FBW Yoke Sensitiviy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Out of radar space
Age: 52
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FBW Yoke Sensitiviy
Ok chaps,
We already know that 777 first came as the FBW Narrow Body A/C with a yoke. But I was never get used to idea using the FBW without the auto-trimming, especially with a yoke.
You have a feeling of depth, bank, pitch and even the wind when using a HYD yoke(maybe not as the manual reversion but still), as when the control surface move, it moves the actuator, puts pressure and moves the yoke. At point of larger G, it becomes harder to move so it can point the limits to pilot. Thus you can have the correct trim on yoke. Airbus I suppose does this making restrictions on banking, even with non-A/P "hand flying". Trim is done automatically while in Normal and Alternate laws. Correct me if it's not exact.
But does the T7 also features that?? "Simulating" the way yoke acts in a HYD/Mechanical system, and allowing pilot to trim as its done in the "classical" way. Not just the T7, also the B748, and B787.
Also another little question, Airbus uses autothrust and there is no react on levers(as far as I know), Boeing does it in the autothrottle way and levers move. T7 has which one?
We already know that 777 first came as the FBW Narrow Body A/C with a yoke. But I was never get used to idea using the FBW without the auto-trimming, especially with a yoke.
You have a feeling of depth, bank, pitch and even the wind when using a HYD yoke(maybe not as the manual reversion but still), as when the control surface move, it moves the actuator, puts pressure and moves the yoke. At point of larger G, it becomes harder to move so it can point the limits to pilot. Thus you can have the correct trim on yoke. Airbus I suppose does this making restrictions on banking, even with non-A/P "hand flying". Trim is done automatically while in Normal and Alternate laws. Correct me if it's not exact.
But does the T7 also features that?? "Simulating" the way yoke acts in a HYD/Mechanical system, and allowing pilot to trim as its done in the "classical" way. Not just the T7, also the B748, and B787.
Also another little question, Airbus uses autothrust and there is no react on levers(as far as I know), Boeing does it in the autothrottle way and levers move. T7 has which one?
The B777 trim switch is only used for speed changes. There is no need to trim for turns, configuration changes, or power changes. The thrust levers move in response to autothrottle power changes just as if you were hand flying. All Boeing autothrottle systems are like that. A lot of pilots prefer this as it gives them another cue as to what the autoflight system is doing.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 777 works. You can debate FBW vs hydraulics, A vs B, but the 777 is a great flying airplane where the FBW is an invisible system. It just works. No mode shifts that catch you out. It just works.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Westnest,
FBW vs Cables and pulleys makes no difference to the yoke feel it's exactly the same, both are completely artificial. Under the floor is a mechanical set up just the same as any Boeing yoke which at some point connects to springs to provide artificially feel and some additional hydraulic/electromechanical resistance when required.
The trick with FBW is to make sure the 1cm, 1 inch or whatever amount of movement under the floor translates to the corresponding hydraulic actuator movement and resulting flight control movement and pitch/roll rate plus provide the visual yoke movement feedback.
As stated FBW can take advantage of the fact that the lack of mechanical connections between yoke and actuators means the flight controls can be commanded to move without having to feedback to the yoke and therefore remove the requirement to trim as it's being done behind the scenes with no feedback.
FBW vs Cables and pulleys makes no difference to the yoke feel it's exactly the same, both are completely artificial. Under the floor is a mechanical set up just the same as any Boeing yoke which at some point connects to springs to provide artificially feel and some additional hydraulic/electromechanical resistance when required.
The trick with FBW is to make sure the 1cm, 1 inch or whatever amount of movement under the floor translates to the corresponding hydraulic actuator movement and resulting flight control movement and pitch/roll rate plus provide the visual yoke movement feedback.
As stated FBW can take advantage of the fact that the lack of mechanical connections between yoke and actuators means the flight controls can be commanded to move without having to feedback to the yoke and therefore remove the requirement to trim as it's being done behind the scenes with no feedback.
Last edited by SMOC; 7th Dec 2013 at 22:34.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: france
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by misd-agin
The 777 works. You can debate FBW vs hydraulics, A vs B, but the 777 is a great flying airplane where the FBW is an invisible system.It just works. No mode shifts that catch you out. It just works
Did Russian pilots in Kazan had working invisible licenses too ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Out of radar space
Age: 52
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since when is the B777 a narrowbody
AF Flight 296 was one of the famous FBW incidents, though it wasn't about the control surfaces or the airframe. The thrust levers was just a decoration instead of controlling the fuel flow, or the Captain Michel Asseline was trying to commit suicide with his passengers on board.
