GrayHorizons Posted June 15, 2020 Report Share Posted June 15, 2020 I googled this..."retired Colonel and former SeaKing pilot as well as the former Commanding Officer of 423 squadron" and came up with this. I hope its the article he refers to. https://www.capebretonpost.com/news/local/expert-cyclone-pilot-likely-tried-to-correct-problem-chopper-didnt-respond-460621/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGP Posted June 15, 2020 Report Share Posted June 15, 2020 Thanks GH...that is the one...didn't see it anywhere in main stream news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three_Per Posted June 16, 2020 Report Share Posted June 16, 2020 https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5613239 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGP Posted June 17, 2020 Report Share Posted June 17, 2020 You all know the line...don't fly the A model of anything! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heliian Posted June 17, 2020 Report Share Posted June 17, 2020 11 hours ago, DGP said: You all know the line...don't fly the A model of anything! I prefer the line: "there are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old bold pilots." I still don't think there's anything wrong with the aircraft but more related to the "human factors", they are returning the cyclones to service now without any talks about "fixes". I wonder how many hours the PIC had on helicopters and on type? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrayHorizons Posted June 17, 2020 Report Share Posted June 17, 2020 im trying to wrap my head around what they are saying... semi autonomous mode ? pilot punched in manual commands? the helicopter software did not recognize the pilot's instructions and chose to ignore them ? what kind of AFCS design is this? or better yet, what kind of double speak are they trying to sell us? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGP Posted June 17, 2020 Report Share Posted June 17, 2020 The lawyers will be the next to be heard from and due to client confidentiality we the public will never hear another word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGP Posted June 17, 2020 Report Share Posted June 17, 2020 Watching that video of the military trying to explain what they think went wrong when a smiple question was asked...did the computer cause the crash...lots of mumble jumbo going on there...they and sikorsky have all the confidence in the soft wear...I would say there are others that don't share their views! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmac Posted June 18, 2020 Report Share Posted June 18, 2020 I could be wrong, but, didn't Boeing 737 Max 8 have a similar problem, in my book it would be called insufficient training on type, including all emergency procedures. At one time a/c were equipped with auto pilots that had to be controlled by the Pilot, nowadays, if the computer chips get into an argument, they crash the Aircraft. There are not to many Pilots that I know off that would intentionally do that. So the answer has to be in the lack of training and computer science. Boeing Aircraft are re-training (all) pilots on emergency procedures and how to overcome the computer chips from dis-agreeing. As pointed out by RCAF the Cyclone did not respond to in-puts from the Two Captains flying the A/C, with not enough knowledge of the computer system flying the A/C, would that not indicate lack of training by the RCAF and Sikorsky. The actual cause of the accident remains with the Federal Government and Department of National Defence, for lack of over site. Both of those entities have to learn is that is not their money they are spending, but, the Canadian Taxpayer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGP Posted June 18, 2020 Report Share Posted June 18, 2020 The other part of this story that we would like to know is how many stories did DND dream up before they actually started this story about computer chips disagreeing and then saying that these chips figuired that the pitch attitude that the pilot wanted could not possible be what the pilot DID want and so they drove this ship into the drink! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.