Talk:Air data module

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Moved from Talk:Air France Flight 447/Archive 4/Archives/ 3#Recurrent Material in Airspeed inconsistency[edit]

I have updated the Airspeed inconsistency section as per the discussion above.

  • An illustration of the positioning of the Pitot and static probes along with the arrangement of ADM with that system.
  • A brief discussion (paragraph) of the information flow from Pitot/Static to ADIRU.
  • A new wiki page titled air data module (weeeeeeeee) has been created, and one is free to discuss ad-liberty how many ADM are on an Airbus A3XX, B777, 787, 747-800 or whatever. It is linked to the paragraph.
  • The paragraph is referenced with appropriately.

Cheers.PB666 yap 15:32, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the misleading diagram on the static system, ADIRUs, etc. because it misleads the reader into thinking the AIDRUs are located at the front of the cockpit. They are located in the avionics compartment, which is below the floor of the plane and well aft of the cockpit. The ARINC 429 Data bus information is also not only confusing, but amounts to OR, which we are supposed to avoid. The SAI (standby airspeed indicator) is mislabled as just an airspeed indicator. A diagram would be a good idea, but it must be created by someone who really knows what he is doing, so that it will not mislead the average, unsophisticated reader of Wikipedia. EditorASC (talk) 02:05, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Balogne, no reference for the cockpit is given. No vertical position is implied, and as a matter of fact if you look at the Diagram from the manual if we go by your logic the ADIRU is well behind the DCU and the PFD. Stanby Aispeed indicator, OK that is legit, it will be relabeled, the diagram is extracted from the Manual, so . . . .Any graphics on wiki are made by people willing to make them, I guess you don't understand this, not generally by whiners. If you have a problem with a graphic, then you take it and improve it yourself, and if you can't, well, . . . . . We go back a few days ago and we read your response, you can't even describe the most important aspects of a stall, and here we are and you are telling the I falsely position the ADIRU (In a 2D top down diagram) that the ADIRU is infront of the cockpit instead of underneath. I had to tell you this but if you want to nit-pick, the Pitots are 100 fold exaggerated relative to relative size to AC, not to mention the static port and lines. This is why they are called I-l-l-u-s-t-r-a-t-i-o-n-s (I have another hint, despite what you see on the cartoons rabbits cant actually talk, nor ducks or mice), sheesh how pedantic can a person be.ROFL.PB666 yap 05:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Illustration of the airspeed indication and detection system on fly-by-wire aircraft




I also removed this very poorly written paragraph, which uses incorrect nomenclature, not to mention making the subject more confusing and misleading:

"The system of airspeed determination on fly-by-wire aircraft is composed of multiple sensors called air data modules (ADMs) which feed information to air data reference part of the ADIRU.[115] The Pitot probe, lines and attached ADM send pressure data (pressure increases in the pitot tube as the aircraft moves forward) to the ADIRU.[115] This pressure data is compared to the data sent to the ADIRU by the static port ADMs. The ADIRU use this and other data to determine indicated airspeed. There is also a backup system, shared by ADIRU-3 and is composed of a Pitot tube and 2 static ports, pneumatic lines and a standby 'traditional' airspeed indicator (and an altimeter on the static line) in the cockpit. The probes are electrically heated to prevent icing up.[115]"

