Originally Posted by
Welsh Wingman
The human factors/CRM/cockpit discipline issues that arise out of the AF447 tragedy, as regards the SS, are the absence of artificial feedback (to the PF and through interconnectivity to the PNF) and apply equally to the throttle feedback.
Enough to fill in the missing pieces of the jigsaw for the PNF, if only enough to brief the returning CDB to get him over the line....?
Again, a valid opinion - but certainly not an incontrovertible fact based on the evidence available. We've had an A330 successfully deadsticked into the Azores, an A320 very famously deadsticked into a near perfect landing on water, and conversely we've also had several yoke-equipped aircraft (B727, HS Trident, B757) go into a full stall and crash despite all manner of stick-shakers, stick-pushers and so on giving tactile feedback to the crew (which at least one crew mistook for Mach buffet). It was discussed at length in both the Tech Log thread and this one if you want to check it out.
The upshot of this admittedly anecdotal evidence is that the tactile feedback channel may not be the panacea for communicating aircraft behaviour to pilots that the pro-feedback brigade seem to think it is.
@WW (above, regarding "would you design...") - As I said in greater detail in an earlier post, Gordon Corps certainly didn't mind - ultimately he was the senior engineering pilot who signed the design off, and he was nothing if not a first-rate, safety-conscious pilot of the old school. The design itself was specified with input from pilots of all levels, from the line, through engineering pilots and test pilots.
@CJ (below) - when would it activate? I could see it being annoying if it was on all the time - perhaps when the trim passes a certain threshold which varies with altitude and AoA?