Post mortem on an IEC connector

[Eeyore]

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

The EU Commission should be strung by their necks from lamp-posts
for being a bunch of technically ignorant twats. Why do they think
lead was used
in solder in the first place ? For fun ?

In the past I have many times agreed with your facts, but I have
often disagreed with your way of expressing them. On this occasion I
am
with you all the way.

Let's hope the first aeroplane to crash because of lead-free solder
has only Brussels diplomats and anti-lead campaigners on board.

As far as I know, at this point in time, the avionics industry still
has an exemption from having to use the stuff. Now I wonder why that
could be
... ?

They may be exempt, but what might they do when they can't get the
proper stuff any more because no manufacturer can afford to run two
production lines for the same product simultaneously and daren't risk
getting them muddled?

1) Set up special production lines.
2) Stop making avionics.
3) Change the rules and use lead-free.


There are no plans at the moment, from what I can gather, for
manufacturers
to stop producing leaded solder, nor for distributors to drop it. There is
much 'legacy' equipment out there, which is manufactured in leaded solder,
and should not, as a consequence, be repaired using lead-free solder,
according to published wisdom from those who should know. There is no
legal requirement to use lead-free for the purposes of effecting such
repairs.
As well as avionics, there are a number of other exemptions in important
fields such as medical equipment, and some military areas. Again, I wonder
why
that could be ... ? As far as I understand it, the American military will
not
tolerate the stuff being used in any of their equipment. How eminently
sensible of them. Pity we haven't got the same courage of our convictions
to stand up to the green mist brigade on this side of the pond ...

Maybe after the Eurofighter fleet is grounded because of avionics
failures linked to LF solder?

Hope they don't use it to solder them Airbuses together

So do I, my friend, as I am about to get on one for the first time in
October. All of my previous cross-pond jaunts have been in properly built
747s, which have a proper yoke for the driver to hang on to, and
'automatics' that can be switched off. There's something fundamentally wrong
about a plane that has to be flown with a left-handed joystick, and which
employs a robot driver hidden away somewhere, which believes it knows more
about how to fly a plane, than the human guy and his chum in the co-seat,
who have 40 years flying experience between them ... :-\

Shame that the most common cause of airliner accidents is still 'pilot error' !

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Arfa Daily wrote:

there have been more than a few instances where true
fly-by-wire sytems of this type, have made a totally wrong decision in a
given unusual set of circumstances, and the driver and his chum have been
blocked from taking control to correct the situation.

Can you give a specific example ?

Graham

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A2016B0.5B4C7819@notmail.com...

Arfa Daily wrote:

there have been more than a few instances where true
fly-by-wire sytems of this type, have made a totally wrong decision in a
given unusual set of circumstances, and the driver and his chum have been
blocked from taking control to correct the situation.

Can you give a specific example ?

Graham

I'll get back to you on that. I remember seeing an example on "Air Crash
Investigation", but I have a friend who is an aviator, and a walking
encyclopedia on such things. I will be seeing him tomorrow. I'll try to
remember to ask him.

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A201650.750881A7@notmail.com...

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

The EU Commission should be strung by their necks from lamp-posts
for being a bunch of technically ignorant twats. Why do they
think
lead was used
in solder in the first place ? For fun ?

In the past I have many times agreed with your facts, but I have
often disagreed with your way of expressing them. On this
occasion I
am
with you all the way.

Let's hope the first aeroplane to crash because of lead-free
solder
has only Brussels diplomats and anti-lead campaigners on board.

As far as I know, at this point in time, the avionics industry still
has an exemption from having to use the stuff. Now I wonder why that
could be
... ?

They may be exempt, but what might they do when they can't get the
proper stuff any more because no manufacturer can afford to run two
production lines for the same product simultaneously and daren't risk
getting them muddled?

1) Set up special production lines.
2) Stop making avionics.
3) Change the rules and use lead-free.


