13.07.2015 Views

In-flight upset - 154 km west of Learmonth, WA, 7 October 2008,

In-flight upset - 154 km west of Learmonth, WA, 7 October 2008,

In-flight upset - 154 km west of Learmonth, WA, 7 October 2008,

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

second PRIM 3 FAULT. The role <strong>of</strong> master then switched back to FCPC 1.However, because FCPC 1 had already recorded a pitch fault, it was not able to actas the master under normal law. The control law therefore reverted to alternate law.<strong>In</strong> addition to generating the messages and changing the control law, the sequence<strong>of</strong> faults also affected the autotrim function. The priority order for performing theservo-controller role for the THS was FCPC 1, FCPC 2 and FCPC 3. After bothFCPC 1 and FCPC 2 had experienced a pitch fault, and FCPC 3 had a PRIM fault,none <strong>of</strong> them could manage the autotrim function associated with the THS.2.2.3 SummaryThe simulation studies showed that spikes in AOA 1 values 1.2 seconds apart couldlead to the FCPCs sending pitch-down commands to the elevators, and that thesecommands were consistent with the elevator deflections observed during the twopitch-downs. <strong>In</strong> addition, the studies confirmed that <strong>flight</strong> crew inputs andturbulence did not contribute to the pitch-down commands. The EFCS faultmessages recorded during the <strong>flight</strong> were also consistent with the operational logic<strong>of</strong> the system in response to the pitch-down commands.Given that the pitch-down commands were consistent with the operational logic <strong>of</strong>the EFCS, the investigation examined the requirements and activities involved indeveloping the FCPC algorithm for processing AOA data.2.3 Requirements for designing <strong>flight</strong> control systems2.3.1 Certification basis for the A330/A340Airbus applied for the certification <strong>of</strong> the A330/A340 aircraft types in June 1988. 89The applicable certification basis was the European Joint Aviation Requirement(JAR) 25 (change 13, effective 5 <strong>October</strong> 1989), with some exceptions and specialconditions. The A330/A340 aircraft were originally certified by the DirectionGénérale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC) <strong>of</strong> France. The A340-211 was the first modelcertified in December 1992 (Type Certificate TC 183), with the first A330 model(A330-301) certified in <strong>October</strong> 1993 (Type Certificate TC 184).The A330/A340 aircraft were also jointly certified in the United States (US) underthe US Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) 25. The US Federal AviationAdministration (FAA) validated the DGAC certification for the A340 in May 1993and the A330 in <strong>October</strong> 1993. 908990Type certification is the process used by a regulatory authority to ensure that a new aircraft typecomplies with the applicable airworthiness requirements.Under the provisions <strong>of</strong> Civil Aviation Safety Regulation 21.29A, which was in place at the timethe first A330 was certified in Australia (2002), the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority(CASA) issued a Type Acceptance Certificate for the A330 based on the fact that it had alreadybeen issued with a Type Certificate by the national aviation authority <strong>of</strong> a recognised foreigncountry.- 83 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!