Timeline for How dissimilar are redundant flight control computers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 5, 2017 at 22:48 | comment | added | Martin Argerami | @Shawn: no need to apologize. All I wanted to imply is that there is a lot of knowledge on fly safety. Both Airbus and Boeing have been building planes for a long time, and the knowledge on accidents has increased year after year. Reality is that we are already at the stage where most accidents are not caused by design failures. | |
| Oct 5, 2017 at 21:54 | comment | added | Shawn | @MartinArgerami I apologize if that's how you took what I wrote. I'm simply saying that there are some pretty good real-world examples of things happening that the aircraft manufacturers thought were impossible - like a total hydraulic failure on a DC-10. It probably wouldn't hurt Airbus to keep those examples in mind if they want to deal in "impossible" situations. And in my experience, flying (and other things) always included being prepared for the impossible and improbable so that the likely stuff, no matter how hard, was much easier to handle. | |
| Oct 5, 2017 at 19:48 | comment | added | Martin Argerami | @Shawn: you seem to be implying that you know better than Airbus regarding flight safety. Could you expand on that? | |
| Oct 5, 2017 at 15:49 | comment | added | Baldrickk | @JanHudec thanks for the additional info. it's interesting to know that they would do it that way. | |
| Oct 5, 2017 at 14:37 | comment | added | Shawn | Understood, and I'm not disagreeing with you. However, it is very short-sighted of Airbus to think that an extremely improbable situation is impossible. Again, ask Capt. Haynes about what's impossible. All sorts of "impossible" things happened that day. | |
| Oct 5, 2017 at 12:28 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | @Shawn, that's the thing. Hydraulic failure did happen, but it is needed for the flight control anyway. Since electric failure is less likely than hydraulic one, requiring electric power does not increase the risk that much. | |
| Oct 5, 2017 at 3:21 | comment | added | Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні | "...because complete electrical failure has never happened" - gosh, I hope I'm not on the first plane this happens to. | |
| S Oct 5, 2017 at 3:05 | history | suggested | 2012rcampion | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
corrected 86000 to 68000
|
| Oct 5, 2017 at 2:30 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Oct 5, 2017 at 3:05 | |||||
| Oct 4, 2017 at 19:49 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | @Baldrickk, In general yes, but it never applies to Airbus. All airbus systems have one unit making the decision and another one system verifying it. And if the verification fails, the two-system unit is declared faulty and a fail-over approach is used. | |
| Oct 4, 2017 at 14:45 | comment | added | SGR | @MichaelKjörling See: Minority Report | |
| Oct 4, 2017 at 14:03 | comment | added | Shawn | "because complete electrical failure has never happened" >> You'd think aircraft manufactures would have learned about Murphy's Law long ago. Ask Al Haynes about "impossible" failures. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_232 :-/ | |
| Oct 4, 2017 at 11:52 | comment | added | user | @Baldrickk Yes, that's the normal reason for two-out-of-three voting: with two, if one is wrong, you can't know which one is wrong; all you can know is that they disagree. With three, if one is wrong, you can know because two are still in agreement. As long as not two out of three are wrong, three gives you far better ability to handle disagreements than do two. | |
| S Oct 4, 2017 at 11:22 | history | suggested | psmears | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improve wording and grammar
|
| Oct 4, 2017 at 11:09 | comment | added | Baldrickk | Expanding on the dissimilar boards bit - idk about airbus or anyone else in particular, but I have heard of having three different systems for a decision - this means that if one is "faulty", it is not in agreement with the others, and the correct decision can be upheld, but you can't tell which is which with two systems. Is this right? | |
| Oct 4, 2017 at 9:56 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Oct 4, 2017 at 11:22 | |||||
| Oct 4, 2017 at 8:00 | vote | accept | mins | ||
| Oct 3, 2017 at 22:18 | history | answered | Jan Hudec | CC BY-SA 3.0 |