Is sidestick the way of the future
 

Hi everyone

I wanted to discuss about sidestick controllers. It is little over 22 years since Airbus A320 the worlds first digital fly by wire jetliner started commercial service. One giant big step in the world of civil aviation. Now we have A330,340 and the A380 all with sidestick controllers. The Sukhoi regiaonl jeliner and theBombardair C series too wil have sidesticks.

I want to ask Airbus pilots these questions . Do you like the sidestick . Do you feel it is more ergonomic and precise compared to the conventinal control coloumn. Finally do you think is sidestick the way of the future. I would like you hear from all of you.

Thank you.

Hi ravi30,

No doubt your request will generate some lively discussion, but I trust that, if you haven't done so already, you spend a day or two looking through the column-kilometres of PPRuNe threads discussing possible FBW factors in various Airbus incidents. I've even contributed to one or two of them myself.

It may be that some of those who have previously devoted time and trouble to sharing their considerable knowledge and experience may be a little reluctant to rehearse these arguments all over again. It is certainly a fascinating topic. The ergonomic and engineering factors for and against sidesticks in a two-pilot cockpit are not as simple as they may first appear.

That said, good luck in your forthcoming dissertation.

Chris

I`ve flown both and I love the sidestick.

Fighters are flown in dog fights , close to the ground and other extreme conditions with sidesticks. Why airliners couldn`t?

Furthermore in a flight of 12 hours you will use it for 5 minutes max.Sometimes a lot less. Why I need a column stuck there in front of me?

More.If you have an useless column , you can`t have a very usable table.

It`s just advantages.

Those who like columns are those old fashioned minds which resist to all kinds of changes. Those which , left by themselves would be still flying open cockpits.

A-3TWENTY

Having flown both with column and side stick, back and forth, I like both.
Certainly the side stick is no disadvantace flying-wise.
Having no table is, though!

I've flown both and I much prefer the sidestick. I find it much more accurate (although that could be the aircraft FBW design too) and the space you have in front of you makes for a much more pleasant working environment. I find it much more tiring flying a Boeing, and I think that is partly caused by the cramped flight deck, which is made more cramped by having the control column.

The only benefit I can see with the control column is that it is easier to tell just what the other pilot is doing, inputs wise.

It is very easy to interconnect a force-feedbacked sidestick. I know the DLR developed something like that on request of airbus about 25 or so years back, but it was ditched because it cost a few bucks more.

For me the ideal airplance would have the spacious airbus cockpit with sidestick, but interconnected ones, moving thrust levers and overall the boeing flightcontrol philosophy as well as their EICAS.

Also, it is important to note different flight control law typically apply to a side sticked plane....Boeing FBW is so-called C*u stable meaning-conventional-or speed stable...whereas Airbus is'C' or flight path stable...although I think a 'q' term' would also be beneficial:ouch:

I fully agree with Denti's post. Airbus-style sidesticks, just interconnected, would be fantastic. Have seen a demo sidestick on some airshow by an airbus supplier years ago (must have been ILA08). They could even emulate stall buffet and other "feelings" on their connected sidesticks. Most impressive. That should be the way to go for the Airbus NGSA A320-follow on or however they call it. Current sticks are responsive but can feel a tad "dead" if you have seen the difference.

And I'd personally dislike any fixed F-16-style sticks. However for a high g environment they might just be best fitting. Different business.

Finally the keyboard will be the most used interface during any flight. Moving the yoke out of the center seems just logical.

Flying both, control wheel and side stick (727&A300, A3402&A320).

It's not a matter of steering the plane, it's a matter of understanding what's behind.

If you look to the (many) changes of the FCOM of A320/330/340 (I don't know about 380) issues, it may give you an idea how complex this AC are.

At the very end it's just a marketing tool, to say e.g. A is better than B.

Out:)

A-3TWENTY - You had a good post right up until you wrote the above, then you spoilt it with a really silly comment.

Uhoh- here we go:}

-you're not a pilot
-you're talking tosh
-I have 100000 hrs
-My willy is the grandest site



and so on and so forth:ooh:

A 3Twenty, You must be an absolute joy to fly a fourteen hour day with! With that kind of comment Im sure you will find that you will be getting much less than the five minutes pole time you claim at the moment, you might like to try hand flying it a bit more, you might even enjoy it.{By the way I was one of the very early drivers of the Bus, have also flown an open cockpit}

Here is what the UK CAA has to say on the sidestick à la sauce Airbus :
Does anyone have information on the Sukhoi regional jeliner and the Bombardair C serie, what type of sidesticks do they have or plan to have : interconnected or not ?

