# The Airbus 330 - Possibility of Electrical/Computer Problems



## syscom3 (Jul 20, 2009)

Click on the link to read the whole story. 




> With its human-proof computer systems, it is the most technically advanced aircraft in the world. So why has the Airbus 330's gleaming new fleet been so dogged by technical problems... and disturbing evidence of flawed cabling been so comprehensively ignored?



Read more: LIVE SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: The series of mysterious Airbus 330 accidents culminating in tragic loss of Air France Flight 447 | Mail Online


----------



## lingo (Jul 20, 2009)

syscom3 said:


> Click on the link to read the whole story.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The press loves drama and conspiracy. Now remind me, what sort of aircraft was N387SW?


----------



## syscom3 (Jul 20, 2009)

lingo said:


> The press loves drama and conspiracy. Now remind me, what sort of aircraft was N387SW?



What does that have to do with this story?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 20, 2009)

Exactly what does that have to do with this topic?


----------



## lingo (Jul 20, 2009)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Exactly what does that have to do with this topic?



The topic seems to be about rubbishing the Airbus A330 with the information coming from a newspaper. I would be far more impressed with information from the regulatory authorities, or the users and maintainers.
Long experience has taught me not to believe everything the dailies tell us. The bit about the A 340 had nothing to do with the A 330. It was all to do with the unbelievable stupidity of the airlines ground staff who disregarded regulations and accepted procedures. 

It wouldn't take a towering genius to find a catalogue of incidents and problems suffered by* any *aircraft type. The airline industry is forever sending out preventative advice to its users - and rightly so, but if it all got into the hands of the press to misinterpret there would be far fewer bums on seats as the public would stay away in droves! I mentioned the Boeing 737 N387SW that was fortunate to escape from a decompression caused by the skin structure failing. Just think how that might have been reported by the media.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 20, 2009)

lingo said:


> The topic seems to be about rubbishing the Airbus A330 with the information coming from a newspaper. I would be far more impressed with information from the regulatory authorities, or the users and maintainers.
> Long experience has taught me not to believe everything the dailies tell us. The bit about the A 340 had nothing to do with the A 330. It was all to do with the unbelievable stupidity of the airlines ground staff who disregarded regulations and accepted procedures.
> 
> It wouldn't take a towering genius to find a catalogue of incidents and problems suffered by* any *aircraft type. The airline industry is forever sending out preventative advice to its users - and rightly so, but if it all got into the hands of the press to misinterpret there would be far fewer bums on seats as the public would stay away in droves! I mentioned the Boeing 737 N387SW that was fortunate to escape from a decompression caused by the skin structure failing. Just think how that might have been reported by the media.



No the thread was a topic about the Airbus A330.

You need to chill out. Anytime anyone states anything about the British or Europe in general you automatically go on the defensive. I could post a story about European weather and you would find someway to take offense to it. It is rather annoying. Would it make you feel better if I posted one about Boeing...???

Just chill out...


----------



## Maximowitz (Jul 20, 2009)

He's got a point actually. The only thing I'd believe written in the Daily Mail is the sports results. And I'd check them afterwards too.

It's known as the "Daily Bigot" in the UK due to its rather parochial right wing viewpoint.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 20, 2009)

Maximowitz said:


> He's got a point actually. The only thing I'd believe written in the Daily Mail is the sports results. And I'd check them afterwards too.
> 
> It's known as the "Daily Bigot" in the UK due to its rather parochial right wing viewpoint.



That may be true, but the thread was not written as an attack on Airbus.


----------



## gumbyk (Jul 20, 2009)

Lingo, ignore the hype and hysteria in the opening of the stroy.
There is some element of plausibility in this. Its about a string on uncommanded control inputs on the Airbus series of aircraft, possibly caused by aging wiring. It does happen.

I have had some experience in trying to track down the same sort of issue, in a light GA aircraft autopilot system, and it was implssoble to reproduce the fault on the ground. It was only by rewiring the nav and autopilot systems that we corrected the problem. Never did find exactly where the issue was though. I can only imagine what it would have been like had it been in a high-performance, or large air transport aircraft.


----------



## comiso90 (Jul 20, 2009)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> That may be true, but the thread was not written as an attack on Airbus.



With a title like _*"The Airbus 330 - an accident waiting to happen" *_

I think it is... that's not my definition of non-biased.

I wonder if it's safety record is better that the 737... seems like a bunch of those have crashed but there are a lot more in service..


