法航空难感想

The lack of any link by the crew between the loss of indicated speeds called out and the appropriate procedure;

人这一生其实可短暂了,有时候一想跟坐飞机是副驾驶错误作，飞机的皮氏管出现故障（不），导致飞机断开了自动飞行，需要驾驶员手动作，副驾驶在当时的环境下惊慌，想让飞机抬头（上升），但是飞机当时在35000英尺飞行，空气稀薄，导致飞机高空失速，急速下降坠机。一样一样的,飞机一将一升一站过去了。飞机一将不升,这辈子就过去哼~~

09年法航空难 2009年法航

09年法航空难 2009年法航

A330十几年完美安全纪录不保......

我晕

悲惨

~~

~

空中客车A330-200安全还是330-300安全？

A330-200毕竟安全。空中客车A330-200是A330的远程、短机身型，从机身较长的空中客车A330-300型衍生而来。主要是用作取代同厂的A300-600R，发起日期1995年11月，1997年8月首飞，1998年4月开始交付。

主要优势：

机型保留了A300/A310机型的高效率机身截面设计。电传飞行控制系统则是取自A320。秉承A330/A340系列成熟和先进的特点，现代化的机型提供了一个极为舒适的客舱，有更大的有效载荷载运能力，更远的航程和更好的起飞性能，更完整的运营通用性。

这两种都是相同的机型，只是啊，他们的巡航里程和座位数量不一样，飞机尺寸上也有一些别，但是都是兄弟机型。

空客330系列飞机在法航空难前，一直拥有相当完美的安全记录。而且世界上各大航空公司都有空客330型客机执飞中长距离洲际航班，可见大家对于空客330的信任程度。

所以准确的来说，空客A330系列飞机还是相当安全的，它的两种型号A330-200和A330-300都是非常安全的。

两种机型里，只有A330-200出过一次大，就是去年6月1日法航空难，这也是A330客机投入商业航班后首次发生的致命空难，也是A330及法航史上最惨重的空难，A330-300型还没有出过坠机，因此从率来说肯定是0，要低于A330-200

330-空中客车A330是欧洲空中客车工业公司于1986年1月宣布研制的A330/A340系列两种先进双过道宽机身客机之一。200那个，纯粹是博南哥的问题，拉杆狂魔博南哥。。跟飞机没关系

法航447空难原因是什么？

Temporary inconsistency between the airspeed measurements, likely following the obstruction of the Pitot probes by crystals that, in particular, caused the autopilot disconnection and the reconfig飞行员错误驾驶原因呀uration to alternate law;

班机在里约热内卢5月31日晚上10时03分（UTC）起飞，原定于6月1日上午9时10分到达巴黎，凌晨1时33

西班牙报章在的指，在一架从利马飞往马德里的星航西班牙彗空974航班上有一名副驾驶以及一名乘客在447号班机推测失事海域2000公里以外（经纬度： 7°N 49°W）发现一道强烈白光在6秒内垂直坠入海中，随后班机飞行员回报给西班牙民航当局。

法航空难原因是什么？

我猜外星人干扰，不然哪那么容The crew‘s failure to diagnose the s分，客机报告称即将在50分钟内进入塞内加尔的空中管制区域(经纬度：4°0′18″N 29°59′24″W / 4.005, -29.99) ，而当时班机正位处巴西东北海岸565公里(经纬度：1°21′39″S 32°49′53″W / -1.36083, -32.83139) ，而当时客机以巡航高度为35000英尺（10670米），时速为467节（每小时840公里）的飞行速度飞行。凌晨1时48分，班机离开巴西大西洋空中管制区域。凌晨2时10分，地面控制台首次收到来自客机飞机通信寻址与报告系统（ACARS）自动发出的故障代码 ，指客机皮氏管、飞行控制系统故障，即因为大气资料惯性基准系统（Air Data Inertial Reference Unit）故障导致自动驾驶系统以及自动推力系统（Auto-thrust System）关闭，以及空中防撞系统切换至故障模式、电传纵系统进入备用模式。1分钟后，客机再次发出后备导航系统内综合传感器结构（Integrated Sensor is Structure）、附属飞行管理系统内惯性基准组件故障。2时13分，客机发出一段警报，指两个的空中资料分析系统运作异常，以及来自飞行管理系统发出的指以及第二飞行电子控制系统故障。2时14分，地面控制台收到一段信息，指机舱增压系统异常，而客机处于经纬度为3°34′40″N 30°22′28″W / 3.5777, -30.3744。一般推测当时客机进入强烈的暴风雨区域并遭遇强烈的乱流。其后飞机失去联系。tall situation and consequently a lack of inputs that would he made it sible to recover from it.易出错

法航空难 高额赔付保险解析

失事过程示意图

这个人本身就很有钱，这份保险是年缴保费24万的，一共交5年（忘记具体缴的年限了）。然后每年领取2.4万，到八十岁有40万的满期金，在附件禚佳春 华为员工，27岁，男。条款中，如果飞机上发生意外身故，赔付保额24万的四十倍

