Airbus update on A320 Family precautionary fleet action
Posted by madman320@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 269 comments
Posted by madman320@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 269 comments
MacGibber@reddit
Lots of computer components can fail because of radiation with is why components need to be shielded or designed and hardened to not be impacted.
BoringBob84@reddit
You don't "shield" against stray neutrons without carrying around tons of lead. You have to design the hardware and software with features like watchdog reset, error-checking, etc. to mitigate it.
hughk@reddit
Stray neutrons cause problems but they are rare. It is more likely to be a xharg d particle of some kind. They are more likely to cause bits to flip too.
It usually isn't shielding. Rather using two or more systems in critical areas, self checking logic and error correcting memory. There are software changes too like ensuring that critical data is stored in multiple places.
Ungrammaticus@reddit
Took me a second to figure out what a xharg d particle is, I’m really not up on these newfangled quantum particles
BoringBob84@reddit
Exactly! 👍
Ungrammaticus@reddit
You can shield against stray neutrons with just a thin layer of Boron-11, unless the stray neutrons are extremely high energy.
…Unfortunately cosmic rays typically are extremely high energy.
Gullible_Goose@reddit
It’s funny that to this day whenever I get reminded of cosmic rays and bit flips, I immediately without fail think of Mario teleporting up an entire level in SM64
Those who know, know!
JamesWildDev@reddit
As an ex-software developer I'm struggling a bit to read that rolling back a software update improves protection against a single-upset event as anything other than cover for a botched software update. That would imply that the previous version had integrity checks which are missing or disabled from the newer version.
My suspicion is heightened by the fact that this has happened once in over 300,000,000 flight hours and every jet with a specific software update is grounded, very quickly.
I really hope I'm wrong here, but this looks like an attempt to dodge liability, I've seen this playbook from the software industry before. I hope the injured recover quickly and fully.
Techhead7890@reddit
It seems that L104 was a relatively major upgrade that added a lot of features, increasing the amount of situations where automatic flight corrections would be applied. So I guess it's a sort of teething issue. https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/a320-grounding-linked-to-software-update-designed-to-protect-against-in-flight-loss-of-control/165521.article
bobblebob100@reddit
They arent grounded with immediate effect. They can fly until midnight tonight unaltered, however most airlines have done the works already
mpg111@reddit
so users will have to run Airbus Update and reboot?
Large_Yams@reddit
Apt-update (airbus package tool).
ttman05@reddit
Don’t forget to sudo!
j_mcc99@reddit
Don’t forget to apt-upgrade. Update only updates the local repo.
BoringBob84@reddit
It is only available on Snap.
Large_Yams@reddit
Nah that implies it's inferior. Airbus have done this right. It's a shame it happened but they correctly jumped on it.
crankkpad@reddit
Will it run on my PDL
M6Df4@reddit
Have they tried turning it off and on again?
Adjutant_Reflex_@reddit
Fun fact: that was quite literally the fix for a 787 software issue.
M6Df4@reddit
Not a pilot so I’m curious, is it really that uncommon to shut off/restart the software? I’d have thought if the fix was literally “restart”, it wouldn’t have been much of an issue anyway?
Adjutant_Reflex_@reddit
In this case it was a very uncommon scenario where a plane was left powered on for nearly two months (51 days, to be exact.)
DutchBlob@reddit
Which might cause issues if a Dreamliner needs to divert to the nearest available planet when earth is closed due to IROPS
Fantastic-Title-2558@reddit
just run the Critical Update Notification Tool
patrick_thementalist@reddit
My Etihad flight out of Abu Dhabi on Friday morning on a A320(sharklet) was shifted to another A320 ceo craft due to an 'issue' with the initial craft. was this related to this particular incident?
bobblebob100@reddit
Doubt it on Friday morning
BabyNuke@reddit
What is the "recent event" they're referencing here?
madman320@reddit (OP)
It was an incident involving a JetBlue A320 that experienced an uncommanded nose-down pitch
Accident: Jetblue A320 near Tampa on Oct 30th 2025, inflight upset causes injuries
justvims@reddit
Pretty bad. I also just watched a video about Quanta’s 72 an A330 with a similar issue but totally unrelated with the PRIM. Same uncontrolled pitch down type behavior. Pretty scary stuff.
Drmcwacky@reddit
In that circumstance wasn't it they never really determined the ultimate cause of it? Iirc they investigated a number of things but couldn't pin down a cause.
0asisX3@reddit
They figured a bit flipped in one of the three ADIRUs. From there I think the only plausible answer is cosmic radiation
Drmcwacky@reddit
I mean there's far more plausible causes then simply cosmic rays. There is loads of things that can cause a bit flip, hardware issues for one.
iampiolt@reddit
There’s a pretty fascinating Radiolab about bit flips and this incident.
BabyNuke@reddit
Thank you!
trying_to_adult_here@reddit
Probably the JetBlue 1230 uncommanded pitch down from October 30th
https://airlinegeeks.com/2025/11/05/a320s-sudden-descent-linked-to-faulty-computer/
madman320@reddit (OP)
Update: EAD is out
https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2025-0268-E
juusohd@reddit
Thankfully they allow a repositioning flight so it makes things slightly more bearable. I wonder however what will be the parts availability for the 103+ ELAC
Air320@reddit
I believe it's a software fix which takes around 2-5hrs to upload.
supersimpleusername@reddit
Did I misunderstand the AD, the whole computer is required to be replaced.