----------



## BombTaxi (Jul 20, 2009)

Like max said, I wouldn't believe a word the Mail prints. They are probably having a pop at airbus precisely becaus it is a European comsortium - they hate that kind of thing with a passion.


----------



## syscom3 (Jul 20, 2009)

Read the story.

There seems to be more than a few instances where the plane did something totally unexpected while in flight.


----------



## BombTaxi (Jul 20, 2009)

There are several instances of unexpected autopilot disconnections - but I don't see anything in the report except speculation as to causes.

The A340 incident is irrelevant - as lingo said, ignorance of proper procedure is to blame for that write-off. I get the feeling it was included so that the MoS could put in a dramatic picture of a samshed-up Airbus. As for the wiring, it is a possible cause, but so is software failure. Much of the criticism is drawn from statements made by lawyers representing the families of the AF447 victims. While I do not doubt their competence, they are hardly an objective source from which to take an opinion. They will naturally be trying to paint Airbus in the worst possible light, and their bashing of a European consortium fits well with long-established Daily Mail editorial policy. 

This section is pure hype



> ‘On an Airbus, nothing in the cockpit is real. Everything is electronic. The throttles, rudder and brake pedals and the side-stick are hooked to rheostats that talk to a computer, which talks to an electric hydraulic servo valve, which in turn – hopefully – moves something.’



This guy could be talking about most modern commercial or military aircraft, and the fact that the A330 is fly by wire makes it no more or less likely to crash than any other type. No official conclusions have been drawn from the QF72 incident either (nor the NWA one) - what the Mail has printed is merely conjecture - logical I admit, but conjecture nonetheless. Likwise, while I appreciate the grief of those in the victim's association, for them to suggest a coverup by the BEA and Airbus is pure speculation, and not a little hyperbolic. But again, it's the kind of thing that sells newspapers. I do not believe for a second that the BEA, or the FAA or AAIB, would cover up a potentially lethal fault in an aicraft type if they knew for sure it existed.

AF447 was a tragedy, and the cause needs to be found. But to present this piece of Sunday sensationalist jornalism as a serious contribution to the debate is, I believe, somewhat spurious.

Cheers

BT


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 20, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> I wonder if it's safety record is better that the 737... seems like a bunch of those have crashed but there are a lot more in service..


also consider flight hours


----------



## comiso90 (Jul 20, 2009)

FLYBOYJ said:


> also consider flight hours



maintaince, age and the rest... I cringe when I hear about a 737 going down knowing that, for many, it reflects poorly on Boeing and American aircraft. Many dont consider that the lapsed inspections and haphazard maintainace by poorly regulated carriers in backwards countries.

.

.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 21, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> With a title like _*"The Airbus 330 - an accident waiting to happen" *_
> 
> I think it is... that's not my definition of non-biased.
> 
> I wonder if it's safety record is better that the 737... seems like a bunch of those have crashed but there are a lot more in service..



Yeah I can see where you are coming from with that.


----------



## Colin1 (Jul 21, 2009)

BombTaxi said:


> Like max said, I wouldn't believe a word the Mail prints. They are probably having a pop at airbus precisely becaus it is a European comsortium - they hate that kind of thing with a passion.


The Mail?
Bloody Nationalist newspaper in all but name. The wartime owner, Lord Rothwell or someone, big chums with both Hitler and Mussolini, even sent a telegram to Hitler conveying his support for the invasion of the Sudetenland; Rothwell was hoping that Hitler would come to be liked and admired in the UK.
He was also a big fan of Mosley, describing him as a level-headed man of good common sense and penning a very favourable article on the Blackshirts.
One of the Mail's senior editors even wrote a book defending both Hitler and Mussolini in the late 30s, don't recall the name of the editor or the book but you get some historical idea of why the Mail is positioned where it is in the political spectrum.

I wouldn't wipe my *ss on the Mail, I certainly wouldn't read it.


----------



## Amsel (Jul 21, 2009)

Safety Group Urges Airbus Fixes - WSJ.com

From 2008



> LOS ANGELES -- U.S. aviation safety watchdogs, concerned about severe electrical problems that have blacked out cockpit displays on dozens of Airbus jetliners over the years, urged regulators on both sides of the Atlantic to mandate aircraft fixes and enhanced pilot training to alleviate such hazards.
> 
> Recommendations released by the National Transportation Safety Board Wednesday cite 49 incidents over the years in which electrical problems caused various cockpit displays on widely-used Airbus A319 and A320 to suddenly stop functioning and temporarily go blank during flight. According to the board, seven of those incidents resulted in the simultaneous loss of all six electric cockpit displays -- something that safety experts originally believed was virtually impossible.
> 
> ...




