Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Capt.Rocky300

(1,005 posts)
9. I've read several news articles on the crash.........
Sun Feb 1, 2015, 02:51 AM
Feb 2015

and consider them to be extremely poor reporting and obviously written by people who don't know anything about aviation or airplanes. I question the motivations and accuracy of anything that comes out of that region regarding this crash or the Malaysian Airlines flight that disappeared.

I was very disappointed to learn the recorders would be handled by local agencies and not the U.S. or Australian authorities. As I understand it, there have been only press releases, no neutral third party has had access to the recorders.

And one more thing to consider from personal experience. When you're getting the shit kicked out of you by turbulence the last thing you're gonna do is get out of your seat and look for circuit breakers on the overhead or back bulkhead panels to shut up the warnings. Besides, everything is jumping around so bad you can't read the tiny lettering below the breakers much less be able to get ahold of the corrects one(s) to pull. The breakers are small and there are row upon rows of them and no one memorizes the locations other than just a few you deal with on a semi regular basis. And the augmentation computers don't fall into that category.



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

When you say older pilots... Most commercial planes were fly-by-wire for 40 years or more. TheBlackAdder Feb 2015 #1
Why did that pilot throw the breakers and turn off the computer over the Java Sea? CK_John Feb 2015 #3
Who knows? I wasn't there and I wasn't privy to his thoughts. TheBlackAdder Feb 2015 #4
Can you provide a link to this information please? Capt.Rocky300 Feb 2015 #7
Link: CK_John Feb 2015 #8
I've read several news articles on the crash......... Capt.Rocky300 Feb 2015 #9
No, not at all. Major Hogwash Feb 2015 #2
Some of the instrumentation is more reliable than humans jberryhill Feb 2015 #5
That's just your opinion. Major Hogwash Feb 2015 #11
That's just your opinion. GGJohn Feb 2015 #12
A nice myth but even the AF admits humans can't take the potential G force of todays fighters. CK_John Feb 2015 #6
Your argument is a myth, it is built on a false premise. Major Hogwash Feb 2015 #10
G suits have been around for decades now to counter G forces, GGJohn Feb 2015 #13
Testing of pilotless F16's and the introduction of driveless cars will bring this topic front and CK_John Feb 2015 #14
Any set of instruments or automation can fail FLPanhandle Feb 2015 #15
The problem is that the pilots spend the time trying to fix the computer. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #18
The problem is that the exchange of information is very poor. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #16
I know, I just answered, but.... Savannahmann Feb 2015 #17
A skilled and experienced pilot will know how the FBW computer works. backscatter712 Feb 2015 #19
IMO, the last several post high lights the human problem, which is more important CK_John Feb 2015 #20
I would disagree. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #21
I respect your opinion but... the world is moving to total automation and the bean counters are in CK_John Feb 2015 #22
The problem is this. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #23
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are older experienced pil...»Reply #9