I have to look that up again, but if I remember correctly (and quite frankly this is the only way it would make sense) the RTLU is placed downstream in the linkage system so after the trim and art. feel system (wich is "just" a spring and a screw displacing the sping and via the spring the complete linkage system, adding an offset, of course simplified, which also displaces the rudder pedals...)
One thing and I know that this can led to great ****storm, so now I ask you to pls don't get that wrong:
A FCOM isn't a technical absolute accurate reference... It's written in a way that it it describes sometimes pretty complex subsystems in a correct yet most as possible easy way. Which makes totally sense, as you don't need to know the details of all SAOs (the language when programming the flight control computers) like the cycle time of gain scheduling for alternate law pitch. Just as an example...
Back to rudder: The picture in the FCOM is OK and explains the principal but it isn't a detailed mechanical drawing.
Another example (and please if I missed it, correct me) while looking at the SAO for roll direct law on the 330/340 I noticed that the inner ailerons droop in direct, which isn't stated in the FCOM. Most likely it's only a small detail not worth mentioning but, if you stick brutally to FCOM you would say that I'm wrong, which according to the software! I'm not.
And as a last example: nobody needs to know how the maps in your cars's engine control look, and which functions are embedded to regenerate the exhaust system, just to drive the car. And I wouldn't compare the car's manual to a FCOM but the shop service manual you maybe can (details wise) compare to the FCOM and even there details of the above aren't mentioned. Same for AMM and the SAO stuff I wrote about... (and yes I know that driving a car is not flying a plane, and a plane is not a car and so on)
Hope you get what I mean and before this is somehow an argument later on: no I'm NOT a pilot, so aren't the engineers at Airbus, or most of them... and the thread you where referring to was a truly engineering topic where you need to go into details, like the guy who authored the paper I cited, which is then refuted with, sorry, abstruse arguments about how he (the author) has a phd in helicopter fbw?!?!? Sorry but there I'm out, this has nothing to do with scientific research or working principals.
Simon
Last edited by Sim25; 26th September 2024 at 09:31.