Germanwings Flight 9525 crashes in French Alps

520 posts in this topic

 

Because GPS and Ground Radar give you (only) the speed relative to ground; And that's not sufficient for a decision. What you (as a pilot) need to know is the speed relative to the air (surrounding you).

 

For an airplane travelling at 850km/h, the difference between the GPS, radar and airspeed should be within 10%. A case like Airfrance (and probably this) was much more severe, so it is easy to distinguish between a 10% difference and a 50% difference.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LR you were asking what those flapping surfaces are on the wings. I think you may have been referring to the spoilers:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoiler_(aeronautics)

These do the opposite to slats and flaps which are designed to generate more lift usually at lower airspeeds like at landing or takeoff. The spoilers do the opposite in that they create increase drag on the wing causing it to stall. When sitting in the plane as a passenger looking out over the wing the spoilers seem to flap about freely.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awful, terrible news. My heart goes out to anyone who lost family/friends/colleagues.

 

Did Germanwings strike over the weekeend, or was that just Lufthansa?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If that is true, it is very stupid engineering to have a single point of failure on such an important sensor.

 

As a rule no single point of failure can cause the loss of the system (aircraft).

It simply is not allowed, all airframers build huge amounts of redundancy in aircraft systems.

 

What is very odd about this tragic event is the none existence of any Pilot/Co-pilot actions.

This points to both of them being incapacitated (fire, lack of oxygen, etc.).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The spoilers do the opposite in that they create increase drag on the wing causing it to stall.

 

No no no - every pilot learns that stalls are solely due to the Angle-of-Attack. If the Angle-of-Attack exceeds the critical angle then the airflow departs and the wing "stalls".

 

The slower you fly the greater is the chance of a high Angle-of-Attack, however "High-Speed Stalls" are not unknown (esp. in the military)- ist the angle not the speed that is critical.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoilers are the brakes.

They spoil they airflow over the wing surface thereby slowing the aircraft down without losing lift.

 

If you watch the control surfaces during the approach phase you can see that both the ailerons are linked to provide more control, at cruising altitude the flaps are retracted and therefore play no role.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoilers work by creating a controlled stall over the portion of the wing behind it, greatly reducing the lift of that wing section. Spoilers differ from airbrakes in that airbrakes are designed to increase drag without affecting lift, while spoilers reduce lift as well as increase drag.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who works in the industry, I'm at a loss for words. It feels very close to home.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom line is that this was a 24 year old plane which should have been put out to pasture not wrung out for every cent of profit by a budget airline with a mandate to be in the air as much as physically possible with such afast turn around that engineers are under pressure to perform ground checks too quickly, too superficially. Will anyone say that though? Doubt it. I think this was waiting to happen.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is that frightening? If anything it means the probability you'll be in an A320 accident is lower.

 

Being afraid of one model of aircraft after one crash is like bringing a snowball onto the floor of the US Senate and saying there is no global warming. Look at the overall picture before rushing to judgment.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Or, you can walk but pedestrians die in accidents, too.

 

Article in our local newspaper today: 70 people die in car accidents within Europe - each day!

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are still a few dozens DC3 in service, same goes for the legendary B52.

 

Age doesn't seem to be a problem . Lack of or bad service can be. And even the best service is done by humans.

And what about the brand new Dreamliner and its technical problems?

 

The A 320 series was built a few thousand times, each day thousands of them fly. Since decades.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nobody will say it because this is bullshit.

 

You are entitled to your own opinion with which I respectfully beg to disagree.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bottom line is that this was a 24 year old plane which should have been put out to pasture not wrung out for every cent of profit by a budget airline with a mandate to be in the air as much as physically possible with such afast turn around that engineers are under pressure to perform ground checks too quickly, too superficially. Will anyone say that though? Doubt it. I think this was waiting to happen.

 

Most planes fly for 30 years or more. Updates are mostly about fuel consumption or performance, any safety upgrades are performed across the board.

As per maintenance this is simply untrue. It is even more untrue when it is the lufthansa maintenance center.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bottom line is that this was a 24 year old plane which should have been put out to pasture not wrung out for every cent of profit by a budget airline with a mandate to be in the air as much as physically possible with such a fast turn around that engineers are under pressure to perform ground checks too quickly, too superficially. Will anyone say that though? Doubt it. I think this was waiting to happen.

 

Tough choice,

 

a.) Flying an older but tried and tested Aircraft model with an excellent safety record going back a decade or two & which pilots are extremely familiar with.

 

or

 

b.) Flying a brand new aircraft model with all the quirks, bugs and Gremlins associated with any new model & which pilots have mostly simulator time on...

 

Given the choice, I`ll pick A.)

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now