Flight Safety,
thank you for your thoughts on the matter.
Just a few short remarks (as you probably expected
)
Because the human mind is more creative and an infinitely better problem solver, it will always be the smartest computer in a process. The computer however can assist the human in its main weakness, which is making mistakes when performing routine repetitive tasks. The strength of each can accommodate the other's weakness, as they are very complimentary.
Yes.
In the A320, I believe the design philosophy was overly ambitious from the beginning.
I'd really like to know what you base this assertion on. It was
very ambitious at its time, no doubt. But overly? Why? They managed to pull it off, didn't they?
And despite good efforts, no-one has yet shown that its systems cause problems absent in other models.
The A320 was the first of it's kind in FBW airliner design, and l believe later designs have learned from the A320 experience.
Later designs like the the A330/340/380? Look at the cockpits of those. They look and work just like an A320, except that the screens are bigger, and they have taxi cameras. (Reverse is different, but I'm not aware of cross-engine mechanical interlocks.)
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the 737 for example prevent such an occurrence (with a lockout), by not allowing the pilot to put an engine in reverse if the other throttle lever is not in idle?
(my emphasis.)
With pleasure.
Assuming Boeing 737 and B747-400 are similar, the FDR graphs of the Tahiti incident show clearly, that there can be no interlock
between thrust levers on the 744. Reverse was selected on engines 2 through 4, while engine 1 (and, by logic of its back-driven mechanism, also its thrust lever) was at high forward power (>100% N1).
(Regarding your Boeing quote: What Boeing people say in a Boeing magazine about Boeing aircraft is obvious marketing, similar things can certainly be found about Airbus aircraft in Airbus publications.)
The Airbus design philosophy has, I think, been summarised by Dani (and others): The aircraft does nothing by itself; there is no doubt about who is in control.
This is quite in-line with your design principles. It supports in routine tasks, but leaves all decisions to the crew.
Bernd