原帖由 norrislaw 於 2009-6-3 23:56 發表 
你都幾有見地 ，不過flightplan唔係你諗咁簡單，最安全唔通真係要反方向向南飛再180度兜圈?
正如現役空中巴士機師所講, 盡可能唔好飛入雷雨雲之中, 最起碼唔係好似今次咁飛入去最惡劣環境的地方...
[ 本帖最後由 hkbw 於 2009-6-4 00:49 編輯 ] |
|
|
殺雞焉用牛刀?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 norrislaw 於 2009-6-4 00:04 發表
呢個係冇絕對的，廿年機=/=有壞都唔出奇，新機=/=唔會壞
有冇聽過捉蛇？冇的話可以虛心請教一下眾多日日對住飛機做野既板友，捉蛇係無分老嫩的 ...
捉蛇都要睇下捉d乜...無啦啦個cockpit 可以成個offline, go blank的話, 呢d係咪可以接受範圍唔需要多講,
尤其係空中巴士這些極高科技的機種.. (不如你爬下個九個post先再慢慢講啦) |
|
|
殺雞焉用牛刀?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 gaupost 於 2009-6-3 23:04 發表 
有d 人係鍾意以篇蓋全啦
747 岩岩推出果陣,pan am o既747
成日有蛇唔可以準時起飛
唔通我又話747唔掂咩
人地好似只係話Airbus的電線有問題，而唔係話成間Airbus唔掂喎。 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 hkbw 於 2009-6-3 01:22 發表
親身經歷又有, Aerospace既同學/教授講既又有..
首先, A380電線唔夠長要重舖一事已經係天大既笑話, 仲攪到要延遲交機..
第二, Airbus個種集百家大成既砌機方式, 品質真係良莠不齊
每次搭Airbus來往, 梗有d電器野 ...
In the 1st case, you can laugh. But you are wrong with the problem - it is not the wiring not being long enough. That is a consequence of the root cause of the problem. At least they have a very matured airframe going into service, offering reliability unmatched by any type at equivalent timescale post-EIS.
In the 2nd case, the sub-assembly approach used by Airbus is a highly common practice adapted in the aerospace industry. Boeing do that on the 737, let alone the 747-8 and the 787. Even in the military field, it is a very common practice as well e.g. F-35 Lightling II, Eurofighter Typhoon, Panavia Tornado etc.
Speaking of IFE failure, these things are built by subcontrator - usually selected by the airlines anyway - and the system is completely separated from the avionics and the airframe. Even other systems like the air-cond (and what do you mean by 機翼等電子設備? There are just hydralics and fuel systems in there which doesn't fail very often) are outsources worldwide - a lot of the systems on Airbus, the avionics for example, actually comes from the States, even the same suppliers to Boeing Aircraft. I fly on planes built by Boeing and Airbus all the time and stuff on Boeing fails just about as much as on Airbus, if anything.
As for your last point of note, Cathay did take up additional A333s well after their "debacle" with the A346. In fact a few are still due for delivery from what I understand. |
評分
-
查看全部評分
|
|
Tinyl Bus Photography - FB Group
|
|
|
|
|
|
基本上Airbus同Boeing的零件製造都是聯合國的，唔會一間廠做晒(而家部份A320直頭在天津做埋組裝)，當然品質上可能會有分別
記得有一次在Megabox玩B737-800模擬機時，途中問過一位教我的現役民航機師(佢飛過A/B記的飛機)一個問題「整體上你覺得Airbus定Boeing好？」，
佢答我Boeing好d，而他其中一個覺得Airbus不好的原因是其品質和用料整體都不及波音好
[ 本帖最後由 volvo_chan 於 2009-6-4 05:28 編輯 ] |
|
|
至于你信不信，我反正信了
|
|
|
|
|
|
有報導指黑盒有可能以後都搵唔返 
綜合咁多份報紙同埋板友黎講, 但我始終都覺得另有內情
1. 出事客機前後有兩班 LH 經過 (同一空域)
2. 機上三位都係好有經驗機長
3. A330 唔係一架舊機, 同時具有先進功能
4. A330 有後備電源, 冇理由連求救訊號都唔發
真係好奇怪 ~
PS. Source: From Yahoo! News ~ |
|
|
LJ7006 = MF5119 = AVD1
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 norrislaw 於 2009-6-4 08:21 發表
哈哈，唔好咁講，係我成日要麻煩Haeco同事幫手捉啫，睇得多都學到野既。
呢d就係實戰經驗，唔係坐幾轉346/744上網睇下forum就可以扮專家講的
D實戰經驗唔好講到得你有先得架...
仲有, 淨係同某D級別既人'研究' 係唔夠既...
空巴D機同波音機質素上既分別, 老實講, 行內人個個都清楚...
你要話自己個套係啱既, 冇人會阻你, 香港係有言論自由,
不過有機會令人發笑得辛苦吧了.. |
|
|
殺雞焉用牛刀?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
無錯，言論自由是有的，如果你要話自己個套係啱既, 亦都冇人會阻你，不過你見有咁多人千辛萬苦咁去糾正你，恐怕誰是誰非一目了然。 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
|
