Originally Posted by
BarbiesBoyfriend
What are the benefits of a SS for a pilot?
More room to work and less chance of bumping the thing inadvertently for starters.
(I know they have a way of summing them or for one SS to take priority, but how can either of these features benefit the pilot???)
By clearly delineating who is in control. Because the controls are digital and decoupled from the controls (as are modern yoke designs), there's no need for two yokes to provide extra leverage, so that's half the reason for having them linked gone. With a procedure that is based around only one pilot having control at any given time you've got a significant dent in the other half of the reason.
I know the F-16 has a SS, but most F-16 are single seaters and in the two seaters (mostly) one pilot is an IP.
And in the FBW Airbus, only one pilot is supposed to be in control at any one time, so it's much the same.
The yoke (OK, why not take digital input from a yoke?) has the benefit of being in clear view and both are linked mechanically.
Well, I'd be interested to have it confirmed or denied that the 777/787 yoke "connections" are not mechanical, but in fact controlled by the software-based force-feedback system. Bearing in mind that one of the rationales for FBW is weight saving, it would be counter-productive to retain a mechanical link.
These features might have helped or even saved 447.
There have been LOC accidents in yoke-equipped aircraft - so it's just as likely they might not have. Right now we're all basically arguing from our own positions, and I'm trying to stay as neutral as I can, because as with all engineering solutions there are benefits and drawbacks to both.
Re: The Lufthansa cross-wiring of the controls. I've said this before, but imagine how difficult the thing would have been to control if the sticks were linked via force-feedback as opposed to the priority-button design!