  1. A phrase like "...system of airspeed determination..." simply is not the kind of nomenclature used in manuals, which explain the layout and function of avionic systems.
  1. This statement is just plane wrong: "...fly-by-wire aircraft is composed of multiple sensors called air data modules (ADMs)" The ADMs are not sensors!
  2. Nor are they there because the plane is a FBW plane.
  1. There are only 4 types of sensors on the plane, which supply information to the ADIRUs: pitot probes (3), static probes (6), angle of attack sensors (AOA) (3) and total air temperature probes (TAT) (2). All probes are heated to prevent icing. I repeat: ADMs are not properly referred to as sensors!
  1. And, this is the first time I have ever heard of a "traditional airspeed indicator." No such animal, in aviation nomenclature. Besides these specific criticisms, the entire paragraph only adds confusing to the article and that is the most important reason why it had to be removed. EditorASC (talk) 02:53, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Answer: The task at hand here is to limit speculation by limiting the scope of the argument. If I get into the full line of data processing then it becomes original research. So that we stick with what we have in the public sphere discussions of Pitot tubes and ADIRU, then we contain the scope of the argument. However to grapple the specific problem that must be contained, otherwise we venture into original research is that aspect of airspeed that touch off the computer errors. Pitot failure and ADIRU off line. Lets go over this, very specifically so that we can begone with this fuzzy thinking. There is no information suggesting the involvement of TAT sensor (temperature gauge) or AOA sensors (Angle of Attack), therefore there is no reason to mention these as they fall outside the scope and open up the original research argument.
  1. Answer: Lets go back to the very basics, A pitot tube points in the direction from which air flows across the surfaces of the aircraft. By intercepting air flow around the aircraft in a dynamic equilibrium it creates a dome of pressurized air in front of the opening of the tube, called 'Ram Air' and anywhere within the tube, as long as the tube does not loose much air by leakage, will have the same pressure. That is pretty much what it is. A static port on the other hand measures ambient pressure, as a consequence the holes for the static ports are either on the side of the pitot tube or the side of the aircraft. "8 ADMs convert pneumatic data from the Pitot Tubes or Static ports into numerical form".(An exact quote from the manual) Hmmm. If they were not numerical first then what are they, lets look up pneumatic. The branch of mechanics that deals with the mechanical properties of gases.(Source Wiktionary). In other words that data is the force that the gas (i.e air) is creating, on surfaces with a sensor, a sensor that then converts that pressure data into numerical values. We could have a situation where the gas data is converted to analog signal or a voltage amplitude and that information is then sent to the ADM. But the diagram is very specific about the type of lines that convey the information thes are pressure lines, and they go directly to the Standby Altimeter and ASI. IOW, that manual is not only describing the type of data being converted by the ADM but it is graphically describing a pitot tube connect to a pitot line that is connected to an ADM. Not only does it show the lines, but it dithers the lines grey and labels the line in the legend "Pitot lines". The manual that you referenced disagrees with you almost in entirity. The pitot tube is labeled in the diagram. The pitot lines are labeled in the diagram and the ADM at the end of the lines is the sensor which converts gas-mechanical-force data into numerical data. You got a problem with the diagram I suggest you take it up with Airbus. This is just like the discussion of Stall. I really hate to be patronizing, but if you will look at "Probes schematic" (http://www.smartcockpit.com/pdf/plane/airbus/A330/systems/0019/ Airbus Training, simulator, flight crew operating manual, Navigation ADIRS, 1.34.10 P2, Seq 001, Rev 03 so that we can be absolutely certain you are on the right page). I want you to look at the bottom of the page, it shows a legend and that legend says "Pitot lines" "static lines" and "Electrical lines". Now I want you to follow the static lines from the third, static port (See "probes location" above "Probes schematic") on both sides. You should note that the pneumatic lines "T" into each other and they feed 3 devices, The standby ASI, the standby Altimeter and the ADM. The static ports (see "probes location") for the ADIRU-3 static ADM are located distally from the ADM. Remote ADM is also the case with the Standby Pitot tube. The sensors are not attached to the Pitot external appendage or the static ports but to pneumatic lines that carry the gas pressure. If you can provide a different source of information other than the reference above which justifies your position please do so, and I will revert your writing back, otherwise I have to remove your sentences.
  1. Answer: There are a great many sensors on an A330, RTFM, AND, the ADM are gas pressure sensors.

