Originally Posted by
TTex600
We get it buddy. You have no sense of humor and you're on a mission to uphold the good reputation of Airbus against all of us haters.
Huh?
I'm British - if you want to see my sense of humour I suppose I could do a silly walk and drop my trousers!
As I said on the other thread, as someone who does 99.9% of his flying as SLF it does me no good whatsoever to defend a problematic or bad design. What I do have a problem with is falsehoods being repeated with no supporting evidence, and it'd be the same no matter who made the aircraft concerned.
One of the biggies for me is conflating FBW (which is the technology used in the flight control systems of the A320 through A380, as well as the B777 and B787) with FMC/FMS (which has been a standard component of every major airliner for the last 3 decades or more). The latter of which is essentially a fancy term for advanced autopilot and is the exclusive domain of the "what's it doing now?" problem.
As an analogy, it's as wince-inducing for us as systems engineers as it would be for you to hear a cadet or a journalist talking about AoA and pitch attitude as though they were the same thing.
It's still funny and it still illustrates my point that A3-TWENTY is not a bad pilot just because he assumes the aircraft has imperfections.
Wha? I wasn't even referring to his posts! I've responded to some of the points he raised years ago and have no intention of revisiting them now...
jc quoted him and implied that he might find himself in a situation sometime that he didn't understand. My point was that he wouldn't be the only one. It's called being human. I'm not perfect, nobody is. Get the chip off your shoulder.
If that does happen (and I fervently hope it doesn't), I don't think the type he's flying will have any impact on the situation. The idea that the airliner design consensus from the late '50s to the early '80s was some kind of golden era is provably false. Likewise, the idea that the FBW Airbus types are any more difficult to understand when in an unexpected failure mode than their brethren from other manufacturers is simply not supported by the evidence of the last two decades.
@A-3TWENTY - I've asked this before and I'll ask it again. You remember the incident when the sidestick controls were inadvertantly connected in reverse, and it took quick action from the pilot in the opposite seat to remedy? Now imagine what would have happened if the sticks were connected and the pilot in the correctly-wired seat could not overcome the force-feedback.
The sticks are not connected for several reasons, and it's worth understanding what those reasons are before asserting that the design decision was a mistake.