Having said that it is an engineers preference... They have not just left the side sticks control to being just asynchronous.
They have taken the pain of having the 'Dual Input' call outs and the take over push button as well, wonder what is the school of thought that has gone in.
Also, I'm trying to find out if the other FBW airplanes with side stick have a similar take on it.
There's always a reason to madness as there's madness to every reasoning. Wonder why chose one over the other...
I hope I will not be deleted once again on that subject?
The reason I see is the choice of using the C* law, piloting Nz and not speed. Not only A and B limit Nz (they called that "protection", and A managed a hard limitation when B managed a soft limitation), but A and B pilot their effective system to Nz=1. It attenuates low turbulence, and that is a commercial choice done with the engineer fantasm to reduce "noise" and to realize more than the pilots are able to do (competition between pilots and enginers).
The feedback in the closed loop in consequence modifies the result of pilot's stick input with the help of aerodynamic force of autotrim. In result nor A nor B can disconnect the autotrim.
And you put the Nz law equation in the feedback. Nz is not the speed but its derivative. The output Nz of the feedback goes bakwards to meet the pilot's stick want, both are compared in the sommator and difference is the "input" of the closed loop.
If you want to add the pilot's want (the stick position and tendances) the system must use use the same dimension than Nz that is acceleration L.T-² and no more speed. In the direct loop the first thing you have to do then is an integration of the input signal. You can watch that integration appears as the factor 1/s in the A333Zab old schematic, where "s" is the Lagrangian operator).
That integration logic operates and appears in the small movements of the stick described by PJ2 or Bubbers44 and gums and in the slow accumulated movement of elevator autotrim and in the fact that seeing the stick position (of both pilots) cannot be interpretated like classic position of sticks and control.
The Viper needs the Nz feedback to realize hard and high limitations needed by modern air combat uses, not to try to increase the crews comfort... with nz=1! They need other values of Nz that gums could modify with the thumb on the top of the stick, piloting himself Nz and not leaving Nz control to the effective system like A or B.
Could some of you (A, B, FBW fighter pilots, engineers, designers, salers) confirm? Thanks.