Fly By Wire

[Graviman]

"The weapons can point the aircraft, so the targeting accuracy and time to shoot drop to half that when the pilot is unaided."

This kind of gets to the heart of the arguement about FBW - what is its intended pupose at the design stage? For general heli use, investment/maintenance cost is the biggest controlling factor.

Maybe control authority should be broken down in various categories:

1. Control augmentation - power enhancement of conventional controls. Achievable through hydraulics or e-servo, since the context is FBW systems.

2. Stability Augmentation - attitude feedback into control system. The simplest mechanical method is the Lockheed gyro (light/training heli), but can become fully digitised if power augmentation also required (using 1.)

3. Flight Augmentation - velocity/climb/position control directly overides pilot input (either parallel or series). This would require e-servos, and a simple electronic controller (including positional sensors).

4. Efficiency augmentation - active trimming, to reduce vibration or fuel burn. Higher harmonic control and any other "tricks" are used to allow a more efficient aircraft.

5. Performance Augmentation - this allows the pilot to explore the limits of the machines envelope, without actually risking the safety of the aircraft. This would require much more sophisticated computer modelling of flight dynamics.

6. Function Augmentation - this allows the pilot to put in high level instructions. The most extreme example is the "destination" command where the heli then completes the entire power-up/take-off/fly/descend/land (pilot can overide at any point).

Clearly the last two augmentation modes in a machine would also demonstate vast advantages as a weapons platform.

Hmmm, good thread

Mart