BOAC wrote:
Bobcat's idea is good in my book.
Thanks.
I do not agree with the other software engineers saying it is just a matter of some extra lines of code. I would rather remove some lines of code.
After all, we do not need auto retard, we can autoland without it and I can see no purpose in having it especially on single channel or manual flight.
Right! Although a dual channel autoland could justify auto-retard as it is all automation. If a autoland precedure is supposted to be automatic, the power idle, speedbrake, wheelbrake etc. should also be included if the autoland definition means getting the aircraft stationary on the runway. If the autoland definition ends at main gear touchdown, then there is no need for auto-retard. Anyway, setting power at idle after touchdown is as basic as applying takeoff power prior to takeoff. But if the pilots "forget" to apply power when lined up and cleared to takeoff, nothing happends. There will be no accident until crew and pax starved to death. That would take weeks...
Secondly, should we now be looking at imposing some further restriction on the amount an automatic system can trim nose up?
Restricting trim unconditionally would also restrict the center of gravity. I have absolutely no idea how the COG will "drift" from flight to flight in a large jet like the 738 but in smaller aircrafts it's important to calculate/predict.
In the case of a 737, stopping it earlier, at a point where we are still above Vss, and lighting the 'stab out of trim light' should give a tactile input that things are not right and require remedial action to continue stable flight.
Right! Couple it to Vs and Vne. Although that would of course introduce another dangerous scenario when the indicated air speed is wrong.
Bottom line: We still need pilots in the cockpit.