41–50 of 374 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Making a computer that can fly without airspeed makes less sense to me than making an airspeed sensor that either doesn't ice, or can de-ice itself. Is that so impossible?
Supposedly they do de-ice themselves, but that obv didn't work properly here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Making a computer that can fly without airspeed makes less sense to me than making an airspeed sensor that either doesn't ice, or can de-ice itself. Is that so impossible?
Supposedly they do de-ice themselves, but that obv didn't work properly here.
This maybe seems trollish or silly, but in all seriousness, if your sensors aren't good enough, first rule out improving the sensors before you try to compensate with the system.
The temperature drops 1.98C for every 1,000 feet you go up so you can see quite quickly how fast you can enter an area below the freezing point of water.
Icing of the pitot tube and carburetor are a constant worry at least for prop driven aircraft. Right from day one you're taught what to look for signs of carburetor icing and how to correct it. Water in the fuel is probably #3 on the list.
I never got far enough along to learn about wing icing I ran out of money for lessons but really everyday it's ice, ice, ice!
Could they not simply have looked out the window and understood? Or simply felt gravity in their bodies? A 40 degree incline is pretty severe, wouldn't it be obvious?
Pilots are trained to ignore sensory input like the feel of gravity, the feel of being in a dive/climb/bank and use the instruments to make determinations about what the aircraft is doing. Usually those feelings are dead wrong.
It's amazing how flying into a cloud bank, even though you've been flying straight and level, suddenly your body screams at you that you're in a descending bank or something. You just learn to disregard those senses and trust the instruments.
As far as looking out the window, it was cloudy, at night, and at high altitude. At high altitude in straight and level flight your nose is pointed at blue sky, not the visual horizon.
Could they not simply have looked out the window and understood? Or simply felt gravity in their bodies? A 40 degree incline is pretty severe, wouldn't it be obvious?
Could they not simply have looked out the window and understood? Or simply felt gravity in their bodies? A 40 degree incline is pretty severe, wouldn't it be obvious?
Our bodies are horrible when it comes to spatial awareness. Pilots are trained to ignore sensory input like the feel of gravity, the feel of being in a dive/climb/bank and use the instruments to make determinations about what the aircraft is doing. Usually those feelings are dead wrong. It's amazing how flying into a cloud bank, even though you've been flying straight and level, suddenly your body screams at you that…
Could they not simply have looked out the window and understood? Or simply felt gravity in their bodies? A 40 degree incline is pretty severe, wouldn't it be obvious?
I've followed the discussion of the AF447 investigation on several flight discussion forums. The PF (Bonin) apparently never became aware of his angle of attack (once the airplane fully stalled, AOA was absurdly high). He did not seem to be aware that his constant inputs had caused the Airbus's THS (trimmable horizontal stabilizer, horizontal flaps on the tail) to deflect to maximum in order to try to keep the nose u…