Airbus could be asked to ground all long-range airliners

Published on June 30th, 2009

Airbus could be asked to ground all long-range airliners – Times Online

The European Aviation Safety Agency EASA is likely to be asked why it had never taken action to remedy trouble that was well known with the Airbus 330 and 340 series. Nearly 1,000 of the aircraft are flying and until AF447, no passenger had been killed in one.

“EASA has a legal and moral obligation to get to the bottom of this problem now. If there is a defective system and the aircraft is unsafe then it should be grounded,” said James Healy-Pratt of Stewarts Law in London. The firm, which specialises in aviation, is representing the families of 20 of the victims of flight 447.

41 users responded in " Airbus could be asked to ground all long-range airliners "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Awake said, on June 30th, 2009 at 6:48 pm

There are approximately 7 Million people flying at any time throughout the day. I repeat… 7 million… and how many will be injured in any way during a particular day? Basically none.

Thousands and thousands of planes are in the air right now… how many are falling out of the sky?

Ambulance chasing lawyers being alarmists to bolster their case? Really… how would have thought that would happen?

# 2 newglenn said, on June 30th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

There must be some others besides me put off by those annoying photos jumping back and force (lately a roller coaster and an airliner puffing smoke).I feel so powerful when I use “flashblock” to turn them off instantly and go back to peacefully enjoying this site. Those with firefox might want to look into it.

# 3 Mark Derail said, on June 30th, 2009 at 7:38 pm

It’s just a blame game.

I’m sure it’s pilot error, letting the Auto Pilot on through those stormclouds, making the Auto Pilot think it was doing 400+ knots while the plane was probably moving backwards.

Once the major draft stopped, it nose dived with full throttle, knocking the pilots back.

Airspeed indicators on passenger jets should be backed with GPS. Relying on airspeed and radar isn’t enough over oceans.

No ground stations + references for the pilots to see.

The Airbus is fine over land as it is.
Just stick a TomTom (TM) with suction cups on the windshield. Problem solved.

# 4 nolimit662 said, on June 30th, 2009 at 7:40 pm

#2 newglenn——Oh you poor, poor man. So easily annoyed. I pity you.

# 5 Named said, on June 30th, 2009 at 7:45 pm

So, Airbus has “nearly 1,000″ planes flying and no one has died in them until now, and the EU is considering grounding them ALL until an investigation is underway? If only the some regulatory body in the US (FDA) had as much integrity…

# 6 nolimit662 said, on June 30th, 2009 at 7:55 pm

Yeah, why don’t we shut down everyone from driving cars while we’re at it. Thousands more die in car accidents every year. Let’s investigate why cars crash so much. Dumb.

# 7 Sea Lawyer said, on June 30th, 2009 at 8:06 pm

#1, Awake, people obviously aren’t familiar with the concept of reasonable risk.

# 8 Skippy said, on June 30th, 2009 at 8:08 pm

The European authorities are basically strangling all the Europe based airlines with newly implemented standards for SMS (Safety Management Systems). These standards are slowly making their way over to North America. Transport Canada, for example, is implementing a new comprehensive SMS that starts this September and will roll out in three stages over 3 years. It’s crazy the amount of bureaucratic red tape the airlines (and their suppliers) have to go through to implement this system. My company is one of them. Crazy stuff.

# 9 TEch_1 said, on June 30th, 2009 at 9:13 pm

http://imgur.com/Vc70i.jpg

# 10 BigBoyBC said, on June 30th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

I like the picture, all that’s missing is the sound of a sputtering engine. (like an old tin-lizzie)

# 11 Phrazer said, on June 30th, 2009 at 10:08 pm

Damn, I think I had a seizure watching that graphic. My tongue is bleeding.

# 12 Ah_Yea said, on June 30th, 2009 at 10:10 pm

Ok people! The EASA has every right to ground the Airbus, and for very good reason.

theaviationpage.com/2009/06/airbus-a310-rudder-failure

The rudder has been failing regularly!

# 13 Morbo said, on June 30th, 2009 at 10:20 pm

Not going to happen. Overblown article indicating a London solicitor will ask the EASA to ground the fleet…. Or what? The EU will never allow this so much of France, Germany, Spain + UK’s aerospace industry depends on making those planes.

# 14 mwyres said, on June 30th, 2009 at 10:24 pm

Won’t happen – if you took every single one of these out of service, the airline industry would more than struggle to cope with the passenger load. Responsible airlines maintain these planes correctly, and follow instructions for maintenance from the manufacturer – so I really don’t think there’s much cause for concern.

# 15 Ah_Yea said, on June 30th, 2009 at 11:01 pm

Agreed. It’s a strongarm tactic.

