instead of an Airbus. This is because the control wheels are larger and more obvious. <https://web.archive.org/web/20130608033135/http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-33816_162-57587193/four-years-later-lessons-from-air-france-flight-447 https://web.archive.org/web/20130608033135/http://www.cbsnew...> (More in the previously-linked Wikipedia article.)
Arnt 2y ago
Oh, there are more. The first dozen A380s built are said to be different than the later ones. That doesn't mean that Boeing now has its QA in order, or that Boeing's current state proves that anyone else is equally bad. It's just whataboutism.