Hacker News Reader

Comment by Someone1234 | Hacker News Reader

Honestly if the aircraft just communicated what automated actions it was taking better, it may not have been so fatal.

"STALL AVOID - STABILIZER ADJUSTED - STALL AVOID - STABILIZER ADJUSTED" would be kinda hard to ignore. Even if they forgot to put it in the manual.

View on HN

Then on most modern aircrafts, these alarms would be going off all the time. It's more important to know why the computer received incorrect data on the angle of the plane.

Usually there are three or more sensors reading it and the master computer uses the voting mechanism to arrive at the correct reading. So in this case probably the master computer had erred?

I don't understand. Do most modern aircraft fly right at the edge of their ability to stay in the air?

Not in climb, cruise, or descent. Only on maximum performance takeoffs and the last moments before touchdown are modern airliners near the edge of the envelope of controlled flight.

Engine "Stalling" is not a big issue at all. As a part of training we purposefully stall engines and recover from it. And as angle of attack increases due to increase/decrease in wind speed, engine stalls can be more frequent that usual.

You are conflating two separate things. Stalls in the aerodynamic sense (angle-of-attack above critical) have nothing to do with the engine "stalling" (engine-out) which is a mechanical failure.

I should have used better terminology. The article here describes aircraft stalls and I was talking about the same.

Aircraft stalls are not extra-ordinary events and with auto pilot on the computer is always adjusting the angle, speed , preventing stall etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com