There are no plans at the moment, from what I can gather, for
manufacturers
to stop producing leaded solder, nor for distributors to drop it. There
is
much 'legacy' equipment out there, which is manufactured in leaded
solder,
and should not, as a consequence, be repaired using lead-free solder,
according to published wisdom from those who should know. There is no
legal requirement to use lead-free for the purposes of effecting such
repairs.
As well as avionics, there are a number of other exemptions in
important
fields such as medical equipment, and some military areas. Again, I
wonder
why
that could be ... ? As far as I understand it, the American military
will
not
tolerate the stuff being used in any of their equipment. How eminently
sensible of them. Pity we haven't got the same courage of our
convictions
to stand up to the green mist brigade on this side of the pond ...

Maybe after the Eurofighter fleet is grounded because of avionics
failures linked to LF solder?

Hope they don't use it to solder them Airbuses together

So do I, my friend, as I am about to get on one for the first time in
October. All of my previous cross-pond jaunts have been in properly built
747s, which have a proper yoke for the driver to hang on to, and
'automatics' that can be switched off. There's something fundamentally
wrong
about a plane that has to be flown with a left-handed joystick, and which
employs a robot driver hidden away somewhere, which believes it knows
more
about how to fly a plane, than the human guy and his chum in the co-seat,
who have 40 years flying experience between them ... :-\

Shame that the most common cause of airliner accidents is still 'pilot
error' !

Graham

Is that one a 'fact' or a guess ? Again, I'll ask my mate tomorrow if he
knows any stats on that ...

Arfa

 

[N_Cook]

Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:msYTl.48211$TE3.30649@newsfe13.ams2...

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A201650.750881A7@notmail.com...


Arfa Daily wrote:

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:

Is that one a 'fact' or a guess ? Again, I'll ask my mate tomorrow if he
knows any stats on that ...

Arfa

There was that French ? air show one, where the pilot quite gracefully, (no
frantic movements appeared on control surfaces or engine speed) flew into
woodland.


--
Diverse Devices, Southampton, England
electronic hints and repair briefs , schematics/manuals list on
http://home.graffiti.net/diverse:graffiti.net/

 

[Ron]

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A2016B0.5B4C7819@notmail.com...

Arfa Daily wrote:

there have been more than a few instances where true
fly-by-wire sytems of this type, have made a totally wrong decision in a
given unusual set of circumstances, and the driver and his chum have been
blocked from taking control to correct the situation.
Can you give a specific example ?

Graham


I'll get back to you on that. I remember seeing an example on "Air Crash
Investigation", but I have a friend who is an aviator, and a walking
encyclopedia on such things. I will be seeing him tomorrow. I'll try to
remember to ask him.

Interesting forum for those of an aviation bent.

http://www.pprune.org/

Ron

 

[Meat Plow]

On Fri, 29 May 2009 22:28:48 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A201650.750881A7@notmail.com...


Arfa Daily wrote:

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

The EU Commission should be strung by their necks from lamp-posts
for being a bunch of technically ignorant twats. Why do they
think
lead was used
in solder in the first place ? For fun ?

In the past I have many times agreed with your facts, but I have
often disagreed with your way of expressing them. On this
occasion I
am
with you all the way.

Let's hope the first aeroplane to crash because of lead-free
solder
has only Brussels diplomats and anti-lead campaigners on board.

As far as I know, at this point in time, the avionics industry still
has an exemption from having to use the stuff. Now I wonder why that
could be
... ?

They may be exempt, but what might they do when they can't get the
proper stuff any more because no manufacturer can afford to run two
production lines for the same product simultaneously and daren't risk
getting them muddled?

1) Set up special production lines.
2) Stop making avionics.
3) Change the rules and use lead-free.


There are no plans at the moment, from what I can gather, for
manufacturers
to stop producing leaded solder, nor for distributors to drop it. There
is
much 'legacy' equipment out there, which is manufactured in leaded
solder,
and should not, as a consequence, be repaired using lead-free solder,
according to published wisdom from those who should know. There is no
legal requirement to use lead-free for the purposes of effecting such
repairs.
As well as avionics, there are a number of other exemptions in
important
fields such as medical equipment, and some military areas. Again, I
wonder
why
that could be ... ? As far as I understand it, the American military
will
not
tolerate the stuff being used in any of their equipment. How eminently
sensible of them. Pity we haven't got the same courage of our
convictions
to stand up to the green mist brigade on this side of the pond ...