Air320@reddit
Depending on the aircraft that might be true. Some ac natively don't support 104 and had to be upgraded. To downgrade them would require the previous software as well as the previous computer. The ac which support both versions can simply be uploaded with the older version
It_Is1-24PM@reddit
Airframes with ELAC B L104 need a hardware replacement. Airframes with ELAC B L103+ can have a software update.
Air320@reddit
No. Both 104 & 103+ are the names of different software versions. The software is being rolled back to the previous stable version with is 103+.
The ac requiring hardware replacements are mostly old non neo ac whose hardware couldn't support the optional 104 and were upgraded with hardware to support the 104. This upgrade for old ac was optional and most non neo ac don't have it and aren't affected.
Novacc_Djocovid@reddit
A comparison chart further down says ceos with 104 need a hardware replacement.
awayheflies@reddit
Its not entirely how it works tho. Its only if the plane has a non field loadable unit. But that not depended on ceo vs neo. You can have a ceo with 104 software on a loadable ELAC in which case no hardware change is necessary. Simply reverting the software.
buckket@reddit
So it's a customer option to have field loadable units or is there another reason for this differentiation?
Novacc_Djocovid@reddit
That makes sense, thank you. So the hardware replacement is basically a software update by swapping the planes ROM with one that contains the target version?
awayheflies@reddit
No, hardware would be the entire computer. When we do software updates we load it straight onto the computer from a loading port
lambda-person@reddit
Is it possible to know based on airplane name if it will need software or part replacement ? I take flight tuesday on Airbus A321-251NX :(
awayheflies@reddit
No its not. But if it flies its cause they confirm they have the right software. The directive is to be carried out before next flights
blonded_olf@reddit
That isn't an A320
lambda-person@reddit
It's the whole family.
747ER@reddit
The only thing the name “A321-251NX” tells us is that it’s an A321NEO with CFMI engines.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your comment or post has been automatically removed from /r/aviation. Posts/Comments from new accounts are automatically removed by our automated systems. We, and many other large subreddits, do this to combat spam, spambots, and other activities that are not condusive to the sub. In the meantime, participate on Reddit to build your acouunt age and this restriction will go away. Also, please familiarize yourself with this subreddit's rules, which you can find in the sidebar or by clicking this link. Do not contact the moderation team unless you feel you have received this message/action in error. We will not manually approve comments or posts from new accounts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
ShatOnATurtle@reddit
Will the ELAC have to be removed and teste? Or can it be done without removal
awayheflies@reddit
A lot of them can be loaded without removal
juusohd@reddit
Yeah, it seems that way. I think the effects of this will be under a week.
BulbousPear1@reddit
The part number is already available but the demand will be higher than the offer!:)))
Wrong_Acanthaceae599@reddit
Repositioning without passengers
Ungrammaticus@reddit
If you’re carrying passengers it’s not a repositioning flight
TGM_999@reddit
But they are repositioning the passenger
juusohd@reddit
Exactly.
DutchBlob@reddit
Interestingly the A318 babybus is unaffected by this EAD. Does anyone with more knowledge of the A320-family than me know why?
Griff1604@reddit
Are US carriers required to comply with this? Or not until the FAA issues their own?
LootenantTwiddlederp@reddit
AA just said it's doing the software downgrade today and tomorrow.
chriskbrown50@reddit
Literally stopped boarding our AA flight mid stream; took off 2.5 hours later. Out of Denver
DoItForLA@reddit
Frontier, known for bumping people off of flights by wantonly swapping a 321 for a 320, says... "You guys are already gonna be late. Might as well make it productive."
/s if that was necessary.
idkwhatimbrewin@reddit
I have a 6am flight on Frontier tomorrow (in theory)
DoItForLA@reddit
When you go to choose seats, does it show 30 total rows or 40? If you have 40, it's planned for an A321 and you (in theory) won't be affected.
TGM_999@reddit
A321s are affected by this
BigBlueMountainStar@reddit
You might be accurate than you realise
Griff1604@reddit
Thank you!
TGM_999@reddit
This one applies to US carriers https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExternalWindow/DRSDOCID170146585920251129034243.0001
kallax82@reddit
You usually have to comply with the ADs issued by the authority in the state of design. Airbus is French, but with Europe having EASA, US carriers have to comply with the EASA AD.
TGM_999@reddit
I'm not sure the FAA automatically adopts airworthiness directives from other authorities they always issue their own.
BoringBob84@reddit
Even if the FAA didn't adopt this EAD, it would be wise for operators in the USA to incorporate it anyway, in case they ever want to operate or sell the aircraft in the EU.
TooobHoob@reddit
But the airworthiness design organization is still under EASA recognized under equivalency rules, so if it affects the design organization part I imagine some shenanigans probably occur through that path. (My understanding of civil airworthiness is extremely limited).
TGM_999@reddit
The Americans just like to be different and also take there time while doing it. I'll use this as an example https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExternalWindow/FR-ADNPRM-2025-21495-00000000000.0001theirwhich This is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, so it's in the consultation stage, that the FAA just recently published and it's to adopt an AD that EASA published 11 months ago. Now thankfully, they are usually much quicker to adopt EADs, though.
