← Back to Squawk list

The US regulator mandates additional measure for inadvertent autopilot engagement in A220s during take-off

提交时间：大约 1 年以前

WASHINGTON — The Federal Aviation Administration revealed two of 38 Airbus A220 take-off incidents were nearly catastrophic. The unintentional autopilot engagement requires additional precautionary measures to prevent a recurrence, the US regulator says. (www.airlinerwatch.com) 更多...

Tom Novak

19 条会员评论

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Scott Campbell 大约 1 年以前 4

Flown a few miles on the Canadair C1000 or whatever Airbus wants to call it, love them - but this is a BIG problem especially for Delta ...

回复 ↓•永久链接•Report

bentwing60 大约 1 年以前 11

Damn those pesky New age autopilots, they want to do it all!

回复 ↓•永久链接•Report

James Simms 大约 1 年以前 3

Never would have had a problem w/Otto the AutoPilot

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Ronald Spencer 大约 1 年以前 3

The Robots are taking over

回复 ↓•永久链接•Report

Tim Dyck 大约 1 年以前 3

Wait til planes become self aware and see the pilots as a threat to safety. Science fiction has spent a century warning us of what will happen but we keep recklessly moving forward.

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Mark Jenkins 大约 1 年以前 6

According to the article that I read, human pilots are inadvertently selecting autopilot instead of auto throttle due to the relative proximity of two switches. This has nothing to do with self-aware planes and everything to do with poor user interface design.

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

darjr26 大约 1 年以前 2

What is a detached auto throttle?

回复 ↓•永久链接•Report

Peter Fuller 大约 1 年以前 3

Seems “detached” was a poor word choice: “disconnected” or “disengaged” would have more precisely described the situation.

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Steven Williamson 大约 1 年以前 3

The software programmer who has never flown an aircraft had no problem with the original engagement!

回复 ↓•永久链接•Report

JMARTINSON 大约 1 年以前 -1

Well the guy who installed the cupholders hasn't ever flown an aircraft either, so why aren't you bitching about them?

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Chris B 大约 1 年以前 5

This is a much better article than the posted one. https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/ad-addresses-potentially-catastrophic-button-mix-up/

回复 ↓•永久链接•Report

bentwing60 大约 1 年以前 4

Yep, and these days it seems to have more to do with the 'Button pushers' than the buttons pushed!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Doug Parker 大约 1 年以前 3

When I did tech support, we'd call that a PEBCAM error: Problem Exists Between Chair and Mouse.

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Philip Lanum 大约 1 年以前 1

The A220 uses a mouse during takeoff?

A joystick maybe, but a mouse?

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

JMARTINSON 大约 1 年以前 3

When he did tech support, he'd call that a PEBCAS error: Problem Exists Between Chair and Stick.

Happy now?

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

davemc380 大约 1 年以前 1

We call it a problem with the carbon-based interface

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

watters robert 大约 1 年以前 1

Not really; pilot error is always blamed for shit design.

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Stephen Leftly 大约 1 年以前 2

I agree this looks to be a design failure ...on two or three fronts.

Firstly why is the auto throttle disengaging in turbulence - the reason given is inconsistent airspeed indications from sensors. That should be fixed. I would guess there is enough data to show that if there is a discrepancy either the lowest or highest reading is correct.

The second is that the two buttons should not be close together which allows for misselection and both have the word "auto" as a prefix.

Finally should the autopilot function be selectable at that low altitude just after takeoff?

回复 ↓•永久链接•父级•Report

Randolph Hesler 大约 1 年以前 2

Many, many years ago Boeing had a similar problem on their 757/767 fleet. It was attributed to bad switches in the MCP (Mode Control Panel), if memory serves me correctly.

回复 ↓•永久链接•Report

The US regulator mandates additional measure for inadvertent autopilot engagement in A220s during take-off

19 条会员评论

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

登录