Maybe after the Eurofighter fleet is grounded because of avionics
failures linked to LF solder?

Hope they don't use it to solder them Airbuses together

So do I, my friend, as I am about to get on one for the first time in
October. All of my previous cross-pond jaunts have been in properly built
747s, which have a proper yoke for the driver to hang on to, and
'automatics' that can be switched off. There's something fundamentally
wrong
about a plane that has to be flown with a left-handed joystick, and which
employs a robot driver hidden away somewhere, which believes it knows
more
about how to fly a plane, than the human guy and his chum in the co-seat,
who have 40 years flying experience between them ... :-\

Shame that the most common cause of airliner accidents is still 'pilot
error' !

Graham


Is that one a 'fact' or a guess ? Again, I'll ask my mate tomorrow if he
knows any stats on that ...

Arfa

Human error is unfortunately the most common factor in aviation
mishaps. In the US the FAA doesn't permit idle cockpit chatter below
10k feet in commercial aircraft. We had a commuter go down not long
ago (Dash 8-400) if memory serves and pilot error was a factor since
the pilot and copilot were chatting about personal things instead of
paying attention to icing conditions and doing things like turning on
the deicing equipment and taking the Q400 off autopilot. They flew the
damn thing into the ground after they lost control of it.

 

[Meat Plow]

On Sat, 30 May 2009 07:51:23 +0100, "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk>wrote:

Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:msYTl.48211$TE3.30649@newsfe13.ams2...

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A201650.750881A7@notmail.com...


Arfa Daily wrote:

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:



Is that one a 'fact' or a guess ? Again, I'll ask my mate tomorrow if he
knows any stats on that ...

Arfa




There was that French ? air show one, where the pilot quite gracefully, (no
frantic movements appeared on control surfaces or engine speed) flew into
woodland.

http://www.airdisaster.com/investigations/af296/af296.shtml

 

[Eeyore]

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote

Shame that the most common cause of airliner accidents is still 'pilot
error' !

Is that one a 'fact' or a guess ? Again, I'll ask my mate tomorrow if he
knows any stats on that ...

It IS a fact actually. Go to any of the professional aviation sites.

You know than Spanair MD-82 ? that crashed in Barcelona on takeoff for example
not long back ? Pilots forgot to deploy the flaps on take-off because they were
in a hurry after a maintenance delay that COULD have alerted them to the problem
( WOG fault ).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanair_Flight_5022

That's a nice recent one. I could give you loads more.

The Turkish one at Amsterdam, stalled into the ground ( called CFIT in the trade
) Controlled Flight Into Terrain. Pilots not monitoring instruments and flight
attitude combined with an instrument fault ( pilots could EASILY have caught it
- they had 45 seconds to avoid a stall ).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Airlines_Flight_1951

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comair_Flight_5191
Pilots took the wrong runway !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comair_Flight_3272
Total failure of pilots to actually FLY THE AIRPLANE ! Captain reacted to the
stick pusher in EXACTLY the wrong way.

And it goes on and on.

Graham

WOG = wheels on ground btw.

due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address

 

[Eeyore]

N_Cook wrote:

There was that French ? air show one, where the pilot quite gracefully, (no
frantic movements appeared on control surfaces or engine speed) flew into
woodland.

THAT ONE is highly controversial. Not least an apparent 'black box' swap to
cover up possible technical faults. Incidentally, the 'graceful' crash coutesy
of the automation meant very few lives were lost. NO further A320 was fitted
with that specific model of engine.

Graham

--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address

 

[Eeyore]

Meat Plow wrote:

"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message

Shame that the most common cause of airliner accidents is still 'pilot
error' !

Is that one a 'fact' or a guess ? Again, I'll ask my mate tomorrow if he
knows any stats on that ...

