From Newsgroup: rec.aviation.military

EASA Directive 2014-0266-E responded to a previous event in which incorrect Angle of Attack sensor data caused the autopilot to command a dive that was very difficult to override either by pulling back the column or flipping switches. There are hints on line but not hard proof that the solar
radiation problem might be a similar remote sensor data error. The South Atlantic crash of AF447 was also triggered by the autopilot's response to incorrect sensor data and the 737 MAX issue was related.

The software fix to a hardware error was to make increasing pilot control easier. However JFK Jr's crash was thought to be his graveyard spiral dive resulting from seat-of-the-pants piloting error, the human equivalent to sensor loss. On AF447 the captain made the correct recovery response until
the stall sensor warned him to stop.

https://www.pentestpartners.com/security-blog/airbus-aoa-angle-of-attack-sensor-issue/
"One primary objective would be to have the systems revert to what is called rCyAlternate LawrCO where, at its simplest, the pilots controls have a more direct effect on the control surfaces. ...
However, there wasnrCOt a published method available in the cockpit for pilots to force the airplane systems in to Alternate Law!"

https://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_2014_0266_E.pdf/EAD_2014-0266-E_1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graveyard_spiral

My interest is in learning how others have dealt with sensor and indicator errors and protection device malfunctions in computer control systems, for instance Apollo 11 and 13. The large safety margins and redundancy I design into ground equipment may be too bulky and heavy for flight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_Flight_401
"The crash occurred while the entire flight crew were preoccupied with a burnt-out landing gear indicator light. The captain bumped the yoke on the aircraft, causing it to turn off the autopilot. Due to the focus on the landing gear and the minimal changes in the cockpit, the pilots did not notice. Because of this, the aircraft gradually lost altitude and crashed."

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.aviation.military

On 11/29/25 06:16, Jim Wilkins wrote:

EASA Directive 2014-0266-E responded to a previous event in which
incorrect Angle of Attack sensor data caused the autopilot to command a
dive that was very difficult to override either by pulling back the
column or flipping switches. There are hints on line but not hard proof
that the solar radiation problem might be a similar remote sensor data error. The South Atlantic crash of AF447 was also triggered by the autopilot's response to incorrect sensor data and the 737 MAX issue was related.

Thanks Jim.
I rode those flown by Turkish Airways mid November
from Istanbul to Athens, and then back from Athens
to Istanbul.
Then the big A350 s from and to Sea-Tac.
Very interesting diagrams of crew rest areas up
in top middle on those big suckers.
Sleeping for 8 !?
Emergency descend slides thru what looks like
luggage overhead storage!
Ans schlurp - the crew would be very quickly
back down with the passengers to help them.

The software fix to a hardware error was to make increasing pilot
control easier. However JFK Jr's crash was thought to be his graveyard spiral dive resulting from seat-of-the-pants piloting error, the human equivalent to sensor loss. On AF447 the captain made the correct
recovery response until the stall sensor warned him to stop.

https://www.pentestpartners.com/security-blog/airbus-aoa-angle-of- attack-sensor-issue/
"One primary objective would be to have the systems revert to what is
called rCyAlternate LawrCO where, at its simplest, the pilots controls have a more direct effect on the control surfaces. ...
However, there wasnrCOt a published method available in the cockpit for pilots to force the airplane systems in to Alternate Law!"

https://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_2014_0266_E.pdf/EAD_2014-0266-E_1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graveyard_spiral

My interest is in learning how others have dealt with sensor and
indicator errors and protection device malfunctions in computer control systems, for instance Apollo 11 and 13. The large safety margins and redundancy I design into ground equipment may be too bulky and heavy for flight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_Flight_401
"The crash occurred while the entire flight crew were preoccupied with a burnt-out landing gear indicator light. The captain bumped the yoke on
the aircraft, causing it to turn off the autopilot. Due to the focus on
the landing gear and the minimal changes in the cockpit, the pilots did
not notice. Because of this, the aircraft gradually lost altitude and crashed."

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: rec.aviation.military

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:10gev6a$3e470$1@dont-email.me...

... There are hints on line but not hard proof that the solar
radiation problem might be a similar remote sensor data error. ... --------------------------------------
https://www.flyingpenguin.com/?p=74567
"While solar radiation has remained predictably dangerous, a specific
software change removed needed integrity controls, as transistor shrinkage increased risks, and release tests clearly werenrCOt being done thoroughly enough."

While avionics hardware design and programming weren't in my technician's
job description I did pay attention to what might go wrong.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2