Quote:
In the specific case of alternate 2B law, some coefficients used in the longitudinal flight control law become speed-independent and are set for the maximum speed for the aeroplane configuration (330 kt in clean configuration). This hardly modifies the behaviour of the aeroplane in comparison to normal law, but can nevertheless induce an unusual response dynamic when the aeroplane has an abnormally low speed for the configuration.
So when the THS started moving, NU, it was at this time that both PF and OTTO were commanding a flight path into STALL. For different reasons? Or were both trying to maintain "1G"?
Does that constitute the "Unusual Flight Response" ? BEA are saying the unusual response was that of the aircraft?
Is that what that sentence is saying about Alternate Law 2B?
Quote:
A homogenous law, ensuring aircraft behaviour independent of the flight conditions and, in particular, independent of the centre of gravity location, is achieved by tabulating the gains as a function of the computed airspeed, high-lift configuration and centre of gravity location.
Was 447 trying to "Land"? Did she confuse "high lift configuration" with 'high drag configuration'
Last edited by Lyman; 9th Aug 2012 at 13:34.