I doubt it. While the B2s themselves are seen by the public more often today (airshows, etc.), info on B2s is still closely guarded.

The Internet provides a valuable service to everyone... spys included. The focus of those cyber attacks isn't to shut our networks down... it's to plant "bugs" and quietly take our data.

This switch to fly-by-wire could be compared to fully hydraulic vs. hydraulic assist steering...

On the B2 I believe the cause was a pitot tube not having the "Remove Before Flight" tag removed.

As for Fly-by-wire....not all comercial aircraft have it....it started with the A320 and Boeing first put it on the 777.

However, there is a fundemental difference in how Airbus implements fly by wire vs Boeing....Airbus wants the computer to do all the thinking for the pilot...pilot says..."I would like to go that direction"....computer says "Ok, I'll make it so...provided it fits within my programming." But with Boeing, the "I want to go there" is treated as "Sure thing boss...what ever you say."....with a few bells and whistles thrown in.....

You have to understand that the primary purpose of fly by wire is not to take the work away from the pilot but rather reduce weight and inprove performance....electrical wires are a lot lighter and more reliable than control cables....

The Boeing 787 takes it a step further....no central hydraulic system(s). Each actuator is a self contained unit....it has power and a control signal going to it....in fact, redundant power feeds....it generates it's own hyd pressure....hence, if a unit has a hyd leak....only that unit is affected....and those electric wires feeding the actuator are a lot lighter than hyd lines.....

For those of you who really want the scoop on comercial aircraft..Flightblogger is one of the best sources.

Computers have their place, but not in control type things.

It's like the guy that bought a new car - the GPS asked him where he wanted to go.
He said "Applebees."
The computer said "you can't afford Applebees, I'm taking you to McDonalds."

Most commercial jets still have some hydraulic amplification control over control surfaces,
While some of the military aircraft are of such unusual and extreme design that a human can't fly them without crashing them, so they are fully fly by wire.

F-16, F/A-18, Stealth 'Fighter' (which is actually a bomber) and the B-2 'Flying Wing' are examples of planes that can't be flown without computers to limit parameters.

The planes are simply too unstable for a human to control on anything but the most simple maneuvers.

The orignal 'Flying Wing' program was shelved because the planes kept flipping over backwards,
But the idea was kept around since the since the design is so efficient.. (All lift surfaces and no unused drag surfaces)

ANYWAY,
Boeing (and the rest of the US 'Jumbo' or 'Heavy' jet industry) still uses a Hydraulic over Hydraulic amplifier system that was first invented by Howard Hughes for his military lifter The HK-1 or the military designation, H-4 Hercules ('H' for 'Heavy),
(HK-1/H-4 known to most as the 'Spruce Goose')

Which laid the ground work for most 'Heavy Lifters' we use today.

I think Boeing has one 'Fly By Wire' plane, but that's the only one I know about from the US.

Airbus did fly by wire from the outset, which the fly by wire system held the plane up for over 5 years, and most agree it has 'Bugs' still...

And Airbus has the annoying habit of tails falling off for no apparent reason... About any old hard landing or tail drag will do it!
I know that one hasn't be resolved yet! They just had two cases in the last year!

There are several upgrades since then, but as demonstrated time and time again,
The pilots CAN FLY a commercial aircraft right into the ground...
They will get warnings, stick shakers, audio & visual warnings, and some will even attempt to correct the air craft, but in the end with commercial aircraft, the pilot still has the last word...

With military 'Fly By Wire' aircraft, unless they are switched to 'Combat' conditions, they CAN NOT fly the aircraft into the ground...
The computers will simply level and/or recover the aircraft from what ever dangerous situation it's in...

Now, if the guy flies into the tail of an aircraft carrier,
or flies into a mountain in an aircraft that isn't equipped with ground imaging radar, that's the pilot's fault, not the aircraft...

In the case of at least 3 different B-2 aircraft, they simply flipped over backwards, or nosed into the ground shortly after takeoff,
And a glitch was found in a sensor/computer interface, and according to the Air Farce, it's been fixed...
AND,
According to the Air Force, the B-2 can fly complete missions WITHOUT THE PILOTS...
Take off, refuel, drop payload, return and land with 'Hands Off' controls...
Pretty interesting since this is the strategic bomber that took the place of the B-52 for deliver of nuclear weapons...
-----------------------------

Flight control computers...
It's like traction control on your car!

Good thing to keep control when you hydroplane or slide on the highway at speed,
Bad thing if you are trying to do a burnout or rock the vehicle out of a snow drift!

There really sould be some end to this BS...

If not...

Carry On!


Dale

I guess it would have been the end of it...
If you hadn't felt the need to pad your post count again!

Austria isn't down under. That's Australia. I didn't do well in geography either, but know at least that much.

You would be correct, I misread the post...
You get the 'Taz' award for spell checking!

You just had to bring my name into this didn't you.

The difference between Austria and Australia is a lot more than spelling.



I don’t think Dale’s comment was limited to just this particular thread. I think it is to the BS you spread in general.


I’m no aviation expert, but:

The information I’ve seen differs. The Airbus A300 was not fly by wire. The information I have read agrees with what JeepDawg posted.

I know of one Airbus A300 crash, American Airlines Flight 587 on Nov. 12, 2001 in New York after takeoff from John F. Kennedy Airport that kind of fits your description.
Personally, I think you fell asleep with your television on and tuned to either AMC or TCM. While you were sleeping, the Jimmy Stewart movie, "No Highway in the Sky" came on and the audio cause you to dream the whole thing.



One of the passengers killed on American Airlines Flight 587 was Hilda Yolanda Mayol, a 26-year-old American woman on her way to vacation in her native Dominican Republic. Two months earlier, on September 11, Mayol worked at a restaurant on the ground floor of the World Trade Center and escaped before the building collapsed.

Another coincidence, this stuff happens all the time. It’s not fate, bad luck or juju but simply caused by the number of people in the world. The odds are simply that sometimes someone will escape death only to be killed a short time later.


Can you support that? The HK-1 was for Hughes and Kaiser. When Kaiser withdrew from the project, it became H-4. I would have assumed the “H” was for Hughes. If not, what happened to Heavy-1 thru 3?




The information I have seen is that ONE B-2 has crashed. That was on 23 February 2008 at Andersen Air Force Base in Guam. It did not flip over on its back, it stalled on takeoff and the left wing hit the ground. The stall was blamed on moisture in air-data sensors.

Do you have any references for your “at least 3” other B-2 crashes that flipped over backwards? This wasn’t one of them.


As I said, I’m no expert on these matters but for some reason, there is a huge discrepancy between your stories and what I have seen elsewhere. You have shown a long time habit of just making stuff up as you go along. I think this is more of the same, but maybe my information is wrong here.

Hey TAZ and Dale - you guys know just about everything -

There's a question that needs answering - you guys would know.

Cows and horses eat pretty much the same diet, but why does their poop look different?