条款大概是这样的，具体数字上可能有点出入

法航447空难的原因分析

以下是BEA于2012年7月发布的报告结论部分的原文（因为机翻错误太多，无法阅读，我个人又没时间一点一点翻，所以直接把原文写上去了）：

The obstruction of the Pitot probes by crystals during cruise was a phenomenon that was known but misunderstood by the iation community at the time of the accident. From an operational perspective, the total loss of airspeed rmation that resulted from this was a failure that was classified in the safety model. After initial reactions that depend upon basic airmanship, it was expected that it would be rapidly diagnosed by pilots and mad where necessary by precautionary measures on the pitch attitude and the thrust, as indicated in the associated procedure.The occurrence of the failure in the context of flight in cruise compley surprised the pilots of flight AF 447. The apparent difficulties with aeroplane handling at high altitude in turbulence led to excessive handling inputs in roll and a sharp nose-up input by the PF. The destabilisation that resul惊讶，同情，难受，害怕。要高高兴兴的过好每一天。ted from the climbing flight path and the evolution in the pitch attitude and vertical speed was added to the erroneous airspeed indications and ECAM messages, which did not with the diagnosis. The crew, progressively becoming de-structured, likely nr understood that it was faced with a “” loss of three sources of airspeed rmation. In the minute that followed the autopilot disconnection, the failure of the attempts to understand the situation and the de-structuring of crew cooperation fed on each other until the total loss of cognitive control of the situation. The underlying behioural hypotheses in classifying the loss of airspeed rmation as “major were not validated in the context of this accident. Confirmation of this classification thus supes additional work on operational feedback that would enable improvements, where required, in crew training, the ergonomics of rmation supplied to them and the design of procedures.The aeroplane went into a sustained stall, signalled by the stall warning and strong buffet. Despite these persistent symptoms, the crew nr understood that they were stalling and consequently nr applied a recovery manoeuvre. The combination of the ergonomics of the warning design, the conditions in which airline pilots are trained and exed to stalls during their professional training and the process of recurrent training does not generate the expected behiour in any acceptable reliable way.In its current form, recognizing the stall warning, n associated with buffet, supes that the crew accords a minimum ll of “legitimacy” to it. This then supes sufficient previous experience of stalls, a minimum of cognitive ailability and understanding of the situation, knowledge of the aeroplane (and its protection modes) and its flight physics. An examination of the current training for airline pilots does not, in general, provide convincing indications of the building and maintenance of the associated skills. More generally, the double failure of the planned procedural responses shows the limits of the current safety model. When crew action is expected, it is always suped that they will be capable of initial control of the flight path and of a rapid diagnosis that will allow them to identify the correct entry in the dictionary of procedures. A crew can be faced with an unexpected situation leading to a momentary but profound loss of comprehension. If, in this case, the suped capacity for initial y and then diagnosis is lost, the safety model is then in “common failure mode”. During this nt, the initial ility to the flight path also made it imsible to understand the situation and to access the planned solution.

Thus, the accident resulted from the following succession of nts:

Inappropriate control inputs that destabilized the flight path;

The late identification by the PNF of the deviation from the flight path and the insufficient correction applied by the PF;

The高星(女) 本钢国贸公司商贸公司 crew not identifying the approach to stall, their lack of immediate response and the exit from the flight envelope;

These nts can be explained by a combination of the following factors:

The feedback mechanis on the part of all those involved that made it imsible:

To identify the repeated non-application of the loss of airspeed rmation procedure and to remedy this,

To ensure that the risk model for crews in cruise included icing of the Pitot probes and its consequences;

The absence of any training, at high altitude, in manual aeroplane handling and in the procedure for ”Vol ec IAS douteuse”;

Task-sharing that was weakened by:

Incomprehension of the situation when the autopilot disconnection occurred, Poor mament of the startle effect that generated a highly charged emotional factor for the two copilots;

The crew not taking into account the stall warning, which could he been due to: A failure to identify the aural warning, due to low exure time in training to stall phenomena, stall warnings and buffet,The appearance at the beginning of the nt of transient warnings that could be considered as spurious,The absence of any visual rmation to confirm the approach-to-stall after the loss of the limit speeds,The sible confusion with an overspeed situation in which buffet is also considered as a symptom,Flight Director indications that may led the crew to beli that their actions were appropriate, n though they were not,The difficulty in recognizing and understanding the implications of a reconfiguration in alternate law with no angle of attack protect

法航空难人的姓名和职业？

辽宁

姓名

肖翔 中科院工程热研究所副研究员

李明文 本钢公司副

张庆波 3.2 Causes of the Accident本钢公司制造部

孙连有 本钢炼铁厂厂长

申作冰 本钢原燃料处处长

陈持平(女) 本钢国贸公司辽本公司副，辽宁副之妻

陈庆伟 35岁,男。两月前抵巴The lack of a clear display in the cockpit of the airspeed inconsistencies identified by the comrs;西办

法航中有9名人。验尸刚刚进行中。