Garage Years:
Also, my understanding of the side-stick is that the Airbus stick is quite a different design to that of the F-16. The F-16 stick only moves a very small physical deflection and is more of a force sensor (I worked F-16 simulators about 17 years ago!), while the 'bus stick is a position sensor. That in itself though is merely interesting.
This puzzles me a bit. Decades ago when I was a student at Navy Test Pilot School, we were given three flights in a highly-modified "variable-stability" B-26 operated by Cornell Aeronautical Laboratories (later called Calspan). The right seat was truly FBW. Right seat control response was determined exclusively by analog computers. Students were asked to evaluate the response in various configurations. One configuration was to have the stick (or yoke, I can't remember which) move large distances for small control surface movements but with little force required. The opposite configuration was to have the stick "locked in concrete" and all control surface movements responding only to stick forces. My instructor, Nello Infanti, asked which I preferred. I preferred minimal stick motion with aircraft response determined by stick forces. Nello informed me that the vast majority of pilots also preferred that configuration. I would think that, when finding it necessary to fly current FBW aircraft using the stick, that precise control would be more difficult using stick deflection rather than stick forces. Is Garage Years correct in his characterization of the AB side stick?
(See Nello's obituary here:
Nello Infanti Obituary: View Obituary for Nello Infanti by Dengler, Roberts, Perna Funeral Home, East Amherst, NY )