    ....The air data module includes a housing that is adapted to be mounted to an external surface of an aircraft, and includes at least a sensor compartment and an interface electronics compartment formed therein. A pitot-static probe is coupled to the housing and extends therefrom, and has a static pressure passageway that is in fluid communication with the sensor compartment. Air data module that ensures sufficient air data performance after exposure to relatively high overpressure

    Need Pictures? Honeywell, Air Data Module, PG1152BC - Single sensor air data module - note the pneumatic line port on the side.
  2. Answer: 'Traditional' may not be the best choice for this since I'm afficionado of the DC6 and DC7 aircraft I consider the ASI from the 1940s to 1970s 'traditional' along with dead reckoning, NDBs, etc.
On the bright side, at least this time you got the reference right, that's a start. Problem is once again you add alot of trivia that has nothing to do with airspeed determination, basically you have run right out of the introduction page of the navigation manual, this time putting it into more your own words, another good start. However if we engage in all the sensors in an A330 then the discussion is no longer about the finely defined topic that is discussed by BEA, Air France and Airbus relating to this incident and it becomes original research, consequently it does not belong on the page. Are there any more arguments that you want to engage in and found to be wrong.PB666 yap 05:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response to PB666 yap:
  1. “A pitot tube points in the direction of air flow.”Once again, you have it bass akwards. The relative air thru which the airplane passes, flows from the nose to the tail. If the tube pointed in the direction of that relative flow of air, the tube would be pointing towards the tail, instead of the nose. To the contrary, the pitot tube points in the direction from which the relative flow of air is coming.
  2. “The task at hand here is to limit speculation by limiting the scope of the argument. If I get into the full line of data processing then it becomes original research.” You are constantly engaging in OR. Your going to a different source----to justify your using the “sensor” label as a definition of the ADM----is classic, bold and naked OR. The only source which has thus far been accepted as a “reliable source” for explaining the layout, functions and definitions of the A330 Avionics, is the Smart Cockpit Training Guide [115]. That one, which several Wiki editors have referenced (indicates consensus acceptance as a reliable source for that kind of information), contradicts your use of the word “sensor,” and instead lists 4 types of sensors, which feed information to the ADIRUs, and the ADM is not listed as one of them. When you then resort to the Honeywell page, for your contradictory definition, as well as for the source of your ARINC 429 comments, you are engaging in blatant OR, which is a clear violation of Wiki Policy. In addition, you are adding confusion to the article by inserting a definition which is contrary to the A330 training manual.
  3. “The manual that you referenced disagrees with you almost in entirity [sic].” That statement is false. All the rest that follows amounts to a “snow job” which does nothing to explain anything nor does it say why what I wrote is inaccurate. The fact that the ADM has a compartment to receive the pneumatic pressure information coming in from the pitot and static probes, so that another part of the ADM can convert the pneumatic data into numeric data, which can then be sent to the ADIRUs, does not mean that the ADM itself is a “sensor.” It is a transducer that has the main function of converting one kind of information, to another kind of information, so that the computers can receive and interpret the converted data. Again, your devotion to your own OR, accomplishes nothing but to add confusion to the article. The manual which you claim disagrees with me, in fact disagrees with you. It does not define the ADM as a “sensor,” and it explicitly excludes the ADMs from the list of sensors which provide data to the ADIRUs.
  4. “There are a great many sensors on an A330, RTFM, AND, the ADM are gas pressure sensors” First part is irrelevant. The A330 Navigation Manual is talking about the sensors which provide information to the ADIRUs.
  5. That manual lists 4, and the ADMs are not on that list.
  6. The fact that the ADMs contain a compartment to sense the input from the pitot and static probes, does not turn the entire ADM into a “sensor” The ADMs receive the pneumatic information and convert it to numeric information, so that the ADIRUs can make sense of it. When you insist upon calling the ADMs mere “sensors” in direct contradiction of the A330 Navigation Manual, then you are not only engaging in OR, but you are adding confusion and ambiguity to the article. It is not proper to refer to any module or part as a "sensor," unless the sole function of that part is to sense something. Whenever a module or part has a multifunctional purpose, then the correct nomenclature should reflect that. An ADM is no more just a "sensor," just because it has a part in it which senses inputted information, anymore than you are just a "mouth," just because you contain a mouth in your structure.
