Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 28-10-2003 @ 01:23 PM by Valhall
www.emc2fraternity.org...

Here you go. This write up claims the Airbus as the first fly-by-wire and then goes to describe the conflict between the first-pass software and human controls...

and then follows up with: this software was corrected.

Which means: it is no longer fly-by-wire.

You need to get your nomenclature straight. Autonomous flight control software is NOT fly-by-wire. Fly-by-wire is a phrase reserved for aircraft that CANNOT be safely flown by humans.

There are usually two reasons for fly-by-wire systems:

1. The maneuverability capabilities of the aircraft preclude the slow response time of a human pilot from maitaining control during extreme maneuvers (i.e. fighters)

2. Either the controls surface areas are large enough, or the flight regime includes flight conditions that cause the forces required to manual operate the control surfaces that are outside the maintainable, or even initially achievable forces for a human pilot.

THEREFORE, a fly-by-wire aircraft is UNFLYABLE by a human pilot.

There are no US commercial aircraft that are fly-by-wire.

They may have autonomous flight control software, but it is Aalways overridable by the pilot, and the aircraft are always flyable by a human pilot.


reply posted on 28-10-2003 @ 01:48 PM by Valhall
Just spoke with a man at Boeing Commercial Aircraft Public Relations:

Here is what I was told.

The 777 is considered a fly-by-wire system because there are no hydraulic controls within the system. For this reason, the system cannot be deactivated as the control surfaces are being controlled via electronics.

The stick is not a joy stick and the pilot is flying, but the forces are converted to voltage and thus electronic impulses for control surface deflections.

I asked if there were limtis and stops in the 777 control software that would prevent the pilot from performing certain maneuvers. This is where there was some double talk. He said that the software would yield to the pilot but if it sensed that he was attempting to do something that would destroy the craft it would “push back”.

I then ask him to explain what this meant by taking the Hawaii 737 incident in which the fuselage was peeled back and the resultant forces on the aircraft could only be overcome by the pilot performing maneuvers that the autonomous flight control software would not have allowed (i.e. it would have sensed that this was a destructive maneuver). I asked “could this be done with the 777”. And this is where the talk got a bit more doubled.

In light of the statement made above of the “push back” he stated a company line as follows: The advantage that ALL our crafts have over our competitors (NOTE: I’m assuming this is a foreign fly-by-wire commercial aircraft) is that the pilots ALWAYS have the discretion to operate the plane.

He then went on to state that – here’s the important part to the original post of this thread – ALL OTHER BOEING MODELS ARE HYDRAULICALLY OPERATED (including the 757 and 767) and no other Boeing aircrafts have anything other than autonomous autopilot software.

And, there are no remote control capabilities for any Boeing commercial aircraft on the market.

You may verify these statements by contacting Boeing and requesting the Commercial aircraft public relations office.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes
P. O. Box 3707
Seattle, Washington 98124
206-655-2121
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 12 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 5 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 16 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 13 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 7 days ago with 6 member flags