Griff1604@reddit
Thanks for the info! Makes sense
Ustakion@reddit
Oot. But since its in the EAD, is there an actual A320-215 variant? I dont think airbus ever made them
PM_Good_Recipes@reddit
So am I reading it correcting that airlines will have until after their first flight after tomorrow at midnight UTC to fix their planes per the EAD?
TGM_999@reddit
Its effective 23:59 tomorrow so effectively it has to be done before the first flight on Sunday
PM_Good_Recipes@reddit
Thank you!
WVVVWVWVVVVWVWVVVVVW@reddit
That's my interpretation too because I'm seeing flights departing as normal currently.
PM_Good_Recipes@reddit
Thank you!
ForsakenRacism@reddit
How could Boeing do this
Stabile_Feldmaus@reddit
The difference to Boeing is that the bug gets fixed before something serious happens.
777978Xops@reddit
Using the max crashes to hang over a company that’s over 100 years old is honestly a reach. Those crashes happened over 5 years ago and a lot has changed even since Alaska even
grain_farmer@reddit
5 years is not long ago. Nestle is still not forgiven by many for something they did in the 1970s. I would say those max crashes have permanently damaged the reputation of Boeing.
The issue isn’t that the max crashes happened, but the way the company reacted, even after the second crash they were advising against ground the plane after the first country did it.
Company culture is famously hard to change
It will take many years to observe whether a few heads rolling at the executive levels and executives saying what they think shareholders want to hear them saying will undo the pervasive insidious nature of prioritising profitability over safety at every layer. I’m sure a lot has changed but time will tell if it’s enough.
Thiokol eventually changed its company name 12 years after the Columbia disaster to try and shed the reputational problem but even 20 years later, in Truth Lies and O Rings it’s noted that despite multiple reorganisations and mergers, safety claims by Orbital ATK were scrutinised more compared to other suppliers.
sPLeenss@reddit
Uhhhh no it won't.
You do know that the 737 family goes beyond the MAX? Until very recently, the 737 was the best selling passenger-jet aircraft of all time. It has been an immensely successful design. The MAX crashes really only damaged the reputation of the MAX and not (for example) the NG variants. (but honestly, I dont see many people all that hesitant to board a MAX today)
12,000 737s have been delivered. Of this, 1 variant of aircraft has experienced 2 crashes. Saying that, because of this, the entire 737 family will be remembered like the DC-10 is silly.
grain_farmer@reddit
The issues with the DC10 were very early on in the life of the airframe and they were rectified and the aircraft had a good safety record after that.
The 737 started on a high, and the last iteration destroyed its rotations so dramatically that Boeing is now working on a replacement, hundreds of orders were removed from the order book.
Multiple operators of the max have removed the max branding such as Ryanair, one of the largest aircraft lessors and AA.
sPLeenss@reddit
I think I may have misunderstood what you originally wrote. When you said 737, were you referring exclusively to the MAX or the entire 737 family of aircraft?
Didn't VietJet, Norwegian and Ethiopian just make massive orders for MAX aircraft?
This doesn't mean that much. Alaska Airlines still have their "proudly all Boeing" branding on their MAX planes despite the plug blowout. (Also they aren't really all Boeing). Ultimately, airlines lining up to buy more planes says more than them choosing to remove 3 words from their livery.
I think this is definitely more to do with perception and the way modern media works and makes money. Modern "journalism" is pretty horrendous, especially with regards to aviation. They'll churn out clickbait garbage, and this usually gets worse in the wake of a major accident. Arguably, it's worse now than it would've been back then.
If in your original comment, you were talking about the 737 MAX only, then you could very well be right, people could see the MAX in the way that people saw the DC-10, but ultimately that would be down more to scaremongering by the media and the general trend of aviation-illiteracy amongst the general public rather than the actual plane. I don't see this happening with the entire family though. I think people are able to separate between the NG and MAX.
What I will say, is that nobody today thinks of the 747 as a death trap. In spite of JAL123 and CAL611 (amongst plenty of others), it's still seen as one of Boeing's better planes because it continued to be reliable and pretty safe. I think that the MAX will follow a similar trend.
We'll probably see in around a decade or so.
maverick4002@reddit
Crazy behavior to be going to bat for a corporation that caused the deaths of 300+ lives just a few years ago AND faced no repercussions. Wow
lesedna@reddit
Except Airbus has known it for years and this very version has been likely the cause of the incident in October where an Airbus could have reache désintégration if the pitch down was higher. Don’t be biased, all companies work the same. EASA forced their hand on that one after discovering something we might never know about and that’s good otherwise it could have been silently updated. Again, EASA forced the AD.
MidsummerMidnight@reddit
Who you kidding? Boeing wouldn't fix this till a plane crashed.
TGM_999@reddit
That's not true 787s have had similar occurrence, the FAA are taking their time over the AD but Boeing sent a bulletin out to operators with the fix in all the way back in April.
Ok_Vegetable5501@reddit
Not sure if you’re just a Boeing fanboy or what but Airbus will actually fix the issue and prevent people getting killed while Boeing would just sweep it under the rug and not fix it for profit
BoringBob84@reddit
That is some serious projection and whataboutism from an Airbus "fanboy." EASA is forcing Airbus to fix this.
sunsetair@reddit
They wait till it really happens. Could happen isn’t important to them
biggsteve81@reddit
Except it did really happen on an Airbus, hence the emergency directive.