  7. “'Traditional' may not be the best choice for this since I'm afficionado [sic]of the DC6 and DC7 aircraft I consider the ASI from the 1940s to 1970s 'traditional' along with dead reckoning, NDBs, etc. Irrelevant and it constitutes more of your engaging in OR. The correct nomenclature in aviation is well known. Your insistence upon resorting to other personal knowledge information, violates the OR and POV rules. It appears that you are trying to turn this article into your own personal weblog. That too, is a violation of Wiki Policy.
  8. Your diagram cannot be allowed to remain, since it is very misleading----makes it appear that the ADIRUs are in the front of the Cockpit, right behind the firewall. Your noting where the nose of the aircraft is, in that diagram, implies that all other items located are also in the area of the plane, as you indicate in the diagram. And, of course, that simply is not true, so it cannot be allowed to remain. And, the ARINC 429 part of that diagram amounts to OR and that too violates Wiki policy.
  9. As a fellow Wiki Editor, I have the responsibility to remove or reword confusing, misleading and false information, as well as to remove statements which amount to an expression of your personal OR and POV. It makes no difference that an editor who constantly accuses others of engaging in OR, is doing it constantly himself, i.e., he cannot gain immunity for his violation of that policy, simply by alleging that many others are engaging in OR. Thus, I will continue to remove that diagram and your associated paragraph, until such time as you amend them in a way that will eliminate the confusing, the misleading, the OR and the false information that is now in them. EditorASC (talk) 11:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Responses
1. Answers: That is not what I meant to say, some wording was diced up because it was a hefty reply.
2,4,5. Answer: Where is your reference?. Are you accusing Honeywell of conducting a Snowjob? They call them "single sensor ADM", "dual Sensor ADM". "Boeing MD-10 and Airbus A320/A330/A340 families, configured to provide digital pressure signals to the Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (ADIRU), is clearly the component of choice.""Key Features: . . . Exceeds all GATM/RVSM requirements, Certified to DO-178B Level A, ARINC 429 Digital Interface, 98% BIT coverage, 0.02% FS accuracy, Altitude: -2,000 to +80,000 ft."http://www51.honeywell.com/aero/common/documents/Air_Data_Module.pdf This is not original research, this is what an ADM is Along with a very nice picture which clearly shows the port for the bus and also the connection for the pneumatic line. A key component of ADM #HG1152AA is a sensor with a "Range Ps or Pt: 43 In Hg " If you want to have a prolonged discussion on the ADM take it to the ADM page, this is not the place. This is all I will respond hereforth about ADM, since prolonging this discussion only gives you the chance to create more misinformation.
3. Answer: I was responding to "There are only 4 types of sensors on the plane", which is clearly wrong, and by your standard above, original research.
6. Answer: I did change the wording, as you pointed it out.
8,9. Answer: Then you should try to better to get your information right. Had you made the comment about the nose previously I would have changed it. ARINC 429 is listed above as one of two buses for the ADM. The image is also used on the ADM page which it its primary function, and so the ARINC 429 completely fits with a diagram concerning ADM, whether or not it is used on this main really depends.PB666 yap 14:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the sake of the ADM page the diagram has been changed as per the suggestions of ASC, the nose label and colorations were removed and the ARINC 429 was replaced by "communication". I still think the image can be improved since we as above we know there is also a maintenance bus. Since this image is now clearly in the realm of what an ADM is, I think the depiction of the maintenance bus is a good idea. I am going to leave this discussion here for now, but It will be moved to the ADM page soon as per the changes of Socrates and that no news has mentioned ADM it really does not belong here to begin with.PB666 yap 16:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree fully with all the comments above by User:EditorASC and will support his efforts to ensure that all the OR is removed from this article. Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:05, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Socrates, then you should check his sources carefully before you make that statement.PB666 yap
This particular discussion is focused on your contributions, not his, however I'm currently checking all content regardless of who added it. Socrates2008 (Talk) 14:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have provided references for just about everything I have said. I did not want to add the paragraph on system structure to begin with, he kept readding the bugger. I was only trying to create a compromise situation. The solution you provided is more than adequate, for now.PB666 yap 15:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[Section was refactored]. The topic of discussing ADM on the main page has been settled, it is too technical and a footnote was added. It no longer belongs in this forum as this is a discussion on how to improved the article on the main page, the Air data module has its own page. PB666 yap 14:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Air data module. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Air data module. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Air_data_module&oldid=1198201842"