No ejector seats :}

When flying manually is allowed , I have no objections.Would you use to get upset when your FO didn`t want to fly manually? I don`t .Up to him.He is not neither better nor worst because he decided to fly AP all the time.

For sure!! Since you are retired , you are not updated , but nowadays with RNAV SID`s and Approaches , you are not allowed to fly manually.Here in China , one RNAV dep. requires you to engage de AP not later than 500 Ft ( 1 minute).
During RNAV APP , AP is a requirement and for the approach ...Non-Precision or CATI , you can disconect it (~3 min.) . If you are going for a CAT II /III or RNAV..again you are not allowed.

Again , we have restrictions with the FOM.There are number of conditions to fly manually. Min.visibility of 5000 M , bla ,bla , bla.

More. Have you heard abot FOQA? Yes..nowadays , even your taxi speed is controlled.The speed you turn.The speed you enter in your gate.Otherwise....a cofee with the chief pilot( during your day off , of course).And you know? I`m not one of those guys who like to be around the chief pilot. I do prefer my family.

And what?? I like those old charming airplanes .I love them. I flew BT-19. But definetely they don`t apply for the comercial aviation anymore and we have to accept that.They had their time.
I`m not criticizing the old birds. I`m just saying that fight against the changes is useless. Or do you think that if all pilots complain the industry will bring the F/Es back??
People are so hard to accept changes that almost 25 years after the sidestick was implemented , you still hear people saying that it could`t be there.(like the auto thrust by the way).

To end-up:
Those who REALLY enjoy flying are those who have they own bird , or go to the airfields, rent one to enjoy the real flying.

Don´t tell me that one flying 90,100 hours a month in a very restricted airspace like the european one , with FOQAs recording your flight , and sometimes with one FO that you barely know , you will fly manually most of the time .Do you??
This is an era where most of the chief pilots , once they manage to seat their ass down in that chair , forget completely they once were pilots and go to the bean counters side.

I still like airplanes and the flight ( once doors are closed) , but all the environment you have to deal with to have the chance to fly and bring a shorter salary home...I`m tired out.There was a time when this still was a profession of gentlemen...


A-3TWENTY

Dunno, one of the top 5 european airlines and our OPS-manual actually urges us to hand fly wherever possible to keep our skills up. But then, we are allowed to hand fly RNAV departures and arrivals, are allowed to hand fly CAT II approaches although of course we have to do autolands in CAT IIIa/b cases.

Personally i like to hand fly below FL100, but sometimes up to cruising altitude, doing raw data approaches or simulated raw data ones (NPAs with boeings IAN technology) whenever i feel like it and the captain is comfortable with (some do not like the FO hand flying, sadly).

FOQA is a given nowadays, however that the question is not if it is there, but how the data is used. Seems from your post china still takes the stone-age approach of using it as a personal prosecution tool instead of a modern SMS.

I do agree however that renting a nice acro plane for personal pleasure beats flying the boeing hands down, however over here prices are quite prohibitive for private flying as you won't find a good plane for less than around 200€ an hour.

Do you like the sidestick.

No. It doesnt feel natural and I get no feeling of security like I did with the Boeings.

Do you feel it is more ergonomic and precise compared to the conventinal control coloumn.

No. With the column I could make the airplane sing. I cant do the same with a goddamn Scarebus sidestick. I reckon sidesticks were realy meant to make the conversion easyer for gays and women.

Finally do you think is sidestick the way of the future.

Unfortunatley yeh but thank christ I willve retired by then.

- 3600hr PIC A320

How long have sidesticks been about you might ask. Honeywell produced what was known as a "formation stick", first fitted to the B-24 during WWII, also B-17 and B-29, to reduce fatigue on long formation flights. Operated via the autopilot.

'Slasher' said:

Which says all you need to know about:
:rolleyes:

I can't believe they let people like this have such an amazing career.

There is no justice in the world :ugh:

I doubt Slasher really does have 3600 PIC on the 320. If he does please let me know what outfit he's with so I can keep my family well clear.