Machinebird;
...as I understand, that stick deflection in the 'Bus is essentially commanding a rate, not a control deflection. Zero control deflection equals zero rate.
Thought I'd say hi.
Yes, you're correct. No input = no output in terms of pitch and roll. However, the controls themselves will be moving, albeit in tiny deflections, to maintain the last ordered bank angle and pitch attitude.
As such you would be pulsing the control rather than applying a pressure.
Not sure what is meant by "pulsing", but what is required to fly the Airbus series well and smoothly is a gentle, steady pressure...a "squeezing" of the stick in the desired direction, keeping in mind that ailerons and elevators are also moving to maintain the last ordered attitudes even while that attitude is changing as per stick orders...this is especially the case in turbulence*.
In Normal Law the sidestick is a roll-rate request in roll and a 'g'-loading request in pitch. In Alt II Law the autoflight system is in Roll Direct Law, or WYSIWYG Law... ;-) and the control deflection is proportional to the stick deflection, (and therefore one must be very gentle with the airplane especially at cruise altitudes). Pitch remains in a modified 'g' (load factor demand) law but,
"...with limited pitch rate feedback and gains, depending on speed and configuration."
The roll is sensitive in Direct Law and, with mis-handling, (or more bluntly, ham-fistedness), prone to PIO but I hasten to add that it is readily controllable, (positive, not neutral stability). Letting go the stick would be a good first response to any PIO in roll, (I understand the slight right roll of 8deg, but it is inexperience that induces the PIO, not the airplane. In fact, (and it has been discussed ad nauseum), there was no need to pitch the airplane up at all and roll control was/is straightforward).
The pilot who videoed himself flying the A320 should be embarrassed in demonstrating his atrocious "technique" to the world. The key is tiny movements, always, even on approach. Pushing the stick around like that would get a reviewed-standard on any sim ride as that means one doesn't understand fbw or the Airbus autoflight system very well.
On response,
OK465's post highlights what I would have to say about displays and airplane response...neither are significant issues.
Since he was now in Alt 2 law, neutralizing the stick did not stop the roll rate (It was now a 'conventional' aircraft in roll response with somewhat higher responsiveness to stick input.) He had to then make a corresponding opposing control motion to stop the roll.
Yes. And over-controlling (leading to PIO) is easy to do but equally easy to stop. To
mm43's comment, ". . .
one has to wonder whether it is the visual search for reaction clues, rather than real SS feedback that leads to the "stirring" technique. ", it could be, if one is using outside (VMC) references, but not in my experience either in the aircraft or the sim in terms of the response of the PFD.
The fairly rapid response of the A330 in Roll Direct doesn't (or shouldn't!) lead to a loss of control but with inexperience and/or lack of training in actual hand-flying it can be momentarily disconcerting.
Icepack is essentially saying the same things.
Someone asked about hand-flying experience... Typically, international crews get around 3 to 5 hours of hand-flying experience and perhaps 25 landings on average per year**. Domestic work will get substantially more...about 65 to 90 landings a month and much more hand-flying...difficult to estimate how much.
*When/if one has the opportunity to take a look at some flight data traces for an approach on a windy day, one can see how "calmly" the Airbus autoflight system moves the controls..."just enough" to maintain pitch and roll attitudes. The traces are very interesting once the autopilot is disconnected. The amplitude and frequency of the aileron (and even the spoiler) traces increase, the elevator less so, but higher than with the autopilot engaged. There, a lag in response (because the airplane is such a large mass), tends to make one believe that the airplane isn't responding to one's SS orders, so one 'gives more'...(done it...doesn't work!), and then over-controlling does become a bit of an issue if one isn't careful.
**Long-haul flying schedules yields about six flight legs per month, possibly eight or nine at the most. Split between two, possibly three pilots (depending upon whether the third is another F/O or is an RP who only sits up front during cruise), that gives about 3 takeoffs and landings per month per pilot.
Each takeoff is hand-flown but the autoflight is engaged pretty quickly after takeoff especially where departure routes are complex. Climb, cruise, descent and approach phases are typically on autoflight with the autopilot being disconnected around 400' AGL, sometimes a bit sooner, though usually not much later.
The takeoff and approach/landing phases are hand-flown for around 2 to 5 minutes at takeoff and about 30" to 1 minute on the approach and landing. At the very most, airline pilots flying long-haul may get 6 to 8 minutes of low-level hand-flying per leg.
Three legs per month means perhaps 20 minutes of hand-flying, or about 200 minutes (just over 3 hours) per year of handling the flight controls.
Again for domestic the opportunities are vastly greater and more difficult to estimate but my guess would be around 80 to 100hrs of actual hand-flying per year for busy domestic schedules.
Hand-flying is rarely given/taught/provided for in recurrent simulator sessions which is a shame because it is the only real opportunity to try one's hand especially with Level D simulators providing the opportunity to practise visual approaches.