This last could obviously be added to current aircraft without difficulty! Why isn't it?
Because nobody gives two hoots about extracting a few hundred more kilos out of a takeoff...
or maybe it is technically very difficult and/or the regulators are unable to work out how it will be reliable/safe enough and/or the costs involved outweigh the benefits?
Reality check required...
Originally Posted by Tourist
By contrast, the tech knowledge required for the Airbus CBT is more like "the ladybird book of planes"
In most of the recent LOC prangs, a rocket-scientist knowledge of how the thing works wouldn't necessarily have saved them. Being able to fly would have (as well as having a stab trim that doesn't run full back just because Joe Bloggs is holding full backstick
).
Originally Posted by Tourist
The fact that Airbus manage to be incredibly safe under these circumstances make me think that it is deliberate policy and not degradation of standards that has led to this.
Yep, and guess what, the boffins/RS test pilots have been proved wrong. The first skill you need is be able to fly. Can't fly? You'll die. Worry about the pressure of a gearbox later.