RayNTex52@reddit
Me
hemihotrod402@reddit
Oh cool typing this while sitting on a 321….at least we’re taxiing to the gate
MaxPlease85@reddit
Currently landing with an A321 Neo in Abu Dabi, hoping to hop on an A321 Neo to Düsseldorf in two hours. 😳
Ungrammaticus@reddit
The NEO can be fixed by purely software updates, so very best case probably in about an hour.
But I would probably just consider my flight to be effectively cancelled
I_DRINK_URINE@reddit
They can all be fixed by purely software updates.
Ungrammaticus@reddit
Sure but for some of them the ELAC has to be physically removed in order to be downgraded
I_DRINK_URINE@reddit
I see. I didn't realize they don't all support in-situ data loads.
MaxPlease85@reddit
No delay, I'm sitting in my seat now.
I assume because this one is brand new, as the flight attendant just said.
Here in Abu Dabi, the majority of flights are going. I'm flying Etihad and it is their home airport. Maybe they were just able to update/downgrade it in time.
I just want to go home.
lambda-person@reddit
How do you know which one can't be fixed ? I should take a Airbus A321-251NX tuesday, impossible to know if it has ELAC 104
CashKeyboard@reddit
321 from Abu Dhabi to Düsseldorf, wow. It truly is 2025.
MaxPlease85@reddit
A321 Neo LR.
Fortunately I landed 90 min ago. Phew.
Lolthelies@reddit
I just got off an A320 lol
msak75@reddit
I’m just getting on an A320
LMB_mook@reddit
Considering they've all been grounded, you won't be on it for long.
msak75@reddit
Are you deadass? I got to KCLT a few hours ago and still see some A320s heading out.
Lolthelies@reddit
Break a leg! (We can use that here too right?)
msak75@reddit
lol let’s see
Dezbi@reddit
Lol I’m responding in the air on a 321
zimbobango@reddit
How does a software update overcome something that's impacted by a physical effect like solar radiation? I would have thought you'd need more reflective insulation or some such?
bobblebob100@reddit
Error detection in the software, or lack of perhaps
lofibeatstostudyslas@reddit
I mean, I don’t want my flight cancelled. But I really don’t want it to go ahead on an unsafe aircraft
SirEDCaLot@reddit
Sorry you're getting snark answers.
It seems the new software doesn't properly error-check some data. So if the aircraft hits a bad burst of cosmic rays or solar radiation that can corrupt something causing the autopilot to do stupid stuff.
This happened to one aircraft under very specific conditions, everyone was fine other than some bumps and bruises due to a rapid movement. Airbus's answer was to ground 6000+ aircraft.
Keep in mind Boeing's answer when two identical aircraft fell out of the sky in exactly the same manner was to do nothing and insist the plane was safe.
I_DRINK_URINE@reddit
The manufacturer doesn't get to decide whether a plane should be grounded; that's up to the regulators.
Boeing started working on improvements to MCAS right after the first accident. They held online conferences with 737 MAX operators where they explained how MCAS works and answered their questions. They sent detailed information to all operators describing how to deal with MCAS issues, and the regulators required the operators to pass that information to their pilots. There was a relatively small number of MAXes in service at the time, so the risk of an additional accident in the interim was calculated to be low. It didn't meet the threshold to require grounding. The number of A320s in service now is many times greater, and unlike MCAS, this issue is dangerous even if the pilots do everything correctly.
SirEDCaLot@reddit
Can you explain what the pilots did wrong with MAX?
My recollection of both crashes was that the pilots hadn't even been informed that MCAS existed, so they were suddenly presented with an extreme repeating nose-down trim and no reason why it would be the case.
Furthermore, my recollection is after the first crash it was found that MCAS was only operating on one AoA sensor, so when that sensor fails MCAS may do bad things. A software update was developed, but not required to be installed by either Boeing or FAA. This was a 'let's rug-sweep this, we'll install the software quietly and nobody will know how bad it was' fix.
I_DRINK_URINE@reddit
That's largely true for the first accident. And yet despite that, the Lion Air captain was able to fly the plane for 5 minutes without any serious issues. He simply overrode MCAS each time it kicked in. It was only when he handed over control to the FO that things went wrong. The FO repeatedly made small trim inputs which allowed MCAS to reactivate, but he allowed MCAS to run for the full 10 seconds each time, and he never brought the aircraft back into trim. The captain then ignored him when he said he was having difficulty controlling the airplane.
Why did the captain hand over control in the first place? Well, he had asked the FO to perform the unreliable airspeed memory items. Those are steps that the pilots are expected to have memorized. The FO had no idea what they were, as if he'd never heard the term "unreliable airspeed" before, which is unthinkable. He spent 5 minutes looking for the checklist in the QRH. The captain finally gave up and decided to look for the checklist himself, and that's why he handed the controls to the FO. The FO's lack of knowledge of critical information demonstrates a massive failure of the airline's training program. Additionally, the reason the AOA sensor was malfunctioning in the first place was multiple egregious instances of improper maintenance, any one of which would have been utterly unthinkable at any decent airline.
