Well:

Airliner near-misses prompt call for changes to 'go-around' rules - U.S. News



As to the current incident, one article I read they took to quoting a little kid who shared his worry they were going to crash into the ground and die. The epitome of poor reporting.

I don't doubt that the passengers were caught off-guard. But 1,600' isn't that much and it was controlled, not like when the elevator jack screw strips.

People have a tendency to be panic prone, and quoting little kids doesn't help that one bit.

My other favorite part was that the maneuver "wasn't explained" until after it happened. Hmmm...as a passenger, I'd far rather the crew be focused on resolving the situation. We can chat about it later, after all, but if we worry about talking beforehand, there may not be any "later."

A little rationality and perspective can go a long way.

You are not getting that from the average person.

That's why the USA is in the current state of affairs that it finds itself. The morons of the world rule the day.

FWIW, the pilots didn't have to do an emergency decent whereby the aircraft is effectively fully unloaded (0g). That's what excites all the idiots.

A push on the yoke that slowly accelerates the aircraft downward over 10 seconds and results in a decent rate of 4000 fpm would achieve the 1600 foot drop in about 30 seconds. More than enough time to avoid a collision.

Spirit flies some variant of the ScareBus 320 -- those have sidesticks not yokes, and would the envelope protection even allow for a 0g descent?

NASA has an aircraft that dives quickly and allows for zero G's in the interior. In this way Astronauts can see what zero G feels like for a few seconds at a time.

The aircraft is nicknamed 'The Vomit Comet' since this seems to be the reaction of some folks that try this.

That's got to hurt when the acceleration turns back towards the positive side..............

Good question...........I'd guess that the software would allow something close to 0g but not quite.

Don't want the people flying around the cabin..............although this has definitely occurred in the past.

Better have a few people dead from smashing their heads on the ceiling than all passengers dead from hitting a large object. Much prefer Boeing's control philosophy of soft limits that can be overridden with more force on the yoke.

Back when I used to fly, I always kept my seat belt buckled throughout the flight. If there was turbulence or sudden maneuvers, my head didn't bang into the cabin ceiling.

..............the DC-7 was quite the popular plane..............

Flight control limits can be easily argued both ways. The A300-600 that crashed in Queens on climbout had control limits and it was still insufficient to prevent stupidity by the pilots.

The A330 that crashed outbound from Rio also had flight control limits. Didn't prevent the pilots from causing a high altitude stall and sit there looking stupid at the gauges for over three minutes............

The B-757 that crashed outbound from Puerto Plata, DR on climbout had no flight control limits. Pilot stalled the aircraft when he reduced power due to faulty airspeed reading on his side. Couldn't figure out that he stalled it despite the stickshaker going wild.

You can't fix stupid.

Did it? The A300/310 are mostly not FBW.

Got links to the full reports? I love reading about accident investigations.

__________________
Whoever said there's nothing more expensive than a cheap Mercedes never had a cheap Jaguar.

83 300D Turbo with manual conversion, early W126 vented front rotors and H4 headlights 401,xxx miles
08 Suzuki GSX-R600 M4 Slip-on 26,xxx miles
88 Jaguar XJS V12 94,xxx miles. Work in progress.
99 Mazda Miata 183,xxx miles.