They won’t pull all the planes out of service, but they will THREATEN to pull all planes out of service unless the airlines upgrade their plane on a set schedule.

# 16 DvorakIsAmerican said, on June 30th, 2009 at 11:23 pm

So Boeing 737 has had 68 fatal crashes in history, 747 has had 28 fatal crashes in history. Airbus has 1 fatal crash in its history and you think the EU should decide to ground all the flights?

# 17 faxon said, on June 30th, 2009 at 11:29 pm

Every airplane is basically “unsafe”.

# 18 faxon said, on June 30th, 2009 at 11:39 pm

“Airbus, could you please ground all your airliners?”

There. Now they HAVE been asked.
Bad writing in this headline, folks.

# 19 ridin the short bus said, on July 1st, 2009 at 12:46 am

OK #3
All modern Aircraft (Airliners) DO have GPS. The GPS is an inherant part of the Flight Management System, wich is part of the Auto Pilot System.
Its Called FMGEC on A330/A340 Aircraft.

You will also like to know that GPS is NOT the primary method by wich Aircraft know thier current position. It is by recieving Ground Stations and also by gettign data in Real Time from the on-board inertial reference systems, then the GPS is considered in Ranking as 3rd. However over water (oceanic flight) the GPS will be the primary bit of positioning data coupled with the INS System data and thus creating Ground Speed reference. Althugh the Ground Speed is also calculated and presented to the Pilot from the Inertial reference System as well on its own.

For the folks that think this is the first Airbus accident with Fatalities.. The A300/A310/A320 have all been involved in accidents with Fatalities, some were pilot error others were not. Lets not get into a tit for tat about it but beware that this was the First A330 Fatal Crash. The A330 Came on the scene in 2000. The A340 in 1994. An A310 Crashed Yesterday. Also Look up Air Transat..this was an A330 Incident over the Atllantic. Etc Etc Etc..

Airlines and Airline Maintenance Companies follow the Airbus Industrie maintenance and periodic inspection as dictatd by Airbus Industrie. Also the Aircraft are constantly be upgraded with newer avionics systems that improve safety or ease workload for the crew etc.. The Airplane you buy today is not the same plane you finish with, almost every part of the plane has been replaced over time… Any Blanket stateent in this scenario will never fit!!!

I am inherently familiar with Airbus Aircraft and the Systems. What I would be more concerned with is the limited ability to control the aircraft with difficult weather conditions and having lost all primary flight controls. Then the crew are down to Satb trim and rudder pedals only. And thats a trick even in Good Weather in the day time!!!

# 20 ridin the short bus said, on July 1st, 2009 at 1:02 am

To date, there have been 23 fatal Airbus crashes, killing 2,584 people.
EXCERPT: Used in law, science and philosophy, a rule known as Occam’s Razor requires that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex, and/or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities.

Part One of this comprehensive report on the viability of the Airbus aircraft can be found here. This follow up piece is published here in its entirety with kind permission of the author William John Cox. First published on Global Research, June 19, 2009.

have a read
http://www.nowpublic.com/tech-biz/ground-airbus

# 21 pedro said, on July 1st, 2009 at 1:08 am

#5 No, AF447 is the fourth incident where the same symptoms have been found. The first lethal but not the first time it has happened. So yeah, it’s EASA’s time to move their behinds.

#6 Ever heard of car model recall? dumbass!

#16 Yeah, let’s wait until more people die. It doesn’t matter if the same failure has appeaed over and over. Until more people die, it’s not relevant.

# 22 brian t said, on July 1st, 2009 at 1:43 am

As already pointed out: the pilot (auto or manual) needs to know the plane’s AIR speed, but GPS only gives you ground speed. You might be able to estimate airspeed based on grounds speed and reported wind conditions, but not accurately enough for the job. At cruising altitudes, the stall speed is not that much lower than the airspeed, so there is a smaller margin of error. This is called the “coffin corner” of the envelope: if you look that up on Wikipedia, there’s a link to a 2003 FAA document on flying in those conditions.

# 23 RTaylor said, on July 1st, 2009 at 3:14 am

People dies while riding horses, and even walking down a road minding your own business. Many people die in bathrooms falling or kill over from cardiovascular disease straining for a bowl movement. The Universe can be a dangerous place.

# 24 Turion said, on July 1st, 2009 at 4:23 am

please keep in mind,
Airbus uses fly-by-wire! so basically, my understanding is that the final word has to come from the computer, rather than the pilot. Repeat, the computer. Am I the only one uncomfortable with this?