For the second accident, the pilots were absolutely informed, as I mentioned already. There was an AD requiring airlines to send the information to all their pilots. For Ethiopian, that info would've been sent via an iPad app. It was confirmed that both pilots had at least viewed it, but of course there's no way to know if they actually bothered to read it. Despite having access to that info, the captain proceeded to do the exact same thing the Lion Air FO had done. That demonstrates that simply having information about MCAS doesn't ensure that they'll handle the issue correctly. There were serious fundamental training deficiencies at both airlines, and both airlines already had a history of accidents with poor training as the major factor.
Not sure what you mean by "it was found." Obviously, the people who designed it knew how it worked from the beginning, and so did the FAA and other regulatory agencies. No-one perceived it as a serious safety issue, but they were looking at it with the assumption that the pilots are properly trained.
Wrong. A software update was being developed, but it just wasn't ready yet by the time the second accident happened. It had only been 8 months, a very short amount of time to get aircraft software developed and certified. As I mentioned, the FAA estimated the probability of a second accident occuring before the software was ready, and they determined it to be very low. But again, that's assuming well-trained pilots.
As I already mentioned, everyone involved was kept well informed after the first accident. As members of the general public, you and I weren't privy to every detail. But the people who needed to know absolutely did know. It's well-documented that representatives from Ethiopian Airlines were present in the online meetings with Boeing, and they also sent later follow-up questions by email, which Boeing answered. Whether that info truly made its way to all of the pilots is another question.
The elephant in the room is the fact that the standards for pilot qualifications have been dropping for decades, all over the world. When you combine that with countries that have nearly non-existent regulatory agencies, and airlines that will promote someone with only a few hundred hours of total time to captain, you're going to have issues. This wasn't the first accident for either airline, and sadly it definitely won't be the last. The fundamental problems haven't been fixed because it's easier to simply put the blame on the big, evil, American mega-corporation.
lofibeatstostudyslas@reddit
Exactly, I’m supporting the precautionary approach to a safety critical activity
feloria7@reddit
Rather be annoyed at the gate than scared in the air.
lofibeatstostudyslas@reddit
“It is better to be on the ground wishing you were flying, than to be flying and wishing you were on the ground”
laughguy220@reddit
It is better to be on the ground wishing you were flying, than to be wishing you were not flying rapidly towards the ground.
QuasiEvil@reddit
irate was right there!
MapleMapleHockeyStk@reddit
I want this on a t shirt....
Live_Situation7913@reddit
Read the article genius it literally says it may cause disruption doesn’t mean your flying on a danger flight
External_Rest6861@reddit
Found the asshole.
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
Chen932000@reddit
Did you read the AD?
“This condition, if not corrected, could lead in the worst-case scenario to an uncommanded elevator movement that may result in exceeding the sircraft’s structural capability.”
lofibeatstostudyslas@reddit
Learn some manners
Niidforseat@reddit
True. Don't be Boeing.
bobblebob100@reddit
Out of interest does Airbus compensate airlines for this and does it allow passengers to claim under EU261 for delays?
N205FR@reddit
For those wondering why it’s safe to fly on an A32x now, I study space weather. There are no earth side facing sunspots capable of a major flare right now. But even if there were, the entire A32x fleet has completed about 180 million flights as of today, gone through FAR stronger solar flares than Oct 30 (example: Oct 2003 Halloween Solar Storm, May 2024 Gannon Solar Storm, etc). So clearly this is unique to this particular ELAC software and even then with 80,000 flights per day (in 2 days the A320 fleet flies as many flights as the 737max flew between its two crashes) only one was affected. So the chances of Nevertheless it is good they are proactive on this.
TL;DR: if you’re on an A320 between now and when the grounding takes effect (by then the vast majority of AA/UA/DL/B6/F9/NK/AS/G4’s fleet would be downgraded and back to service), you’re perfectly safe.
Slight_Meaning_2543@reddit
This really calmed down my anxiety a bit lol. Thank you for explaining
bobblebob100@reddit
How long would this likely delay things for? I fly Monday on a A321neo, and thats the bulk of the airlines fleet so hoping im not disrupted
hughk@reddit
The change should be finished today. However, if the plane has to be repositioned for the fix, then the schedule may be disrupted by being in the wrong place.
bobblebob100@reddit
Thanks. Jet2 have now said only a few planes of theres are effected and wont effect operations
exus1pl@reddit
That sounds like major BS
tachyon534@reddit
An airline manufacturer taking action to ground a fleet and repair a fault BEFORE there's a fatal accident? The American mind cannot comprehend this.
BoringBob84@reddit
Airbus didn't take action. The regulators forced them to.
tachyon534@reddit
They self reported to the regulator.
Starlifter40612@reddit
So what was missed in qualification testing of the ELACs? Buying the qual by similarity argument and/or are Airbus commercial EMI testing requirements just not stringent enough?
hughk@reddit
They don't get checked for solar radiation. Nothing does unless it flies at very high altitude or goes to space. Usually this is handled by defensive software and hardware design.
crankkpad@reddit
I once did an A380 troubleshooting which resulted in an EEC ( Engine Electronic Control) of one of the 4 engines due to the installed partnumber with a certain embodied modification being easily failed by space radiation. Was roughly half a million for the eec ( if bought new what nobody does who has a part pool contract)
And i thought I have seen shit before this blew my mind.
goldjade13@reddit
What exactly does that mean?
hughk@reddit
Usually there is little radiation at lower altitudes so flights at 25K feet, have few problems. Flights at 40K feet or so are in the danger zone, so to speak. This kind of altitude is common for medium to long distance flights. Also, if solar activity is low it is much less likely to happen.
