Salute averow
Our AoA data for the FBW system used two conical sensors and one hemisphericl probe that used differentail air pressure for pitch, yaw and total pressure. The pressure probe data was decoded in a special box, and the mechanical AoA values were basically sent to the main FLCS computers ( four of them).
I may have to get with one of the guys over on the F-16.net forums to verify my data, but seems I recall middle value logic until down to two sensor input, then the most benign value.
Our system used only three of the computers until one went tits up, and we brought in the 4th. Looking back, we had a very graceful degradation until all was lost.
Unlike the 737, we depended entirely upon the FBW and associated computers that interpreted our control inputs and then moved the control surfaces. But the 737 was supposed to be aerodynamically a "normal" airplane and not intentionally unstable as was the Viper ( below 0.95M +/-).
It looks to me that the newer variations of the 737 are more like the VooDoo I flew a half century ago. That thing got "light" on the stick when you got close to the critical AoA, and if you kept pulling then the plane increasd AoA all by itself with no stick command or even forward stick. Wahoo!!!
The VooDoo had two AoA and gee limiters depending whether you had the autopilot engaged or not. Also had a stick pusher for rate limiting and actual AoA limits. Worked for me. And all that was back in 1965 or so. Our roll "feel" was only some springs and no change if we were at 300 knots or 700 knots. Pitch was helped by a bellows to account for CAS and a bob-weight to help for our pitch rate commands at higher gee. In short, nothing fancy like we see with the 737 feel system and STS and now the MCAS.
Thanks for the questions...
Gums sends...
Last edited by gums; 12th Feb 2019 at 01:54.
Reason: typos and readability