Human error is unfortunately the most common factor in aviation
mishaps. In the US the FAA doesn't permit idle cockpit chatter below
10k feet in commercial aircraft. We had a commuter go down not long
ago (Dash 8-400) if memory serves and pilot error was a factor since
the pilot and copilot were chatting about personal things instead of
paying attention to icing conditions and doing things like turning on
the deicing equipment and taking the Q400 off autopilot. They flew the
damn thing into the ground after they lost control of it.

That is indeed one I quoted. Pilot fatigue is now being increasingly seen as a
contributor to pilot error esp in the USA where pilot pay is low and pilots
commute long distances to work, thus making their day longer still.

Terms and conditions of work can make a big difference. Qantas has never lost a
single jet airframe for example. BA only lost ONE in its entire history in a
mid-air accident caused by a negligent flight controller. I think that makes BA
pretty much the safest airline to fly on overall numbers. And 'cultural norms'
make a big difference. It's no surprise to me that Asian and African airlines
have the worst accident rates.

Graham

--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address

 

[Eeyore]

Arfa Daily wrote:

Mind you, the Airbus has only got one redundant engine.

That's why they have rules called ETOPS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS

Graham

--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address

 

[Eeyore]

Arfa Daily wrote:

The 747 has got three ...

Engines ? BA flew one from LAX to MAN on 3 engines, one having failed
after
take-off.

The FAA didn't like it much and made a big fuss but concluded it was
within the
regs.

Graham


due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious
adjustment to
my email address

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A2198FB.8CBED5AE@notmail.com...

Arfa Daily wrote:

The 747 has got three ...

Engines ? BA flew one from LAX to MAN on 3 engines, one having failed
after
take-off.

The FAA didn't like it much and made a big fuss but concluded it was
within the
regs.

Graham

Three potentially *redundant* engines is what I said. The 747 is capable of
still remaining airborne and controllable, with just one motor running, as
far as I am aware.

Arfa

 

[Eeyore]

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

The 747 has got three ...

Engines ? BA flew one from LAX to MAN on 3 engines, one having failed
after take-off.

The FAA didn't like it much and made a big fuss but concluded it was
within the regs.

Graham

Three potentially *redundant* engines is what I said. The 747 is capable of
still remaining airborne and controllable, with just one motor running, as
far as I am aware.

TWO IIRC, A 747 will be descending on one, so the redundancy on twin engined
airliners is pretty similar esp since they have more modern and reliable
engines.

Graham

--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notcoldmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A21CC59.E5F27BE0@notcoldmail.com...

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote
Arfa Daily wrote:

The 747 has got three ...

Engines ? BA flew one from LAX to MAN on 3 engines, one having failed
after take-off.

The FAA didn't like it much and made a big fuss but concluded it was
within the regs.

Graham

Three potentially *redundant* engines is what I said. The 747 is capable
of
still remaining airborne and controllable, with just one motor running,
as
far as I am aware.

TWO IIRC, A 747 will be descending on one, so the redundancy on twin
engined
airliners is pretty similar esp since they have more modern and reliable
engines.

Graham

Whatever. Even if it needs two to maintain level flight, that's still two
out of four, which leaves two that can be out, which is better than two
going out on a two engined plane. I would still prefer to have just one out
of four running, even if that did place the plane in a descent
configuration. At least, coupled with the substantial glide characteristic,
that descent is going to be very slow. As to how modern and reliable engines
are, that doesn't really mean a lot if you have say multiple bird strikes.

I spoke to my aviator friend yesterday about fly by wire incidents, and he
says that he has read of many, although ones that have resulted in a large
scale catastrophe, have been fairly rare. As to pilot error being "the
biggest cause of accidents", he said that you should be careful how you
interpret the numbers on this, with respect to other published causes. He
agrees that many incidents are pilot related, but he also said that it is
nothing like the TV program "Air Crash Investigation" where every crash gets
resolved to a wrongly fitted bolt or whatever, and that many incidents never
have a real cause determined. In these cases, apparently, it is normal to
log the (probable) cause as 'pilot error'. He also said that just about all
training accidents, of which there are apparently many, are logged as 'pilot
error', so one way or another, this distorts the figures against the true
situation.