Btw,, the Convorde flew so high (60K feet) that it had a radiation exposure monitor by the Flight Engineer's position. Most of their systems were analogue though.
It can and has happened at ground level to some computers but it is much rarer. There are ways to mitigate this in safety critical systems.
Weekly_Injury_9211@reddit
I’ve no idea and I’m a pilot….
BoringBob84@reddit
At high altitude are many ionizing particles. These can cause devices with digital memory to inadvertently change states (AKA "flip a bit").
This can cause computers to lock up, it can destroy data, or it can cause unexpected behavior (as it did in this case with an uncommanded dive).
There are many methods in hardware and in software to mitigate this hazard that equipment designers incorporate. Apparently, this equipment on the A320 is susceptible and needs to be fixed.
Wikipedia - Single Event Upset / Error
crankkpad@reddit
I can confirm i didnt know this. Or maybe i did and forget. Its roughly 10 years ago during A380 D1 checks
AdultContemporaneous@reddit
I'm just a ham radio operator who hangs out here, and I don't know what he's talking about either, but space weather jingles my bells and I bet it was quite a story.
crankkpad@reddit
We didnt know as well. But airbus did. And they said: change the engine control.
Sometimes, even as licensed maintenance engineer you dont ask for the way. Most times yes, sometimes no.
bath-bubble-babe@reddit
Oh! I've just had a flashback to a story I was onder involved in.
The engine manufacturer had to raise a change request to change the name of the EEC from 'Electric Engine Controller' to 'Engine Electric Controller'. Each change was nominally costed at something like $150k, and the reason for it... there was a mismatch between the name the customer used for it, and the engine manufacturer's name for it.
It led to conversations on prior systems where the yellow maintenance items weren't painted yellow. Needed a change. Next time the person looked at it, they pointed out the yellow was the wrong shade is yellow. Need another change to fix it.
Also reminds me of when I had to enter an order for 12 EEC's on the system, at a total cost of not far off $10m - and that was about 20 years back, so today's value would be easy beyond that.
Spartacoops@reddit
Is it a down date of the software to a previous release? What other functionality will be missing ? Is it an interim solution until hardware is modified or replaced?
Also can we expect other equipment to be affected by solar flares?
chrisb_ni@reddit
In case this is helpful to anyone, I'm a science journalist and I've been in touch with Airbus over this.
They've confirmed to me that the issue is single-event upset / bit flip related (as this wasn't made explicit in the initial statement)
https://bsky.app/profile/chrisbaraniuk.com/post/3m6pvgttwv22h
Spartacoops@reddit
They would say that wouldn’t they?
drone_driver24@reddit
All of our NEO’s are grounded until the old version is installed.
lesedna@reddit
Where / what airline ?
GarryWeber711@reddit
his personal ones
iwillbepilut@reddit
Can confirm all my A320s are grounded, but i can just pick up an A388 from the stable
Creepy-Bell-4527@reddit
Why wasn't there multiple smear campaigns against multiple dead pilots of A320s before acknowledging there might be an issue?
Gullible_Goose@reddit
I mean this specific issue caused by a literally unpredictable and unavoidable cosmic event. There are also no dead pilots to smear campaign
BoringBob84@reddit
That is not true. It is predictable and that is why regulations require avionics manufacturers to design for it.
Gullible_Goose@reddit
I meant you can’t predict when and where it’ll happen, and what specifically it’s gonna mess with or change.
JohnWolfensteinn111@reddit
Table on which aircraft needs software and which need hardware fixes.
CoinsHave3Sides@reddit
This ChatGPT nonsense is dead wrong. It’s stupid even on first glance. The classic ceos have the new software and the brand new neos have the old software? Did you read the table???
mad153@reddit
Thanks chatgpt
bobblebob100@reddit
Is it all neo planes or just certain versions of the A320neo? Noticed a few took off after the airbus announcement
MTXD_FTW@reddit
Wait guys I have a flight in an A320neo tomorrow morning, what does this practically mean for that?
madman320@reddit (OP)
Short answer: We don't know.
Long answer: Not all aircraft in the Airbus A320 family are affected by this problem; therefore, the impact on airlines that own A320 family aircraft will vary. Some airlines have few or no affected aircraft, meaning the impact will be minimal, while others will have to ground almost their entire fleet of A320 family aircraft. Not to mention that some affected aircraft will only need a quick software update, while others will require hardware modifications, which will take them out of service for some time.
Therefore, you should check the news about how the airline you will be flying with will be affected and, above all, confirm in advance whether your flight will operate as scheduled.
MTXD_FTW@reddit
I see, thanks for the detailed response. My airline is Avianca, and their statement seemed relatively negative but no official update on my flight. I’m not American and will essentially be stranded in the airport, sorry to bother but do you know if I’m entitled to anything for this?
madman320@reddit (OP)
Avianca seems to be the airline most affected by this, so it's quite possible your flight will be affected. I don't know what contingency plan Avianca intends to implement, but I would keep an eye out for any updates they give regarding flight changes and rebookings.
