Free Flight, Free Speech

http://avherald.com/h?article=49832451&opt=0

200 meters is like two A320 lengths from the end. Wow.

That stupid calculating and taking off with less than max power is a bad idea in the first place. You will always have less rw to stop near v1. And there have been worse incidents with this methodology. Some Asian or Arabian at Miami i believe, took the whole ils equipment with him. Luckily they survived.

Kind regards, Vincent

I don't understand why because in the final calculation, they don't save fuel with it anyway.

So.. in the Airbus (or any other modern commercial jets), can you push the throttle to full immediately after realizing that the power isn't adequate and do the 'dramatic lever push and gritting teeth faced last minute heroic save action' like in movies?

I'm guessing no. Because I've watched a few videos of how Airbus throttles work and I still have a hard time understanding how... and why.

Yes.
Just push it forward to TOGA.

OK that made sense, but why doesn't that prevent the Air France A320 from continuing flying into the trees in 1988/9 at an air show ( I can't look it up right now, on a claustrophobic phone)

Scarebus has different modes for different phases of flight. They make Hal impose different restrictions on you when in take-off, cruise, landing, etc...

When in take-off Hal surely allows your command to go through when you push the throttles in toga.

But at Habsheim the plane flew so low over the field, that Hal activated some sort of touch-down mode. Then you are not allowed to climb anymore. So effectively, the plane did not crash, but it landed (as per instruction by the programmers). The problem with these interventions of Hal is that you have to do extra things, like realize what Hal did and push buttons to revert Hal's decision. This is very inconvenient if you are in an emergency and just need the thrust quickly.

If you look at the film carefully, you can see that after engine spool-up the energy is not used to climb but to accelerate level. This is not due to inertia, for that the thrust is on too long. It is Hal deciding to land.

Kind regards, Vincent

Wait for the next generation of Airbus flight computers. They are so almost human, they will land on their own if they see another pretty computer down there ... and they won't ask the pilot about that because what do rela humans know about flying and pretty computers anyway?

You see, this is what is confusing me so much about commercial airliners.

On the one hand you have the people who wants to keep honing their stick-rudder skills in the computer age, and then on the other hand, there are things that completely negate those skills (ie. everything Airbus from what I've seen, or in the case of everybody else, put trust in the instruments, not your senses.. - effectively, trust the computers- but.. no don't trust the other computer.. do the stick and rudder, but don't trust your senses.. feeling like you're upside down? Probably not real... don't react to it, the computer instruments tell the truth..

I am as far away as possible on the opposite end of the industry to be qualified to talk about these things, for sure.. but in my opinion at least, these are the things that really dull reaction times simply because there's so many things to even THINK about.

And.. my respect to the people who actually do these things for a living while I am sitting at home brain hemorrhaging trying to make sense of everything.