Arfa

 

[Meat Plow]

On Sat, 30 May 2009 20:42:31 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com>wrote:

N_Cook wrote:

There was that French ? air show one, where the pilot quite gracefully, (no
frantic movements appeared on control surfaces or engine speed) flew into
woodland.

THAT ONE is highly controversial. Not least an apparent 'black box' swap to
cover up possible technical faults. Incidentally, the 'graceful' crash coutesy
of the automation meant very few lives were lost. NO further A320 was fitted
with that specific model of engine.

The A320 has been using the CFM56 powerplant since its been flying.
Boeing uses a variation of it (different thrust) in their 737 stretch
models. All are based on General Electric's military core high end
compressors, combustion and turbine. CFMI makes 6 models all
designated CFM56.

I'm certain the original models probably the CFM56-A weren't scrapped
but rather retrofitted with redesinged controls to allow quicker
throttle up response at low altitude. After all the core of the engine
was designed for the US B1 bomber and F-108 fighter so it wasn't a
design flaw of the entire engine.

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote in message
news:2rqqeq.3bc.19.1@news.alt.net...

On Sat, 30 May 2009 20:42:31 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com>wrote:



N_Cook wrote:

There was that French ? air show one, where the pilot quite gracefully,
(no
frantic movements appeared on control surfaces or engine speed) flew
into
woodland.

THAT ONE is highly controversial. Not least an apparent 'black box' swap
to
cover up possible technical faults. Incidentally, the 'graceful' crash
coutesy
of the automation meant very few lives were lost. NO further A320 was
fitted
with that specific model of engine.

The A320 has been using the CFM56 powerplant since its been flying.
Boeing uses a variation of it (different thrust) in their 737 stretch
models. All are based on General Electric's military core high end
compressors, combustion and turbine. CFMI makes 6 models all
designated CFM56.

I'm certain the original models probably the CFM56-A weren't scrapped
but rather retrofitted with redesinged controls to allow quicker
throttle up response at low altitude. After all the core of the engine
was designed for the US B1 bomber and F-108 fighter so it wasn't a
design flaw of the entire engine.

You seem remarkably well versed in all this, Meat. Very informative info.
Did you have a career background in it ?

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A201650.750881A7@notmail.com...

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

The EU Commission should be strung by their necks from lamp-posts
for being a bunch of technically ignorant twats. Why do they
think
lead was used
in solder in the first place ? For fun ?

In the past I have many times agreed with your facts, but I have
often disagreed with your way of expressing them. On this
occasion I
am
with you all the way.

Let's hope the first aeroplane to crash because of lead-free
solder
has only Brussels diplomats and anti-lead campaigners on board.

As far as I know, at this point in time, the avionics industry still
has an exemption from having to use the stuff. Now I wonder why that
could be
... ?

They may be exempt, but what might they do when they can't get the
proper stuff any more because no manufacturer can afford to run two
production lines for the same product simultaneously and daren't risk
getting them muddled?

1) Set up special production lines.
2) Stop making avionics.
3) Change the rules and use lead-free.


There are no plans at the moment, from what I can gather, for
manufacturers
to stop producing leaded solder, nor for distributors to drop it. There
is
much 'legacy' equipment out there, which is manufactured in leaded
solder,
and should not, as a consequence, be repaired using lead-free solder,
according to published wisdom from those who should know. There is no
legal requirement to use lead-free for the purposes of effecting such
repairs.
As well as avionics, there are a number of other exemptions in
important
fields such as medical equipment, and some military areas. Again, I
wonder
why
that could be ... ? As far as I understand it, the American military
will
not
tolerate the stuff being used in any of their equipment. How eminently
sensible of them. Pity we haven't got the same courage of our
convictions
to stand up to the green mist brigade on this side of the pond ...

Maybe after the Eurofighter fleet is grounded because of avionics
failures linked to LF solder?