Unfortunately, I don't have legal knowledge about provisions they are legally obligated to provide if they cancel your flight, so see if you can find anything online about it and contact the airline in advance.
secondincomm@reddit
So if I have my travel insurance and my flight is cancelled because of this, am I covered? Or does this count as something insurance wouldnt cover?
relayer000@reddit
What did the insurance company say when you called them to ask?
secondincomm@reddit
They are closed at 11pm on a friday night so I thought id ask here in the mean time
BandicootNecessary26@reddit
Is this why everybody is trying to get software updated ELAC's?
Drivaku@reddit
Sounds like a solid update—hope it fixes those glitches!
emiller28@reddit
what does this actually mean? All A320 planes will be grounded?
madman320@reddit (OP)
The EAD (Emergency Airworthiness Directive) has not yet been released, therefore the scope of aircraft affected by this problem and the corresponding fix are still unknown. However, it's possible that it will affect a large number of aircraft in the A320 family, so there will certainly be flight disruptions to perform software updates on all of them.
Griff1604@reddit
So it’s safe to assume this could affect 321’s as well?
madman320@reddit (OP)
Airbus's statement says "A320 Family," so possibly the A319 and A321 will also be impacted.
Dantrej@reddit
And A318, babybus
biggsteve81@reddit
Apparently the 318 is not affected.
awayheflies@reddit
The ad and the aot say a318 is also affected
biggsteve81@reddit
I didn't see it on the list.
awayheflies@reddit
They already put a new revision out and removed them
Griff1604@reddit
Thank you.
ILikeFlyingMachines@reddit
Yes, all planes of the 320 family
Wrong_Acanthaceae599@reddit
EAD was released
https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2025-0268-E
6000 planes affected. Fix is 3 man hour of work but you can not fly except without passengers the plane so all planes off maintenance base will be ferry-ed back empty
It_Is1-24PM@reddit
As far as I know airframes with ELAC B L104 need a hardware replacement. Only airframes with ELAC B L103+ can have a software update.
lambda-person@reddit
Some plane requiere part changing right ? Is it possible to know which part has a plane based on name ? Airbus A321-251NX
lastlaughlane1@reddit
Exact one I’m flying on tomorrow at 10am. I need to catch a train right after. Debating booking a Ryanair 7am flight now!
It_Is1-24PM@reddit
I don't think so.
Would say keep an eye on the socials, app or messages from your airline.
scotsman3288@reddit
that sounds expensive....
Live_Situation7913@reddit
Read article maybe you’ll know?
Drivaku@reddit
Sounds like a smart move to keep those A320s flying strong.
MTXD_FTW@reddit
Wait guys I have a flight in an A320neo tomorrow morning, what does this practically mean for that?
Kyoshire@reddit
How did they actually discover it was caused by solar wind and not something like internal fault or other interference?
VanDerKloof@reddit
Boeing should take notes on what a culture of safety looks like.
777978Xops@reddit
Let’s not act like Airbus voluntarily did this. EASA is forcing them to
theonion513@reddit
How could Boeing allow this?!
BachelorThesises@reddit
SWISS doesn't expect any flight delays or canceled flights for Saturday and also already started with the updates.
ProT3ch@reddit
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cvg4y6g74ert?post=asset%3A7d29d54a-973b-45ba-b505-40d6ad67901e#post
"EasyJet says it has "already completed" the software update on many of its planes and plans to operate its flights as normal on Saturday."
I have a flight with them next Friday, I hope this issue will be behind us by then. Luckily it's winter schedule so less planes are needed.
danmarce@reddit
Now I'm curious about how software updates are distributed and installed, and how log does this take.
mrneddles@reddit
It can vary by plane and airline, planes in the same family can have different loading methods depending on what’s installed on them
Older planes use mostly floppy discs, some have CDs, USBs of CF cards. Newer planes may be compatible with a dataloader that replaces physical media
ILikeFlyingMachines@reddit
I would guess floppy disks
d4ybrake@reddit
Might be weird but I find it extremely reassuring how they're handling this
Leather_Confidence@reddit
This may be confirmation bias but about 24 hours ago i checked ADS B Exchange and thought that traffic over europe was unusually light for 2300gmt.
maverick4002@reddit
I'll have two flights on Avianca tomorrow and they are saying that it will affect 70% of their fleet and to expect significant disruption over the next 10 days, yikes.
Space_Monkey_1977@reddit
It looks like the airlines will have ~24 hours to fix these before the jets are taken out of service.
The AD was published today (28 NOV) but it becomes effective at 29 NOV 23:59Z
bobblebob100@reddit
Seems most airlines can do the fix with minimal delay.
https://news.sky.com/story/which-airlines-are-affected-by-airbus-disruption-13476810
Mother-Prize-3647@reddit
Boeing would’ve hid the issue. That’s the difference.
mixxituk@reddit
Just landed on a320 at Ber will my return be cancelled?
MannyTV_@reddit
So i have a flight on Saturday on a A321Neo, probably canceled, correct?
