Originally Posted by Dixons Cider
I'm sure this thread would not exist if Airbus programmed feedback into the stick, ie the thing moved. Why they didn't/don't do this I have no idea?
I don't know
WHO, in Airbus, decided to implement that sidestick philosophy
but I doubt they've been through a serious study before.
So after a time of operation, experiences, anecdotes, and ... incidents (?), people raised concern about sidestick philosophy ...
So Airbus had to look at it
And here is what they had to say :
In Line Feedback
The side stick operation, initially, raised 2 issues in the pilot community :
- No mechanic (or other) interconnection between sticks was a matter actually discussed.
- Sidestick dual inputs, from both pilots simultaneously, were actually experienced in line operation.
No interconnection between sidesticks
In the first years of sidestick operation, the interconnection issue was raised by certain pilots :
- new feature as compared to yoke mechanization
- potentially less feedback of PF actions on stick, for PNF
After several years of stick operation, pilots do agree that :
- tactile feedback is only beneficial with large enough deflections
- visual feedback is nil with side mounted sticks and small deflections
- interconnection might degrade present sensitivity and accuracy of stick inputs
- during instruction, feedback to the instructor provided by A/C response.
Interconnection
operationally not beneficial
technically not efficient
Note : Autopilot back-drive of stick would be a mere simulation of a stick movement.
What I understand from that:
- Pilots have concerns
- But it's too late to do anything about that
- Pilots should adapt to technology
- And live with it
But I think DUAL INPUT WARNING came at that time ... people will confirm.