FLy By Wire
FLy By Wire
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All of them.
Plus nosewheel steering.
Plus throttles.
Plus ramps.
Difference is, that they are there to ENHANCE the aircraft's handling not to prevent it.
Mechanical back up system (with degraded flying qualities) on flying controls.
Plus nosewheel steering.
Plus throttles.
Plus ramps.
Difference is, that they are there to ENHANCE the aircraft's handling not to prevent it.
Mechanical back up system (with degraded flying qualities) on flying controls.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wok, I have flown both and I don`t know what you mean by "preventing aircraft handling". One of the french development aircraft was fitted with a side stick and Concorde would have been improved greatly if anyone could have afforded to fit a fully FBW control system. I`m not knocking the SST it is still a dream to fly.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seiously, though, the SSC effectively does have a full FBW system - Mech. mode is not there for cost reasons but because there was no way the regulatory bodies of the '60s or '70s would dream of allowing FBW without back-up.
To my knowledge, mechanical mode hasn't been used in anger in all the type's years of commmercial flight.
There are many ways in which the A320 series can be seen to be the son of Concorde - eg the sidestick already mentioned (fitted to 02, I believe), the use of limit selection switches (to,flt,crs ratings) while leaving throttles fully open must presage the detents on the 320, inertial input to autothrottle etc.
I do have to disagree with the assertion that the Conc would necessarily have been improved by the use of sidesticks - it already has the most outstanding handling qualities; a tribute to the French half of the design team who were responsible for flt control systems.
To my knowledge, mechanical mode hasn't been used in anger in all the type's years of commmercial flight.
There are many ways in which the A320 series can be seen to be the son of Concorde - eg the sidestick already mentioned (fitted to 02, I believe), the use of limit selection switches (to,flt,crs ratings) while leaving throttles fully open must presage the detents on the 320, inertial input to autothrottle etc.
I do have to disagree with the assertion that the Conc would necessarily have been improved by the use of sidesticks - it already has the most outstanding handling qualities; a tribute to the French half of the design team who were responsible for flt control systems.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never really liked the ramshorn column on Concorde and still think a side stick would be better. However I was referring to the overall advantages of a full FBW system. You could do away with the FE and panel (stand by for flack) and the weight saving would be very significant There are many other advantages of a fully digital system but, regretably, it`s all academic!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats the big attraction to having a side stick anyone? I think side sticks are horrible horrible things. Whats the problem with having a big fat control column between your legs?
At least with control columns you partly understand what the aeroplane is doing while the A/P is on. Compare this to a side stick which does nothing.
At least with control columns you partly understand what the aeroplane is doing while the A/P is on. Compare this to a side stick which does nothing.
The sidestick on the 'bus is great, it is much more comfortable to sit in the thing for long periods without the restriction of a large (I know I am getting to dodgy territory here) metal object stuck between your legs. The other huge advantage (don't knock it till you have tried it) is the table, paperwork and eating are far easier with it. The fact it does not move when the a/p is engaged just does not seem to a problem, I've been on it 3 years now and it is not an issue. Sorry for rising to the bait, I know this is Concorde thread but once again the poor old Airbus picks up flak from those who know very little about it.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max, dont tell me you watch the control column just to make sure it works? The stick is out the way because it doesn't need to visually display what the plane is doing. The pilot has other means of knowing what the plane is doing without needing to monitor the column.. .I like the arm rest position availble with the stick too! <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> . .Just out of interest, without abusing your professionalism, what license and current type are you if any?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LRC please contact Boeing and tell them about sidesticks. On the airframe that lift my namesakes into the air Boeing have spent so long making it fly like a "real" airoplane that there might as well be cables running back to the PCU's. Looking up under the floor looks no different to its predicessors with cables, pulleys, bellcranks etc. When I heard I was to play with a FBW a/c I nearly retired my turnbarrel tools. . .Boeings answer was that pilots weren't ready for the controls not feeding back surface movement. The weight saved would mean with a full a/c the skipper could carry his wallet without inducing a nose down pitch. MEEEOOOOWW
Long Range Cruise,
My post was a response to Super Ted who seemed to suggest that it was a disadvantage to have no feedback from the side-stick. I agree with you, the system is fine as it is. The issue of having no feedback or movement is one of those things that is raised by critics of the system, in reality when you operate the thing it is not an issue. Seeing as you asked I am a 320/321 Captain based at LHR, about 1700 hours on the 'Bus and about 3500 on the 737 so I have seen both sides of the debate from a practical point of view. Whilst not perfect the Airbus system is very impressive and I am most certainly a fan.
My post was a response to Super Ted who seemed to suggest that it was a disadvantage to have no feedback from the side-stick. I agree with you, the system is fine as it is. The issue of having no feedback or movement is one of those things that is raised by critics of the system, in reality when you operate the thing it is not an issue. Seeing as you asked I am a 320/321 Captain based at LHR, about 1700 hours on the 'Bus and about 3500 on the 737 so I have seen both sides of the debate from a practical point of view. Whilst not perfect the Airbus system is very impressive and I am most certainly a fan.