# 25 ridin the short bus said, on July 1st, 2009 at 4:57 am

The Airbus A320/A330/A340/A380 are all Controlled by Fly By Wire. Wich means they have 5 flight control computers. And Yes thier is NO direct Control by the Aircrew to the Ailerons or Spoilers. The Rudder and ther Stab trim may be manually controlled with 1 good Hydraulic System. (the Aircraft has 3 systems)…
But For those who are unaware…The Boeng B777 aircraft..(rated the worlds safest plane (look it up)) is Also…FLY BY WIRE…Triple rdundent flyt control system..but is FBW!!! The New Dreamliner the B787 is also FLY BY WIRE… The Space Shuttle is FLY BY WIRE the F16 is FLY By WIRE and a whole host of other Aircraft. Thats the Modern World Folks!!! And the Pitot tube technology (theory..) has not reallly changed since aircraft have been in the Air!!! And this is the current discussion point.. seems a mute point to Me!!

# 26 ridin the short bus said, on July 1st, 2009 at 5:05 am

#23 Barer in Mind the B777 (rated saftest airliner in the world)(look it up)!! Is also Fly by wire…
Allnew Aircraft are.. the Dreamliner etc.. (B787) A340/A380 etc… A350…
It all started back in the 70’s with Military programs.. And even the Space Shuttle.
The Airbus has 5 seperate flight control computers and the Mechanical Backup is limited to Stabilizer Trim (Horiaontal) and the Rudder if 1 Hydraulic System is Available.
Good Luck if it goes pare shaped) But Rmember Souix City Iowa in 1989? This was a DC-10 and it was Hydraulic Controlled Flight Controls and they has ALL Failed Hydrauic fliud loss..due to severed Hydraulic lines by Engine No.2 (no computer here Boys)… Differential Thrust and a pitch up moment with Applied power is all they had!!!

# 27 qb said, on July 1st, 2009 at 5:17 am

#23 It’s pretty hard to find a commercial plane built in the last 10 years that isn’t fly-by-wire.

# 28 jescott418 said, on July 1st, 2009 at 5:25 am

The AirBus has become the DC10 of the century. I don’t think its right to assume the plane is to blame. But that is what will happen. Just like auto accidents. We tend to blame the car for low tires, bad brakes, and such.
When it really is the lack of the driver or owner of that vehicle to maintain and drive it properly. One way or another its human error that causes most accidents. I think we need to realize that we can prevent some accidents but we can never eliminate them.

# 29 ridin the short bus said, on July 1st, 2009 at 5:36 am

And for those who have not heard the phrase: “If Aint Boing I Aint Going” Here ya Go!! I am an American. I work With Airbus Aircraft Systems Every day… and I still Prefer the Boeing!!!
I was a B747 Specialist/B767 Development Engineer and Now I work as an A320 development Engineer… I prefer the Boeing!!! But in all respect, the Airbus does have redundent systems. The Boeing has a Control Column… Ya still feel like a Pilot!!!
But to stay on Subject…Europe wont stop/ground any Airbus Aircraft..The backlash and eceonomic negative effects and world wide embarrassment are tooo great..it wont happen, this is some Lawyers Scretactic crazy Idea..Only.. And with several Hundred A330’s in the Air (my Company has many!!) And 1 Crash in bad weahter in undetermined conditions..it wont/cant happen.. just retorik again!!!

# 30 billabong said, on July 1st, 2009 at 6:57 am

The picture on this post sucks!Please use just regular photographs.The movement takes my interest away from the story.The only way this technique works for me is bouncing boobs.

# 31 MikeN said, on July 1st, 2009 at 7:51 am

That’s a lot of ifs. I think we should ground all air travel until they can prove that their flight will not be brought down by terrorists.

# 32 Named said, on July 1st, 2009 at 9:31 am

20,

So, the EU is doing the “right” thing? I agree.

# 33 abusdriver320 said, on July 1st, 2009 at 10:09 am

Short bus driver, I am not sure which airbus you are familiar with, but my 320 uses GPS as its primary n, updating the ground based stations to create a bias velocity (drift) for the INRU’s in case of GPS failure.

Additionally, the control column (yoke) that Boeing insists on keeping (around since Orville and Wilbur) is outdated and needs to be replaced by a stick (see the F-16, Airbus is not alone). All the 737 guys who ride in the 320 love the idea.

As for the safety of Airbus, Boeings have their own special brand of problems- 777’s engines both flaming out on short final, 747’s tank 5 fuel tanks blowing up, 737’s rudders mysteriously slamming to one side in flight etc.