What if 777's overintelligent computers disagree with the pilots commands just as in the AF296?
If everything is simply is on the computer's determination, that would make no sense to try a yoke to be tweaked as its feeling like a hydraulic yoke. Because in fact aircraft decides on its own pitch and bank angle.
So 777 has a bit less strict FBW system than what found in buses?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What if 777's overintelligent computers disagree with the pilots commands just as in the AF296?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Out of radar space
Age: 52
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aren't thrust levers "just a decoration" on any FADEC-equipped aircraft?
Plastic PPRuNer
"....therefore remove the requirement to trim as it's being done behind the scenes with no feedback"
Hasn't this created a few problems lately when the aircraft has significant amounts of trim in that the aircrew will only be aware of if they specifically look for it?
Is this not confusing when modes change or the AP drops out?
Hasn't this created a few problems lately when the aircraft has significant amounts of trim in that the aircrew will only be aware of if they specifically look for it?
Is this not confusing when modes change or the AP drops out?
Aren't thrust levers "just a decoration" on any FADEC-equipped aircraft?
Perhaps on Airbus, but not on Boeing.
On ALL Boeing FADEC-equipped, the thrust command is directly linked to the throttle position. Baring some sort of mechanical failure that would prevent the engine from responding, on a Boeing if you set the throttle at idle, you'll get idle. Set the throttle at part power, and you'll get part power, set high power, well, you know... On Boeing, there is no aircraft computer between the throttle and the FADEC - it's a basic design philosophy.
Perhaps on Airbus, but not on Boeing.
On ALL Boeing FADEC-equipped, the thrust command is directly linked to the throttle position. Baring some sort of mechanical failure that would prevent the engine from responding, on a Boeing if you set the throttle at idle, you'll get idle. Set the throttle at part power, and you'll get part power, set high power, well, you know... On Boeing, there is no aircraft computer between the throttle and the FADEC - it's a basic design philosophy.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FBW vs Cables and pulleys makes no difference to the yoke feel it's exactly the same, both are completely artificial. Under the floor is a mechanical set up just the same as any Boeing yoke which at some point connects to springs to provide artificially feel and some additional hydraulic/electromechanical resistance when required.
The only difference FBW makes on the B777 and B787 is that the artificial resistance is software-controlled as opposed to mechanical.
Thus far there have been no accidents on the line put down to errors in FBW implementation - none.
On Boeing, there is no aircraft computer between the throttle and the FADEC - it's a basic design philosophy.
"....therefore remove the requirement to trim as it's being done behind the scenes with no feedback"
Hasn't this created a few problems lately when the aircraft has significant amounts of trim in that the aircrew will only be aware of if they specifically look for it?
Is this not confusing when modes change or the AP drops out?
Hasn't this created a few problems lately when the aircraft has significant amounts of trim in that the aircrew will only be aware of if they specifically look for it?
Is this not confusing when modes change or the AP drops out?
Last edited by DozyWannabe; 16th Dec 2013 at 17:01.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Grobelling through the murk to the sunshine above.
Age: 60
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Same with Airbus. The FMGC can order thrust to assist control inputs, but it augments the original settings rather than overriding them.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: cloud 9
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys, a bit of an old thread but here goes .
Artificial feel unit simulates the air pressure loads on the yoke so the pilot does not end up over controlling the aircraft ,as powered flying controls are not back driven .
Does this apply to FBW as well ? ( A320 ) because from my understanding the FBW systems have flight envelop protections so there is no fear of over controlling the aircraft . you can have a simple spring centered yoke/stick and call it a day .
If that indeed is the case then how is it handled when the protections are lost ?
SO in short , does the A320 have an artificial feel unit or q feel ?
I am sure the 737 has this .
Artificial feel unit simulates the air pressure loads on the yoke so the pilot does not end up over controlling the aircraft ,as powered flying controls are not back driven .
Does this apply to FBW as well ? ( A320 ) because from my understanding the FBW systems have flight envelop protections so there is no fear of over controlling the aircraft . you can have a simple spring centered yoke/stick and call it a day .
If that indeed is the case then how is it handled when the protections are lost ?
SO in short , does the A320 have an artificial feel unit or q feel ?
I am sure the 737 has this .
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FBW Airbus types (as in A32x/A330/A340/A380) have passive spring feel in the sidesticks in all modes. As far as I can tell it's not an issue and hasn't been now for around 25 years.