Originally Posted by
Capn Bloggs
What's all this Dozy and Clandestino codswallop about the horrors of grabbing the (real) stick off the FO if he can't cope?? So what if I take over? If I was flying with 200hr FOs, I would expect to occasionally.
Er - neither Dozy nor Clandestino argued against taking control from an FO out of their depth, or anyone else for that matter. The point is that whether in a conventional or Airbus FBW layout, such a transfer of control must be done correctly - with "I have control/My aircraft" etc., in conjunction with a "Go Around" call if necessary. Simply yanking on the primary flight control without warning is a very risky thing to do with any type of control layout - as I'm sure you well know - because it runs the risk of startling the pilot in the opposite seat which in turn risks an unpredictable outcome.
Originally Posted by
rudderrudderrat
Why do Airbus still fit coupled rudder pedals? Why not save weight and complexity with uncoupled rudder bars?
I suspect you know why - because the absolute worst-case scenario in terms of control reversion in a FBW Airbus is manual trim only in pitch and rudder. Tying the THS and rudder control into the digital flight control system exclusively would remove that last fail-safe.
As with conventional types, the coupling of the rudder and trim controls is a side-effect of the electro-mechanical implementation - and it's the one aspect of control in which combined muscle power might still have an effect in terms of expediting the required control input.
Originally Posted by
CONF iture
Absolutely un recommended procedure.
Should never take place.
True, but it's also true in conventional-layout ops. Unannounced manipulation of the controls from the opposite side is risky, as I said above - and you must know that when going by the book, "follow-through" has no place in line ops, even line training. It should not be necessary in anything other than trainers and the simulator.