Re: Airbus Safety

Date:         13 Oct 98 02:48:12 
From:         "Tarver Engineering" <jtarver@tminet.com>
Organization: http://www.supernews.com, The World's Usenet: Discussions Start Here
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure


Karl Swartz wrote in message ...
>>Once an aircraft has been debugged and stops falling out of the sky,
>>should it still be considered unsafe ?

>>Airbus certaintly suffered a lot because it released a plane without
>>adequate testing and debugging. Boeing learned from this and made sure
>>quality control was top priority when it released the 777 ...
>
>Quality control has little to do with it.  The DC-10 cargo door could
>have been built with the utmost of quality, but the design itself was
>still crap and the highest quality implementation of it would still be
>vulnerable.

Now, now, the Douglas workers will get their feelings hurt.

>I'm not aware of any Airbus crashes in which manufacturing quality has
>been an issue. If anything, Airbus has done a better job of consistently
>producing aircraft with minimal manufacturing problems than has Boeing.

Airbus wasted much effort trying to meet the now dead RTCA DO-180
requirements.  This left early models with audible Nyquist problems and
certain inadaquacies in the Flight Control Computer.  The new models have no
such Nyquist problem and one can assume there was a change to the FCC.

John