As for the computers telling controlling the plane over the pilot, that argument is so old and tired I don’t know where to begin with it. That has never been a problem for me in 6000 hours in the bus. ‘Normal law’ keeps the plane in very liberal limits. Transport aircraft don’t need to go -15/+30 pitch, or more than 66AOB, plus Alpha max, which prevents the bus from stalling is a GREAT feature (the crew of AA965 would probably agree- max power and full back stick would have saved them).

Now if only could get the 787 into the air within 2 years of schedule, that would be a something to brag about

# 34 John C Dvorak said, on July 1st, 2009 at 10:15 am

#29 we aim to please

# 35 The Crypticone said, on July 1st, 2009 at 3:05 pm

Definitely doesn’t seem like one should feel comfortable with Airbus going to or flying from France.

This is just going to be a boom for Boeing in the ongoing market share for these large jumbo jets.

Starting to believe that “No Agenda” nonsense. I guess it is not bs anymore.

follow me @ http://www.twitter.com/thecrypticone
http://www.myspace.com/thecrypticone1

# 36 Mark Derail said, on July 1st, 2009 at 4:55 pm

Nice responses from pilots.

But surely, a TomTom (TM) powered by simple AA batteries, wouldn’t that kinda help when all else fails?

If I was a commercial airline pilot, I’d carry one in my carry-on (just in case).

#33 We could have used the model’s name…

# 37 Chris1 said, on July 1st, 2009 at 5:15 pm

Am I the only one who remembers the first Airbus crash, during the DEMONSTRATION FLIGHT! As I recall, the computer didn’t know what a touch and go was, and proceeded to land off the end of the runway. The plane and the crew were lost. Apparently the crew was unable to regain control of the aircraft.

I’ve worked with computers since the 70’s and I am pretty comfortable with them. But there are two places I’m not: airplanes and elevators!

# 38 deowll said, on July 1st, 2009 at 7:10 pm

# 34 I didn’t know you had such a gift for words.

# 39 ridin the short bus said, on July 2nd, 2009 at 5:52 am

#33..The Airbus philosophy is a very modern idea of how flight should be handled. And Yes Normal Law/Alternate Law/Direct Law are all fine concepts. Espcially in normal flight regime. And The Best part about Flying the A3×0 is no trimming is required by the Pilot to control the aircraft in stable flight….I will endeavour to say, that the GPS input is NOT the Primay consideration to the FMS to calculate Best know Position. It is one of several inputs that are run thru a piece of software that is referred to as a Kolsman Filter and the Best known/calculated position is a summation of these positions. Auto-Tuned DME Known possition ground DME Stations are the Highest priority in the FMS Calculation.Over water and out of range of DME then the INS/GPS are used. Also Rememeber that GPS was NOT used in the A320 FMS until version -208 or higher. And remember, the GPS system can be detuned for accuracy at any time by the US Government. The Honeywell-or Thales Versions of FM2 are the latest FMS renditions to the A320’s currently coming out of germany or (Now China!!) If GPS was so accepted then we woild see more GPS Precsion approaches, at the end of the day the Ground stations are controlled locally and more reliable. I thnk GPS is a wonderful thing, and can ou remember how to navigate without a ND? It seesm those days are long gone, and thankfully, life is easier now than previously relying on Fixed positions and radar. Trangulating Tuned stations etc… A picture is literally worth a 1000 words, but we had those before GPS in the Airplane. As for the B777, the Engine Flameouts have been attributed to Rolls Royce Powered Aircraft only and (approx 30% of all Flying) and an Engineering solution is underway to correct a problem on the Engine. i Too am tired of the Boeing / Airbus debate, its getting Old… I wil ask you however… have you tried to perform a mechanical backup approach in the simulator? Including a turn to final… it can be hair raising!!! Happy Flyng!!

# 40 ridin the short bus said, on July 2nd, 2009 at 8:20 am

The latest (newer) Aircraft do have a GPS Primary active option that can be de-activated… So in this respect It appears you are correct(ish). As seen in FCOM-4 (Navigation)

As taken from another site: see below
Brand new, state of the art systems use VOR and DME inputs, as well as INS, IRS, GPS, and even LORAN to come up with what some manufacturers call “Best Computed Position”. I’m out on a trip, so I don’t have my manuals handy, but I believe the FMS computer uses a “Kollsman” filter to do this. Bottom line is it usually works very well, with accuracy that can be measured in meters.

# 41 fccu said, on July 2nd, 2009 at 10:38 pm

Valve actuators are really needed for complex tasks in the high power market.If the load requires accurate positioning, the electric actuators as well as the valve actuators has the advantage among others.That is why,to familiarize yourself in this kind of industrial application , knowing how an automation works is a wisely action and will positively keep us in track.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!