High talk in Bangkok

NHK saheb
Very well written article.. Thank you very much.

Re: # 70
Abey ye tau Ghusta hi chala aa raha hai. Nasha utar diya isne(chai wala).

I dont work on airplanes for a living, just a hobby, this 2/3 number was based on my conversations with A P/M. I dont care much about fly-by-wire. Maybe one day when I buy my own then I will look into it.

Waise ek cheez batao:
if there is an induced Magnetic Field with high tension in the vicinity or even severe Lightening Strikes then what will happen to this Fly-By-Wire technology?
Why is this Software so expensive? And how the heck you know what it costs? Do you work for Airbus?
As a Pilot I can trust and feel safe with an Auto Pilot coupled with D/S VOR or INS; but Fly-By-Wire is too risky for my taste.

Re: # 69
No Airhostess, Just me.

kulharee:

man your ode to bangkok makes me want to break out into ``one night in bangkok`` but i`ll resist thaaat temptation! perhaps you`ll appreciate it more.

and it makes me weep to think of ``waiting for godot`` as ``waiting for godododo``. cease and desist abhi issi waqt!!!!

Re: # 68 (delhiwala),
No problem flyboy. Long as it teaches you to look up your facts before you shoot your mouth off and end up biting off more than you can chew.

Cheers,
Irfan.

Delhi, do you carry an airhostess in your plane?

Re: # 67
Thank you for the update. I always thought BA held 2/3 of aviation share. I have no clue about Commercial Aviation, I am just a small time pilot who flies around to checkout new restaurants in the area. One day I will graduate into Acrobatics.

Re: # 63 (delhiwala),
You will notice that I said computer assisted flight CONTROL systems, not computer based flight display systems. You are right when you state that a bunch of sensors hooked up to a computer for display on a monitor is not fly-by-wire. But I was right when I said a computer assisted flight control system IS fly-by-wire. I don`t really know what you mean by ``flying computers`` though. Care to clarify?

Another correction, Airbus holds more than 50% of the market share in commercial aviation (since 2003), so Boeing having 2/3rds is just plain mathematically impossible. In Boeing`s fleet, the only aircraft that has FBW is the 777, and the upcoming Dreamliner. Why? The answer is technical. All flight software, from the control system function, the so-called FBW; to the most mundane alarm, are certified to very high standards. The standard is called DO-178B. All flight software functions are placed in 1 of 5 criticality levels (A through E, with A being the most critical). The higher the criticality level, the more costly the development of software for it. To certify 5000 lines of code at level A (the level needed for control systems) would need millions of dollars. Thus it is unfeasible if you have a large piece of code to certify to a high level. The reason Airbus does it and Boeing doesn`t, is because Airbus invested heavily in R&D during the 80s. A result of this was what are called the ``synchronous reactive languages``. These are high-level languages that are used to program the control laws for FBW systems. They are then translated automatically to machine code that is already certified at level A. All this research was carried out in France, so naturally Airbus adopted it, and the costs for its FBW systems dropped drastically. And in 1988 the A320 became the second commercial plane to have FBW (first was Concorde).

As for your point about what FBW is good for, well it is good for tons of things. But the most important thing is that the computer can filter out and compensate for external disturbances. So, it would be much easier to land with cross-wind conditions, because your computer would be keeping the aircraft at zero yaw when the stick and pedals would be dead center, rather than drifting off the runway.

Regards,
Irfan.

Re: # 65

Delhi, I was just kidding.. Cessna sounds like a fun plane.

Re: # 64
I am sorry I don`t understand your question? What is training wheel?

I fly a Cessna-skyhawk( small SEL type, propeller, 4 seater).

just for fun.

Re: # 63

Delhi, when you first learnt how to fly, did you start with training wheels? At one point did you shift from Half-Kaynchee to Full-Kaynchee?

What kinda plane do you fly?

Re: # 62

Mr Hamid, U WHO? Are you Godot`s evil twin?

Anyways, Flying Computers are there since last 25 yrs but have not become part of main stream aviation. ``Airbus Consortium`` is the major player that manufactures them. Their competitor, i.e. BA, that holds 2/3 Aviation share does not believe in Fly-By-Wire, why????

Glass Air is not necessarily ``fly-by-air``, at least what I have known and seen in Demos. If you are saying that a Computer like Panel with GPS Moving Map display, that is hooked on with RPM/Thrust+Attitude Indicator+Altimeter and other Primary Instruments to show a Computer like display, then I am ok with it. But Fly-By-Wire is totally different thing, frankly I have never seen one and it is beyond my league.

NHK`s point was more about complacency induced by lack of physical action that comes with more sophisticated instruments. For e.g. while landing in Cross-Wind factor greater than your endurance and precipitation conditions, what good is your fly-by-wire?

Did anyone go to OSHKOSH this year?

@Delhiwala,
Modern avionics systems don`t malfunction in the traditional sense of the word, i.e.: it won`t stop working like your VCR or TV. Computer assisted flight control systems (also called fly-by-wire) are usually in what is called a quad-redundant configuration, meaning there is one primary and 3 backup systems waiting to kick in if the primary goes down. Each of these systems is rigorously tested for failures, and the `dependability` of these systems is very very high. On the other hand, if there is a physical catastrophe like a collision then of course a computer assisted flight system will be destroyed, but so will a hydraulic one.

Glass cockpits are the wave of the future, so are simulators. There is no way around either of these technologies. It is true that MFDs and computer screens don`t have the romantic appeal of seat-of-your-pants flying. But I don`t think that the old lumbering hydraulic beasts like the early Boeings had any of that either. Pilots in the future will be more like information systems specialists than the pilots of today. And air travel will be safer because of that.

@NHK,
I think the audience should have censured the pilots found flying under the influence of alcohol rather than criticizing the BBC for producing the documentary. Maybe it`s just me, but I find the image of a pilot in a drunken stupor on the flight deck much more unethical then a BBC reporter going undercover to expose him.

Regards,
Irfan.

PS: I think you mean you ordered a suit, not a suite. A suit is what you wear when you are at a formal occasion. A suite is the two or more adjoined rooms that the hotel gives you if you pay them more money.

Re: # 59

Delhiwala

``Mitti Pao``

Done. Over and out.

Re: # 59

Yeah Delhi… you tell him that. According to him, Khan Sahib is clueless, I am a Coward and a Clueless. But he has yet to tell us what he thinks of himself. I wont be surprised if he think that he himself is Clueless Coward and Dense. I have often asked myself what motivates negative characters like him? They tend to be middler and not very accomplished in their own lives. All they are experts at is looking at any tiny obscure faults in others. I say what a life that must be.

I am expecting a long scholarly article from Gotdot on the separatist movements in Southeast Asia and the Far East.

Re: # 56
Godot Yaar,
Why are you after NHK? This article was not bad at all. I did not find any English discrepencies, really. Maybe, my English is bad too.

Mitti Pao Yaar, Jindgee Chottee hai, khao Piyo, Rabb Da Nam Leyo, te Aish Karo.....