PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AF447 final crew conversation - Thread No. 1
Old 2nd Nov 2011, 19:01
  #629 (permalink)  
DozyWannabe
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@TTex600

I disagree completely.

The last Boeing to have directly-connected controls was the 737. Everything since (and that goes for the DC-10, L-1011, 747 and onwards in terms of US-built airliners) had fully-hydraulic controls, which ran through a Q-feel system that modified the outputs to the flight controls with weighted feedback to the pilots to simulate the feel of direct connection. Without that mediation, it would have been possible to yank the flight controls from neutral to maximum in less than a second (and tearing the airframe apart in the process), as the hydraulics were performing the movements and *not* the pilot's muscle power. D.P. Davies explains the development of these systems in great detail. Indeed, the reason Capt. McCormick was able to effect a landing when he lost most of his hydraulics over Windsor, Ontario was precisely because he was unsatisfied with Douglas's assurances that complete hydraulic failre was impossible and therefore direct connection was unnecessary.

The 7(7/8)7 systems mediate the inputs and feedback - of course they do. They may be designed to simulate the more traditional control systems, but that's all it is - a simulation, like the Q-feel units before them.

The Airbus design simply takes that one step further, reasoning that since direct connection had been done away with for nearly two decades prior to the A320 starting development, they might as well start from a clean slate, which is where the G-loading and rate command control technology comes from. Yes it's different, but only marginally so and as I understand it the difference in behaviour between Normal versus Alternate versus Direct is more than manageable.

The 'bus in fact gives you what you ask for unless what you're asking would take it outside the flight envelope. It even goes beyond that and tries to accommodate what you're asking by managing thrust if necessary.

I'd like to know what "agendas" and "positions" you see, and who you think is "protecting" them, as well as why you think that's the case. In my experience the ones with the agendas seem to be the ones taking every opportunity to bash the 'bus.

Last edited by DozyWannabe; 2nd Nov 2011 at 19:14.
DozyWannabe is offline