Togaroo wrote:
“The airbus FBW control is a sea change in concept as was jet engines to pistons, some people get over it sooner than others.”
“The biggest problem that the bus has is changing peoples attitudes to the way things have always been done. If we didn’t embrace change then aviation wouldn’t be where it is today.”
“The debate will go on between Airbus and Boeing but until you have tried it and understand fully what the aircraft is designed to do and how the pilot is to 'operate' it, then you will have preconceptions against it.”
The sea of change is not as big as that. If you’ve flown a DC10, you would know that the 60ies technology CWS was on a similar track already and, believe me, much better to interact with. What bothers me, are your following remarks, shared by the AB-fan committee, about how some are “AB-enlightened” a little earlier than others. It reminds me of the only argument of the street-harassing religious freaks: “…. I thought the same, but then enlightenment struck me …”
I agree with change, but not EVERY change brings us forward and if critics are dismissed with the enlightening factor and not with down to earth arguments, then it gets sectarian.
I am still waiting for a VALUABLE argument as to why “dead” controls enhance safety as opposed to my arguments in previous post trying to deduct why they are not.
Simple “you will get used to it, you will see, we shall overcome….” is insufficient to me for a professional debate. I have tried both prevailing technologies and find the one less adapted to us humans, the other being at least just as safe.
“It’s just different - please get over it!”
Simply: No. I would like the best and safest aircraft today’s technology can build, with the best acceptance of its jockeys as well.
Your last argument is somewhat naïve. Would you say the same if they took away the second pilot, or the side-stick for good? - It would be different ….
GMDS