Airbus A320 Control Problem Case Study Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Airbus A320 Control Problem fount Study - Essay ExampleThe side sticks reacted oppositely such that when the side stick on the remunerate was controlled, the plane moved in the opposite direction and vice versa. After the plane moved to a height of FL120 the crewmembers noticed the abnormality and sought to land the plane safely for further checking. The maintenance brass instrument group took over the plane and repaired the plane but did not realize the fatal error they did art object trying to repair the plane. No damage occurred to the plane and no injuries occurred to the people on board. This paper discusses and analyzes the findings of the melody investigation police squad and makes the distinguishing mistakes d matchless on the plane by the teams handling the repair. Research Findings and Analysis The team investigating the fatal error first recognized that the plane was on maintenance two long time even in the lead the flight and the plane had indicated the problem. T he problem affected both ELAC rate one and ELAC number two. The errors were both visible through the computer transmission. The elevator aileron computer controls the pricker angle of the plane. The researchers found emerge that despite repairing the elevator aileron computer, a bent pin on elevator aileron computer number one was not replaced and not repaired. The investigation besides reveals that during the repair of ALAC number one, the entire rewiring process was incorrect. The command and the proctor channels faced alteration when the technicians inverted the whole wiring system after getting manifold on which diagram to use on the manufacturers manual. The wire connects the plug of ELAC to the plane for ease of monitoring the back angle of the plane and other conditions of the plane. Due to lack of enough experience by both the engineers and the crewmembers, the errors remained undiscovered and almost led to massive losses and death. Flight controlled check group are to be fault for failing to realize the error. The report argues that the error occurred due to the following reasons. There was an unclear information close the planes diagrams that resulted to abnormal wiring of the control and monitor channels. The researchers believe that a wrong diagram ca apply the problem. The research findings also indicate serious differences between the manufacturers and the engineers on the maintenance. The report argues based on the data difference used by manufacturers and the maintenance team in correcting the errors of the plane. The findings also indicate that the unambiguous instructions from the manufacturer could beat led to the fatal error. According to the report, the analysts argue that the insufficient functionality of the quality assurance services undermined the quality of the die done by the maintenance and the flight control checkers. This is mainly due to the two separate groups working distinctively separate failing to identify and not ice the problem. The high authority members of the organization is also to level as they did not pass their tests in ensuring that sufficient supervision and maintenance was done to the plane before declared twin for transport. The following defenses were broken while trying to correct the error on the plane. On 18th March 2001 when the pane signaled an error message on ELAC number two, the maintenance group ought to name corrected the mistake instead of doing a RESET. Another defense broken is that the crew passed the plane fit for travel while they had not fully corrected the mis