A paradigm shift
Salute!
Well put, PJ.
Seems to this old pioneer with the first completely FBW system that we need to separate the functions that protect the airframe and those that make the plane easy to fly in its intended mission. Our design did both, as with the Airbus, but not to the same degree.
- Gee command increase related to bank angle for a level turn. Same for pitch attitude, as a constant one gee command results in ever-increasing pitch attitude and resulting AoA if speed slows. This makes thing easy for the crew, but I wonder if it reduces "airmanship" and basic skills.
- reduced requirements upon the crew to use trim and train for "unusual" conditions
- control laws that seem to be related to specific portions of the mission, as in "TOGA"
- confusing alarms and cautions when things begin to fail
And the beat goes on.
As all know here by now, I am a big proponent of FBW systems in terms of performance, but not necessarily for making it real easy to get from point A to point B without having basic piloting skills.
Thanks for your views, PJ.