Simviation Forums

This is rather worrying;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-32810273

A software glitch costing lives. As this project is already massively over-run and over funded, why wasn't proper testing done?

Its interesting to remember that many of our modern, fuel injected motorbikes, cars, etc, now contain ECU's (Engine Control Units), computer "Black boxes" which control the engine performance from the input, accelerator/throttle, by the rider/driver.
The ECU monitors a variety of ever-changing conditions, via various sensors, and responds by varying the fuel/air ratio into the engine, and the ignition timing.

In the olden days the accelerator/throttle was directly connected to the Carburettor by a Bowden-cable, or direct linkage. Simple and reliable.

Now, all the control responses are directed to the fuel injector(s) via electrical cable, carrying signals...a very complex electrical system...likely to fail at an inopportune time....especially in the air!!

Very different from the old, normally-aspirated, avgas, carburettor, air-cooled Piper Cub/Cessna 150!

How much we rely on "computers" nowadays!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_control_unit

Paul.

Airbus has had problems with their software before: recall the A320 crash at the Paris Airshow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEH7OpnA-I4

The A380 entry into service was also delayed significantly by electrical problems, mostly wiring issues if I recall correctly.

My 9 month old car (no brand names, please) was just recalled for a faulty ECU in the power steering system. With no new parts on hand, I'm looking at a 1 month+ delay in the repair. Fortunately, the manufacturer provides a loaner vehicle but somehow it's just not the same thing, eh?

Yes, we have become so dependent on computers it is quite unnerving. So the question should always be: how much are we willing to trust the things? And, let's remember, that no matter how good the computer is, it and it's software are designed/built by people, which should always be a red flag.

But software aside, this appers completely unrelated to any software issue before.

Word has it that this A400 used (fuel tank) trimming software not used on previous A400s. We'll wait and see. Either way it appears to have a catastrophic failure very close to the ground.

C wrote:But software aside, this appears completely unrelated to any software issue before.

Word has it that this A400 used (fuel tank) trimming software not used on previous A400s. We'll wait and see. Either way it appears to have a catastrophic failure very close to the ground.

Understood. My comment was about Airbus' general competency in electrical and software development. I spent almost 50 years as a professional pilot and fully recognize the challenges, and dangers, of aircraft development having flown everything from single-engine piston trainers to complex turbine airliners and some very sophisticated advanced helicopters. I believe that at some point it becomes important to look beyond the single issue and examine the overall management style of the development team; think of the massive review and changes brought about at NASA after the Challenger accident. Yet, even that didn't prevent the Columbia disaster.

And it just seems to get more dreadful... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33078767

Obviously of no real relation to an aircraft, but more than a few years back (apx '95/'96) I was using cruise control when the engine revved out of control.

Aside from the fact that I was heading downhill in rush hour traffic, NOTHING that I could do to disengage the cruise control would work.

I switched the engine to the off position but not so far as to lock the steering wheel.

Steering was a little stiff, but not a real problem. I coasted downhill until I could pull into a parking lot, and there I turned the ignition all of the way off.

A few minutes later I restarted the engine again and the engine revved out of control. Turned off again.

While I was waiting for the tow truck to pick it up, I tried the ignition again. No problem. Worked just fine.


When we got it back from the new car dealer we were told that they couldn't find any problems.

The problem never reoccurred again.


Now imagine some computer malfunction at 40,000.

Nothing to do with computers this time. Just happens to me periodically that I made my own solution. When braking for a stop, my pick-up won't cometo a full stop. Instead it speeds up the harder I press the brake pedal. Turns out my triple E shoes are too wide and as I brake, the edge of my shoe catches the accelerator. Can be fatal if braking at a pedestrian x-ing. So I fixed it myself by removing the brake pedal and bending it a bit. Another alternative would be to take my shoes off. Simplicity works.

Bit of an odd story. The computer program for the engines worked for start up, taxi, flight, but got wiped for approach...?
On a whole these are not individual programs, but one program that runs phases dependent on the inputs from the aircraft's sensing systems and cockpit inputs. Also for some safety the thrust levers poties are connected directly to the engine management computers on the engine to prevent an aircraft power failure or system failure from effecting the engine controls. There is a lot more to this story than is being released....? Also of note was the delay in production of the TP400 engine due to problems with completing the FADEC software to the satisfaction of the civil authorities........

Matt

Exactly Matt, there appears to be some concealing of the facts and arse covering going on IMHO.

I've never had a warm fuzzy feeling about planes that are 100% fly by wire with no mechanical backup system. I hope this, and others, plane has it's computers shielded from an EMP. Seems to me the main reason for this plane's existence is to avoid buying American, either the latest C-130 or the C-17.

They are probably both fly by wire too though.

I can remember a time when vehicles were fitted with a Distributor with contact-breaker points, normally aspirated Carburettors, a clicking Fuel pump, a 12-volt Dynamo with carbon brushes and a Voltage Regulator, sometimes a starting handle...and a small set of tools sufficient to overcome any slight roadside difficulty.

Very little to go wrong, little expense involved, and no problem to fix.

...been there...done it... ...!

No Computers involved.

Happy memories!

Paul... ...!

You sound like a Land Rover ex-owner (I had two 109's and one 88 in diferent moments of my life) because of the starting handle comment: one of my 109's I exchanged for my Baja Bug, had no starter nor front seats: with the handle, NO PROBLEM & a wooden board was the drivers seat. The secret for not having a dislocated shoulder was, ALLWAYS pull the handle from bottom to top (never push! Sometimes, motors backfire ) My present VW Combi has two carbs, a distributor with centrifugal & vacum advances & a set of points. I am converting the turbine (has a 1,700 cc "suitcase" engine, cooling turbine on the crankshaft) for a starter handle. Important, since my Combi has a three speed automatic trany, no way to push-start when low battery!! And she has a MARiNE battery, very much more durable & dependable than an automotive battery.

Land Rover owner?.... ....

NAH!..... ....

...my experience was with my old 1931, open, off-set, 1-1/2 seater, Brooklands Riley 9 replica, 1087cc, British Racing Green, GP Motor motor car!

...complete with starting handle, and a take-off for a front-mounted Supercharger (aka Blower Bentley)...!

Lots of fun, but with a fragile 3-bearing crankshaft...do NOT over-rev!!

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z143 ... lands.aspx

Paul.... ...!

...followed also, by my old 1958 Morris Minor Traveller....complete with grass and mushrooms growing around the wood-work.... ...!

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