Originally Posted by
MurphyWasRight
I was just pointing out no matter if "right or wrong" (given full context) that the lack of feedback is a significant departure from other designs.
But the other designs were based around trying to mimic the behviour of flight controls as they were in the '30s and '40s. At some point you have to start with a clean sheet of paper and go "what do you really need to fly this aircraft?". I think the Boeing back-drive system as used in the 777 is a marvel of design, but in raw engineering terms it adds a level of complexity** to the implementation that it seems the Airbus guys felt wasn't warranted (Let's face it, applying FBW - space-age control systems* - to an airliner was enough of a jump in complexity to start with).
The step from direct to "generated/artificial" feedback is minor compared to "from feedback to no feedback".
To be more precise, it's going from "visual/tactile" feedback to "visual only". And yes, that has some drawbacks, but it's not the danger some like to paint it as. The fact is that since the '50s airliner design mandated that cable controls were no longer sufficient to move flight surfaces, and what you've had since is a plethora of mechanical (and in the case of the 777, software) devices to replace that feedback loop artificially.
Now, in a trainer, where you need to feel what the other person is doing that feedback loop is necessary. In an airliner with manual reversion (of which - excluding the 737 - there aren't many flying these days) then the combined pull on the columns can gain you extra leverage, so it's necessary. In a modern airliner where the flight controls are fully hydraulic and/or electronic then that feedback channel serves little or no purpose.
No-one knows at this point what the PNF was thinking, we also know very little of what he said. He had an ADI in front of him that would have been telling him that the aircraft was going nose-high. Surely any pilot in that situation would turn to his or her colleague and say "are you doing that?". The fact is that we don't know - and these endless rounds of speculation are for the most part just people with grievances against Airbus giving them a kicking.
[* - Did you ever hear Buzz Aldrin complaining that he couldn't feel what Neil Armstrong was doing on his sidestick? I'd like to hear some of the naysayers try to relegate those guys to "systems operators"
]
[** - In engineering terms "complexity" = "more components that can go wrong" ]