There is a difference between theory and practise which is why Alpha Prot damps the input, if required, to prevent overshooting the max value.
Ashling,
How many more protections are you ready to make up on this aircraft ?
Alpha Max is not already enough 3 degrees short of Alpha Stall. Do you need another Alpha to protect you from approaching Alpha Max. What is the code name for such Alpha ?
Does Alpha Phugoid look nice ?
Appendix D had been read for a long time.
I would not have missed it for anything :
Despite what pretend Mister Langewiesche or the BEA in the Appendix D, I believe Sully would have obtained a better touchdown on his own without the protections interfering with his experience.
By the way, take that Appendix D and replace the BEA logo by the Airbus one and you will notice how much more natural the reading proceeds ...
Sully would not have got a single of those
phugoid oscillations by being allowed to raise the nose on the flare.
Not at that altitude.
Not in that time frame.
Better attitude Lower RoD just positive stuff.
Originally Posted by Appendix D page 6
Furthermore, it is not certain that, without the phugoid oscillation damping function, it would have been possible to meet all the recommended parameters.
How hypocrite is it.
Do you think they would only have tested without that
POD function ?
Not a chance, too proud to have to admit that flaring in Direct Law may have been as good as flaring in their complex Normal Law with the indispensable magical
Phugoid Oscillation Damping function.
Some pretend that computerized aircrafts are less complex ...
Ashling, would you provide the FCOM's references about that
Phugoid Oscillation Damping function. I must admit I have probably missed it ... or not ?