Originally Posted by
airtren
Text marked in bold indicate a contradiction from one post to another…. so which one is be taken as TRUE?
You show me a post where I said the aircraft and systems were perfect. At the risk of sounding juvenile, I bet you can't.
You’ve skipped a direct invitation of answering on “the lack in the cockpit of visual contact with the SS, or the actions on SS”, which may have helped you get out of the monotony of your “yoke/ss argument” annoyance.
Not at all, I've stated outright that I don't think it's as big a deal as some are making it out to be, and I'll give you some reasons if you like:
- More than 30 UAS incidents in the A330/340 passed without incident. If not being able to see/feel the other pilot's sidestick was a safety concern, more of them would have crashed.
- At least two aircraft equipped with interconnected yokes had a similar LOC/stall/crash event, one of which shows evidence that the F/O didn't like what the Captain was doing and did not overrule him.
- The sidestick design was approved by one of the most respected test pilots and safety gurus of his day.
But maybe that annoyance is welcome, as it is the feed to posting the obsessive instance of one of the "anti-Airbus brigade", or "axe to grind.. with Airbus", or something to that effect....
Well, when one has been here 9 years and has seen the same people make the same arguments over and over again, it's difficult to resist noticing and commenting on the pattern.
Any system failure or system weakness exposed by an accident, which otherwise would not be known, MUST continue to be the focus of fixing, or being eliminated, as to bring that airplane back in line with its expected safety standard behavior before this exposure.
I hope I've answered your questions, so as such I see no systems weakness in the design other than the pitot tubes. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to give me the benefit of your opinion on the matter.