Crash A400M MSN23 Seville

“The AOT requires operators to perform one-time specific checks of the electronic control units [ECU] on each of the aircraft’s engines before next flight, and introduces additional detailed checks to be carried out in the event of any subsequent engine or ECU replacement.”

Paul a écrit:Le FADEC du TP400 a été développé par FADEC International (BAE + Safran).

Vector a écrit:

Paul a écrit:Le FADEC du TP400 a été développé par FADEC International (BAE + Safran).

Je pensais plutôt au FCU qu'au FADEC, mais merci de me le rappeler

Jeannot, c'est quoi un "effet de bord" ?

The crash of an Airbus A400M airlifter that killed four people on May 9 may have been caused by new software that cut off the engine-fuel supply, industry sources have said.

Four company personnel, including both test pilots, died when the aircraft—which had been destined for the Turkish air force—crashed on agricultural land north of Seville San Pablo Airport shortly after takeoff on its first flight.

Two flight-test engineers were pulled from the wreckage and remain in the hospital.

Sources have told Aviation Week that aircraft MSN23, destined for Turkey, featured new software that would trim the fuel tanks, allowing the aircraft to fly certain military maneuvers.

The sources state that the exact sequence of events is not yet clear, nor is it clear whether all four engines failed at some point. Some reports have suggested three engines failed. There also seems to have been a trimming issue leading to strong banking that was not recoverable.

The fuel supply was re-established, but not quickly enough for recovery to safe flight.

Details about the software have emerged as Airbus Defense and Space requested all operators of its A400M airlifter conduct checks on electronic control units (ECUs) fitted to the TP400 turboprop engines on the aircraft.

Airbus alerted the five air arms operating the transport aircraft to perform one-time specific checks of the ECUs on each of the aircraft’s engines before the next flight. The company also has introduced additional detailed checks, to be carried out in the event of subsequent engine or ECU replacement.

The company said these checks were necessary to “avoid potential risks in any future flights,” and adds that the results have been shared with the official investigation team.

In a statement, the company said the alert had resulted from its internal analysis and was issued as “part of the continued airworthiness activities, independently from the ongoing official investigation [into the accident].”

Admin a écrit:Ce qui parait quand même étonnant c'est d'avoir un nouveau logiciel qui semble avoir des bugs sur un avion de série... il y a des avions de tests pour ça non ?

Vector a écrit:Ça s'appelle une analyse de régression et ça fait partie du processus de mise à niveau de tout logiciel.
J'ai comme l'impression qu'on nous bourre le mou !

JujuY a écrit:

Vector a écrit:Ça s'appelle une analyse de régression et ça fait partie du processus de mise à niveau de tout logiciel.
J'ai comme l'impression qu'on nous bourre le mou !

Dans mon secteur (les trains), ce boulot de test c'est plutôt nommé de la non-régression

Admin a écrit:Tu passes encore des crans?

Extracting the information wasn’t simple and in one case involved sending the box to its manufacturer, L-3 Communications, in the U.S., Mr. Enders said.

Marwan Lahoud, directeur de la stratégie du groupe aéronautique européen, s’exprimait après avoir eu connaissance, la veille, pour la première fois des examens des enregistreurs de vol. Le programme de contrôle des moteurs aurait été mal installé lors de l'assemblage final, ce qui aurait conduit à une panne de moteurs et au crash,