modern computerised aircraft training
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Mum's basement
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
modern computerised aircraft training
Hi...after the recent AF accident, one wonders if advanced automated aircraft have some role to play in a more profound way.
Just would like your views on how training for this new technology should change or has changed. Are these machines becoming too complicated?
Just would like your views on how training for this new technology should change or has changed. Are these machines becoming too complicated?
What new technology? Airbus FBW is with us since 1988. Those who find Airbus too complicated are not supposed to get Airbus type rating on their licences.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I'm not rated on AB...from an aerodynamical perspective-- like gusty cross winds
I believe all fighters have AF otherwise how do you pull 'g'
don't know the shuttle I'm not rated on it either
Salud
PA
I believe all fighters have AF otherwise how do you pull 'g'
don't know the shuttle I'm not rated on it either
Salud
PA
Last edited by Pugilistic Animus; 7th Aug 2009 at 17:13.
Bummer. And I thought that your post was based on experience and not on hearsay. Me, myself and a few thousand pilots who fly or flew FBW Airbi did so without help of pitch feel. Some liked it, some hated it, some didn't care at all but looking at mishap statistics, I am mightily sure that we all made quite good job out of it (for most of the time), even in gusty crosswinds.
Personally, I didn't have any problems switching from conventionally controlled aircraft to A320 and return to "classic" aeroplane was equally uneventful. Methinks that all the stories about FBW controls being significantly different are much ado about nothing.
Personally, I didn't have any problems switching from conventionally controlled aircraft to A320 and return to "classic" aeroplane was equally uneventful. Methinks that all the stories about FBW controls being significantly different are much ado about nothing.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: GlobolStaff02
Age: 39
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the review - I've been looking at them as well. Good luck with your system, it looks to be coming along pretty well. 
website update
website update
It's not the 'C' flight path stability' control law that bothers me simply the lack of a 'q' term. and from some of the reports the Priority switch is not as intuitive as mechanically interlinked controls,...it would make the ship perfect,...although I think a conventional CU [speed stable] ship is more familiar to civilian pilots,...I don't mean the control laws just the LACK OF ARTIFICIAL FEEL!!!!
PA
PA
Last edited by Pugilistic Animus; 9th Sep 2009 at 17:09.
And why is that?
Lack of artificial feel didn't bother me at all. It feels different compared to classic aircraft but its not difficult to get used to. My right thumb appreciated the rest given. Even when practicing direct law in sim, trim wheel was fast and precise and I broke no sweat while returning the bird with the stricken FBW back to simulated runway. Regarding the sim-real life difference, of a couple of hundred former or current FBW Airbus pilots I've had pleasure to meet, only one has ever had the chance to check direct law in actual aeroplane. I have his word that aeroplane behaves even better than the sim, but that's all I have regarding the subject.
As for priority button being non-intuitive, of course it isn't! Nothing about aviation is intuitive to primarily ground-dwelling mammalians and has to be learnt. While non-interlinked controls deprive you of knowing what is your significant cockpit other doing with his stick, they can save you a lot of effort if he goes unconscious and blocks controls.
During incap training, we were briefed that upon recieving incap tap on the shoulder, we are supposed to slam the stick to full forward and outboard, simulating falling over it. This assured that everyone knew where their AP discon/Stick priority button is and how to use it.
Lack of artificial feel didn't bother me at all. It feels different compared to classic aircraft but its not difficult to get used to. My right thumb appreciated the rest given. Even when practicing direct law in sim, trim wheel was fast and precise and I broke no sweat while returning the bird with the stricken FBW back to simulated runway. Regarding the sim-real life difference, of a couple of hundred former or current FBW Airbus pilots I've had pleasure to meet, only one has ever had the chance to check direct law in actual aeroplane. I have his word that aeroplane behaves even better than the sim, but that's all I have regarding the subject.
As for priority button being non-intuitive, of course it isn't! Nothing about aviation is intuitive to primarily ground-dwelling mammalians and has to be learnt. While non-interlinked controls deprive you of knowing what is your significant cockpit other doing with his stick, they can save you a lot of effort if he goes unconscious and blocks controls.
During incap training, we were briefed that upon recieving incap tap on the shoulder, we are supposed to slam the stick to full forward and outboard, simulating falling over it. This assured that everyone knew where their AP discon/Stick priority button is and how to use it.
OK I give but I personally like to feel connected to the airplane so that I can be sensitive to it's demands,...of course if properly trained I can fly an airbus or any other type,...but hey I don't decide these matters anyway.
YouTube - Airbus A320 Lufthansa nearly crashed during crosswind approach
ignore the sensational title of the youtube link
YouTube - Airbus A320 Lufthansa nearly crashed during crosswind approach
ignore the sensational title of the youtube link
We have discussed Hamburg close call in this thread. I think you'll find this post quite interesting.
As for "being sensitive for aeroplane's demands", yes, on airbus one cannot put the newspapers over the yoke and see by their shuffling that the aeroplane has reached the turning point so its time to check the fuel and make note in the navigation log. Good instrument scanning is paramount to being successful bus driver. But airbus does cater for pilots too distracted to frequently check the speed tape while hand flying. There are high AoA and high speed protections in normal law, high and low speed stability in alternate law and in direct law, the aeroplane displays something very similar to conventional speed stability - difference being that stick's pitch neutral doesn't move with speed change.
As for "being sensitive for aeroplane's demands", yes, on airbus one cannot put the newspapers over the yoke and see by their shuffling that the aeroplane has reached the turning point so its time to check the fuel and make note in the navigation log. Good instrument scanning is paramount to being successful bus driver. But airbus does cater for pilots too distracted to frequently check the speed tape while hand flying. There are high AoA and high speed protections in normal law, high and low speed stability in alternate law and in direct law, the aeroplane displays something very similar to conventional speed stability - difference being that stick's pitch neutral doesn't move with speed change.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If this is Tuesday, it must be?
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lack of "q" feel is not really related to an aircraft being FBW. The machines I drive have cables from the yoke to the power control units on the surfaces with only springs for resistance. The "feel" is the same at 130KIAS as 360KIAS. It takes a bit of getting used to, but is not a problem.
Having said that, from a "fun to fly" point of view I would prefer it if they were nice and light at low speed with the force required increasing as you go faster.
Having said that, from a "fun to fly" point of view I would prefer it if they were nice and light at low speed with the force required increasing as you go faster.
