Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
http://www.euronews.com/2015/03/24/airbu...rd-authorities/
when will they backpedal all that automation?
Nice title...
Since Airbus owns nearly 50% of the commercial airliner market, this title is a lot like saying, "Yet another Japanese car crashed"...as if somehow, because they're involved in so many crashes, the Japanese cars are inferior...
The Airbus 320 automation is very useful in a variety of circumstances. I wouldn't want it rolled back. I've landed an A-320 in some truly awful weather, in demanding circumstances, in challenging terrain. It's a good airplane and I appreciate the thoughtfulness of the design, and the reliability of the machine.
There is no indication that automation was involved in this accident.
There is no indication of anything, yet.
Originally Posted By: marine65
If this plane were a car it would be a beater.
It had nearly 47,000 flights on it.
I think thats why it ended up in a second class cut rate airline.
I wonder if you can check how many hours and flights are on the next plane you fly on?
Yeah, ummm...no...
Not even close. This is a young airliner. They're not maintained like cars. So, in the airliner world, this would qualify as an off-lease, 4 year old car.
Not a beater by any stretch...
So, I wouldn't want someone so clueless about airplanes, "checking up" on their age, when age means nothing, and maintenance means everything.
Of course, because of its age, you probably think my Packard is a "beater"....
Sorry, fellas...but you can tell that I've lost my patience on this thread already...I'll comment on the findings when there is something worth discussing, instead of pointless speculation...