Another from 2006
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/Airbus.NTSB.FAA.2.234130.html


From NTSB



> ************************************************************
> 
> NTSB ADVISORY
> 
> ...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 21, 2009)

The A319/320 EFIS black out problem has been well known and documented for a long time. I saw it myself on an A319 that was being pulled out of flyable storage. During an engine ground run everything went blank. We simply turned everything off and re-powered up. Everything came back on. My father in law experienced the same thing when flying for Continental.

There are limited "steam gauges" that will enable the pilots to still fly the aircraft while they trouble shoot the problem.

Personally I see reports like this as a two-sided sword. In many cases the media puts out sensationalized and inaccurate information on aircraft accidents and incidents. On the other hand the media could press attention to a problem forcing manufacturers and regulatory agencies to act on a problem. Case in point, Aloha Airlines in 1988 when the upper cab of a 737 blew out due to stress and corrosion. After that all commercial airliners were subjected to the implemented “Corrosion Prevention Control Program” or “CPCP.” This program has identified probably hundreds of corrosion and stress defects in numerous commercial airliners.


----------



## Amsel (Jul 21, 2009)

Is it possible that the same issues have surfaced in the A-330? The current NTSB investigations makes me curious about that


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 21, 2009)

Amsel said:


> Is it possible that the same issues have surfaced in the A-330? The current NTSB investigations makes me curious about that



Only time will tell as the NTSB investigates this


----------



## trackend (Jul 21, 2009)

I do not profess to be an avionics expert but the field in which I work uses simlar techknowledgy the impression the artical gives is that a (singular) computer controls the aircraft systems as far as i am aware it is multiple computers each carrying independant programs, this software is not cloned but produce as seperate nodes each computer works in unison with two three or more units on a majority vote system, if say the aircraft requires to make a 10 degree turn, the controlling processors each calculate the amount of rudder, power etc required also if it is safe to do it, the results must match before the manouver is carried out should one disagree the majority vote wins and the minority processing module is shut down as it has made a mistake and the turn etc can be made, it sounds very dramatic but the chances of in a simple system (which I work in) of three computers using seperate software reaching a false conclusion at exactly the same moment run into millions to one, in an aircraft it must be much higher as a large number of processing modules are used.

I am sure one of our avionics guys will correct me if I am wrong but I also believe inputs to the systems are gleaned from more than one source Ie not just one pitot tube etc.

As with most newspaper articals they attempt to draw conclusions without all the facts its a good job somewhat more qualified people deal with enquires. My freind who has not long retired after 50 years in aviation was an expert witness for the CAA on several aircraft accident investigations including Kegworth said newspapers plant some very misleading information into judicial enguires minds and too much time is wasted by experts having to explain the misconceptions the general public and some non technical investigating enquires have.

so for all the articals, what may seem plausable info i prefer some more substantial facts fro some more qualified people


----------



## timshatz (Jul 21, 2009)

Small war story and I am not totally sure it's true but...

I used to own a 1998 Jaguar XK8 Ragtop. Pretty car BUT, it had the same problem with the Electronics. Every so often, the lights would just go out. Cruising along at 60Mph and everything went dark. More than once too. Somewhat disconcerting to go "Batmobile" on I-76 at 11pm on a Friday night. Anyway, lights out, back on in about 5-10 seconds.

My understanding is, and this is pure hearsay from someone I told the problem too, that the electronics in the Jag and the Airbus come from the same company.

Some of you guys in Europe might know better if it is true.


----------



## Amsel (Jul 21, 2009)

Is this a taboo subject? Or is there some politics involved, and there is really no problem?


----------



## Colin1 (Jul 21, 2009)

timshatz said:


> ... I used to own a 1998 Jaguar XK8 Ragtop... ...this is pure hearsay from someone I told the problem to, that the electronics in the Jag and the Airbus come from the same company.


Just as well it isn't an XJ-S - there'd be an Airbus in every field


----------



## BombTaxi (Jul 21, 2009)

Amsel said:


> Is this a taboo subject? Or is there some politics involved, and there is really no problem?



There is politics involved in the MoS report linked at the start of the thread. Editorially, the paper hates Europe, Europeans and anything that they make. They also hold (to some degree), Airbus responsible for the demise of the UK's civil avaiation industry - I won't go into this any further, or I will be talking pure politics. 

On the other hand, there is clearly something wrong with the A330. I just wouldn't trust the Mail's coverage of the issues as far as I could throw it's editorial staff.


----------

