What the industry needs to decide is whether they are ultimately aiming for pilotless passenger aircraft or not. If yes, then presenting the pilot with T/L's not directly-correlated with thrust is but a small part of that progression. IMO, sitting there as a future mere observer while the computers perform the WHOLE flight is not a situation I would relish, and certainly not why I became a pilot in the first place, but...........
If the answer is no, then retaining T/L's which can be moved by the pilot, or motor-driven to be directly correlated with thrust at all times is a desirable factor. Why? Because, IMHO, in real-life every other speed-variable contrivance that the pilot has ever come across has always had a visible means of correlated control available to him/her. Since by definition under this option he/she will always be in the cockpit, why deprive him/her of an instantaneous witness of thrust-demand which can be readily seen?
I'm not against relevant enhancement of the soft/hardware to improve overall safety, but, where we are now in the scheme of things, IMHO non-moving and non-directly-correlated T/L's are an unnecessary step too far.
Last edited by ABUKABOY; 8th Aug 2007 at 12:48.
Reason: Added words "and non" to make more sense, but it probably won't.