Why is there no "new flight deck option" for the A320 series?

[iggy]

Originally Posted by Uplinker

iggy, whoa ! No, I don't assume that, and I apologise and meant no disrespect, but from your previous comments; including words such as 'slamming the thrust levers', I have to ask.

Surely, even on a turbulent approach you have the capacity to glance at the N1/EPRs when you see the speed trend arrow dip or overshoot? Surely you can see and hear and feel the engines spool up or down?

What, actually, do moving thrust levers tell you that the Airbus FBW family doesn't? Genuine question - I have flown both Airbus and B737, and cannot see any advantage in the Boeing system - for me, it added more problems than it allegedly solved.
.

Thanks Uplinker!

My comments about the moving levers come from my experience in the MD80, and then the 320.

On the MD80 you have the option of using manual thrust once you disconnect the A/P, or keep it until you flare and touchdown. If you do a go around, you advance the thrust forward to the precalculated N1 while pushing the button on the side of the lever at the same time, and then ask the PNF to set GA thrust for you.

This system "taught me" how to fly the thrust manually because, flying manually, with the A/T on, you will feel with your hand the position of the levers for a certain N1, and their displacement when the A/T adjusts the N1 to maintain the commanded speed. It will show you the lever positions of each N1 setting, and the amount of displacement needed to adjust the variations of speed that you are seeing in your IAS. After doing that for a while, you just have to let your "muscle memory" replicate the same movements when you disconnect the A/T, giving you a huge advantage over the Airbus system, where you disconnect the A/T only every 6 months, in a simulator, and usually in the middle of an ECAM procedure, and an emergency. I am also a sim instructor in the 320 and can't get my head around the fact that most pilots in the sim start sweating profusely when they have to use manual thrust, even those with high experience on type. They are aware of the pitch corrections needed to keep the airplane within the desired path, and the amount of rudder needed to correct the drift when landing in crosswind because it is something they do everyday in the line, but they are most lost when it comes to how much they need to advance or retard the thrust levers in manual flight to correct a small amount of IAS, some of them do not even know how to handle them properly, and they definitely do not have N1 included in their scan. In the line, they just fly manual with their hand on the levers, and assume the A/T is doing its job. They don't need to keep an eye on it, and it is just human nature if they stop doing it when you fly 4 sectors a day. In the sim I can spot miles away a pilot that comes from a type that requires manual thrust just by how naturally they move the levers.

What I didn't like about the MD80 is that you have to press the button on the side in a GA, otherwise the levers will go back to their previous thrust setting, but at the same time you can't advance the levers all the way to the end because you will exceed the EGT, so most pilots in the MD80 got used to advance the thrust levers, and then release them so the PNF would set GA thrust. If they forgot to press the button on the side after advancing the levers, the airplane would stall if the PNF was not quick enough to correct it. This is what happened to the MD80 that crashed in Phuket in 2008, they made a GA in wind shear, but forgot to press the button on the side, the levers did not stay in GA thrust, and the airplane stalled.

I also flew the ERJ145, a type that has FADEC, but no autothrust. You still had the benefit of advancing the levers all the way forward in a GA without having to think about exceeding the EGT limit, something I really missed when I changed to the MD80 afterwards.

Do I hear the engines from the cockpit? Not in a 320, wearing the headsets, and landing in heavy rain. Do I glance at the N1? Yes, if my scan allows me to. I just flew some days ago in a really ****ty weather, on final the turbulence and crosswind was such that I could barely keep the airplane centered on the runway trak (NPA approach), and all my focus was to handle the side stick in the correct way so I would not enter into PIO. Did I glance at the N1? Just enough to know that we were stabilised, but after that, in a high stress situation, I just let the A/T do its job, and monitor the IAS while I fly the pitch. BUT, energy is the sum of IAS plus thrust, right? How was the energy of the airplane during the approach? I have no idea. I don't know if, to maintain Vapp, the engines were at the usual range of N1, or they were 20% higher, meaning that I was getting short of energy. The IAS was correct, but I was not aware of the excess of energy available. We did a GA at around 200'AGL, and the transition from 5 degrees to 15 was quite rough, initially the pitch went up too quickly (I guess because we were light and the engines are placed under the wings, so the increase of thrust adds momentum to the pitch up), and I had to find my way with side stick to find a proper balance between pitching up not too quickly, not to let the IAS go below target, and pitching up quickly enough so we wouldn't stop climbing, all that in turbulence. Did I panic? No, but I pushed the levers all the way forward, happy not to have to monitor the EGT or ask the FO to set up GA N1. I was clenching my fist on the levers, I can tell you that.

Don't forget that you come from Boeing, so you already have the skill required to fly the thrust manually, in all circumstances, same as me with my experience on the MD80, but it is very common these days to find pilots that start flying the Airbus and stay there all their life. Count the times you flew the Boeing with the autothrust off, and compare it with someone that has only flown the Airbus. You must have hundreds of time more experience than them, and thus, your awareness of the N1 settings, lever positions, relation between trim setting and N1 on final, relation between weight, landing flaps, and N1, how quick the engine spools up depending on where the N1 is... all that is in your muscle and brain memory, it is something that you do without thinking. A pure Airbus pilot, who has flown only Airbus his whole life, just doesn't have that benefit.

What I would like to know is the reason why the system was designed that way. I understand the FBW concept and I can see the huge benefits it brings along. If to have a FBW flight controls you need to cut the pilot out of trimming the airplane, so be it, it adds safety as a whole. But, Airbus could have let the levers move along the N1 without losing any of the FBW features. You don't need to make the levers move above the CLB detent, just make them move along the N1 only in SPEED mode. If the airplane stalls, let the TOGA thrust kick, as it does now even with the levers on IDLE. I don't see how a moving lever would interfere with the rest of the features...