Hope they don't use it to solder them Airbuses together

So do I, my friend, as I am about to get on one for the first time in
October. All of my previous cross-pond jaunts have been in properly built
747s, which have a proper yoke for the driver to hang on to, and
'automatics' that can be switched off. There's something fundamentally
wrong
about a plane that has to be flown with a left-handed joystick, and which
employs a robot driver hidden away somewhere, which believes it knows
more
about how to fly a plane, than the human guy and his chum in the co-seat,
who have 40 years flying experience between them ... :-\

Shame that the most common cause of airliner accidents is still 'pilot
error' !

Graham

Seems that today, an Air France Airbus A330 en route from Rio to Paris with
238 people on board, has gone down without warning over the Atlantic. Hard
to see what the pilot might have done wrong with the thing at 38000 ft in
the cruise ...

Apparently, it disappeared off African trans-atlantic ATC radar, at around
3am, our time.

This is not instilling a lot of confidence in me, regarding flying on one of
these things in October, instead of my usual Boeing ... :-|

Arfa

 

[Ron]

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4A201650.750881A7@notmail.com...

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Meat Plow" <meat@petitmorte.net> wrote
On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:10:55 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com>wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"Adrian Tuddenham" <adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

The EU Commission should be strung by their necks from lamp-posts
for being a bunch of technically ignorant twats. Why do they
think
lead was used
in solder in the first place ? For fun ?
In the past I have many times agreed with your facts, but I have
often disagreed with your way of expressing them. On this
occasion I
am
with you all the way.

Let's hope the first aeroplane to crash because of lead-free
solder
has only Brussels diplomats and anti-lead campaigners on board.
As far as I know, at this point in time, the avionics industry still
has an exemption from having to use the stuff. Now I wonder why that
could be
... ?
They may be exempt, but what might they do when they can't get the
proper stuff any more because no manufacturer can afford to run two
production lines for the same product simultaneously and daren't risk
getting them muddled?

1) Set up special production lines.
2) Stop making avionics.
3) Change the rules and use lead-free.

There are no plans at the moment, from what I can gather, for
manufacturers
to stop producing leaded solder, nor for distributors to drop it. There
is
much 'legacy' equipment out there, which is manufactured in leaded
solder,
and should not, as a consequence, be repaired using lead-free solder,
according to published wisdom from those who should know. There is no
legal requirement to use lead-free for the purposes of effecting such
repairs.
As well as avionics, there are a number of other exemptions in
important
fields such as medical equipment, and some military areas. Again, I
wonder
why
that could be ... ? As far as I understand it, the American military
will
not
tolerate the stuff being used in any of their equipment. How eminently
sensible of them. Pity we haven't got the same courage of our
convictions
to stand up to the green mist brigade on this side of the pond ...
Maybe after the Eurofighter fleet is grounded because of avionics
failures linked to LF solder?

Hope they don't use it to solder them Airbuses together
So do I, my friend, as I am about to get on one for the first time in
October. All of my previous cross-pond jaunts have been in properly built
747s, which have a proper yoke for the driver to hang on to, and
'automatics' that can be switched off. There's something fundamentally
wrong
about a plane that has to be flown with a left-handed joystick, and which
employs a robot driver hidden away somewhere, which believes it knows
more
about how to fly a plane, than the human guy and his chum in the co-seat,
who have 40 years flying experience between them ... :-\
Shame that the most common cause of airliner accidents is still 'pilot
error' !

Graham


Seems that today, an Air France Airbus A330 en route from Rio to Paris with
238 people on board, has gone down without warning over the Atlantic. Hard
to see what the pilot might have done wrong with the thing at 38000 ft in
the cruise ...

Apparently, it disappeared off African trans-atlantic ATC radar, at around
3am, our time.

This is not instilling a lot of confidence in me, regarding flying on one of
these things in October, instead of my usual Boeing ... :-|

I`ve been following the chat on Pprune, but it would appear that the
server is now overloaded. It seems like it flew into bad weather, there
was some kind of elecrical problem reported shortly before all contact
was lost.