Viewing page 10 of 84

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

tolerance and merely bend it back until it is. Then write off the card as "recorder within tolerance". This requires teh use of the manufacturer's calibration chart which is a very inaccurate procedure when viewed from a precision readout standpoint. You do not know whether you are on the high or low side of the tolerance. This can amount to errors of over 1000 feet of altitude and 20 knots of airspeed on either side. I would recommend that when the recorder is calibrated, the test tape used for calibration should be retained by the carrier. Some are now doing this.

This test tape should be filed, a chart made up to show what values were recorded for the calibration and both retained until teh next calibration is made for that particular recorder. This test tape can then be read on the same machine which will read the accident tape. From this the latest and most accurate calibration chart can be drawn. Another strong recommendation I have to aid in more accurate calibration is to have the crew press the event button at cruising altitude. At the same time recording in the flight log the altitude and airspeed indicated by the First Officer's panel; the time, heading, barometric pressure, and any estimated "G" froces they may be encountering at the time. This is now being done on one carrier. The information could be used in the event of an accident by going back to a previous flight and together with the flight log from a preceding flight, you could make a comparison between what the pilot was actually seeing and what the recorder was recording. Coupling this information with the aforementioned test tape, you could have a far more accurate readout.

WASHINGTON MEETING
On March 19, 1962 Homer MOuden, BNF, and I attended an FAA meeting in Washington, D.C. on Flight, Voice and Maintenance Recorders. First, John Pahl of the CAB reported that information had been obtained from 26 accidents and incidents from flight data recorders --in 70% of the cases the data was of significant assistance; 26% recorder data which was of some assistance; 4% were of no help; of the 4% one recorder was not found. One was destroyed, on two teh tape had run out and one was not operating. Also, one had not been turned on. At the meeting new parameters were suggested. ALPA's recommendations for additional data were:
1. Control surface movements (or position)
2. Powerplant operation
3. Configuration (gear, flap, spoilers, etc.)
4. Attitude (roll and pitch)
5. Loads on critical structural members, and
6. Microphone closures in relation to time.
Other suggestions were: ambient air temperature, electrical system and cabin pressure. Location of the recorder was discussed. My recommendation is to install the recorders in teh tail section of the aircraft--based on experience with the readout of accident foils I am convinced that in order to have a readout with more dependability, this is a must. I realized the problem of plumbing and errors involved, but these can be compensated for. I feel it is better to have three good parameters, undamaged, that you can correct for, then all damaged and unreadable. We also made a requestfor a resettable direct reading gust load indicator. This can be used for turbulence or hard landing checks.
The aid in locating the flight recorder, various methods were advanced. ALPA recommendations are to have the recorder ejecatble with floatation gear, with a small radio to aid in locating its position. Water dye and smoke would aid if employed. The use of radio active material has been considered, however, the distance it can be detected is

THE AIR LINE PILOT

[[picture with captition]]
O.E. PATTON, aerospace engineer of the CAB's Bureau of Safety, works over pieces of the flight recorder recovered from the wreckage of the Pan American 707 jet which crashed recently in Maryland. Record of the flight is contained on the tape of the badly damaged instrument.