Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jodrellblank 5297 days ago
Isn't it also safe to assume:

- Pilots wouldn't be trained with marketing speak so they believe the Aircraft is uncrashable, and ignore 75 repeats of the STALL warning alarm.

- The change of modes between "can't crash" and "can crash" laws normally never happens, so when it does it deserves a huge and explicit attention grabbing ongoing alert of its own.

- The plane would never, ever, detect that it was barely moving forwards, nose pointing up, falling at hundreds of feet per second, and then switch the STALL alarm off.

- The plane designers would make it so one pilot has no clue what the other is doing with the controls, and if both offer conflicting instructions, the plane will not alert them, but just average the instructions.

- The "about to hit the ground" warning would be built to sound early enough that they could use it to avoid hitting the ground.

- The pilots would be trained so that if something goes wrong, seems weird, panic is setting in, they must stop what they are doing and cooperatively restate their assumptions and reassess the situation.

1 comments

These are excellent points. I was amazed at the behavior of the dual input sticks; in what world would this be a useful feature of the airplane (other than, perhaps, a training scenario?) How is the switch to alternate mode not made painfully obvious to the pilots?