MidsummerMidnight@reddit
Depends on the airline. You might just be moved to a different plane.
MentatPiter@reddit
me too :/
Electrical-Win9801@reddit
We are talking about strong or even very strong solar radiation, on October 30, 2025, which would have disrupted the computer, which lost data from an A320 plane which fell for 3 seconds. Is this true of this radiation?
lekker-boterham@reddit
My flight from queenstown to auckland this morning was canceled due to this
holzmann_dc@reddit
Here's the main thread on Airliners Tech Ops:
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1506157
lastlaughlane1@reddit
I JUST booked a flight for tomorrow morning. Airbus A321. And I have a train to catch soon after. And I’m a very nervous flyer. Damn.
mbrz2477@reddit
Took off on an A220-300 about 20 mins ago from SeaTac. Guess it will be okay. 🙏
lesedna@reddit
Unrelated it’s an A220 it’s a bombardier plane not an Airbus made plane
Big-Leadership-4604@reddit
Was waiting to fly out of MCO at 4 in an A321.....fuck.
kingjungle-11@reddit
Are A320neo planes grounded too?
IllustriousAd1591@reddit
Right after Thanksgiving? This ain’t gonna be good
peepay@reddit
Globally, that does not make much difference. Only the USA celebrates that (on this date).
neegropleese@reddit
1 out of every 3 airline passengers is in the US.
Equal-Motor98@reddit
That’s just… not true. 4.8 billion passengers globally in 2024, 876 million in the US. More like 1 in 5 or 6, and decreasing.
neegropleese@reddit
here is the data I used: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/airline-passengers-by-country.
Didn't see any firm data for later years.
Equal-Motor98@reddit
Your data is even more convincing. They mention 666M for the US and 4.35B worldwide, so 1 in 6 or 7.
neegropleese@reddit
The total in the table is 2.2B.
Danoct@reddit
It's 2021 data. It's basically junk.
All of the USA could travel domestically and go to very different places due to how big the country is. The rest of the world is severely constrained by the fact the Covid 19 pandemic happening and most places had international travel restrictions.
Look for 2019 data at least.
neegropleese@reddit
where can I find the 2019 data?
Danoct@reddit
On the link that you provided...
neegropleese@reddit
ok, 1 in 5. Still a major issue.
HuntKey2603@reddit
But USA more, USA bigger, USA better!! Don't you know?
ILikeFlyingMachines@reddit
but US has a rather small Airbus fleet
LootenantTwiddlederp@reddit
I wouldn't call any US fleet small.
Spirit and Frontier are both all-A320. That's about 300 aircraft between both of them.
United has 200 A320s
American has 480+, which is almost half of its fleet
Delta has almost 400, which is also almost half of its fleet.
GigaG@reddit
Eh, we have a lot of A320s. Spirit and Frontier are all-Airbus fleets and the big 3 (Delta/American/United)also make extensive use of A320 family aircraft
ForsakenRacism@reddit
People don’t travel for the holidays in Europe? Come on man. Thanksgiving might be a US holiday but it still follows the same seasonality.
peepay@reddit
They do, but Christmas is a month later. Much can happen in that time.
ForsakenRacism@reddit
It’s the exact same thing as the us lol. Winter breaks usually start before Christmas
mylies43@reddit
Right but this is thanksgiving. Which the EU does not celebrate. Christmas timelines are aligned
IllustriousAd1591@reddit
Yeah, the majority of passenger air traffic around this time is in the USA
Live_Situation7913@reddit
Oh yea let’s only schedule flight disruptions when most convenient for us 🤦♂️
ILikeFlyingMachines@reddit
It's fascinating how such an error only gets noticed after Millions of flight hours
BoringBob84@reddit
"Single Event Upset / Error" events are rare, but they happen.
Floodnever@reddit
Boeing would just hide this and continue flying. Airbus cares about safety - Boeing about money.
84Cressida@reddit
Boeing is the one that recommended grounding MD-11s
Floodnever@reddit
How about Max-8 case? It was all about business and money, not safety.
Tlix@reddit
You’re getting downvoted (and I will too) but Boeing has proved that this is true lol.
beezxs@reddit
Does this affect NEOs?
madman320@reddit (OP)
Yes
Disorientated_Lifter@reddit
Anyone have any idea on how long the revert to the old software will take/how long are delays?
spedeedeps@reddit
A few hours on the NEOs, longer on the old airframes where the affected box needs to be brought to the nerds to be flashed.
Disorientated_Lifter@reddit
Thank you! So likely to be cancelled today in the reality of it? Just wondering if I should justify dropping $300 on another flight with a different airline/aircraft
Disorientated_Lifter@reddit
Incase anyone is interested, was a 2hr delay in New Zealand
Worldly-Purchase9766@reddit
Hopefully my plane is updated by Sunday morning..
Boundish91@reddit
Flying an A320 in March. But it's probably sorted by then.
dakjelle@reddit
My 320 better be updated Sunday
Comfortable-Dish1236@reddit
It will encompass software updates and possible ELAC changes.
GenitalPatton@reddit
How could Boeing do this to us?
meshreplacer@reddit
Last thing you want is everything to get a Microsoft Blue screen on your avionics.
Live_Situation7913@reddit
As if Linux never crashes
BalzacTheGreat@reddit
Ooofff.