The Airbus can easily be hand flown BUT it's a tad trickier than "conventional" aircraft (meaning aircraft that you can trim) because you cannot "trim a speed".

Here's a way to visualize the difference between an Airbus and a plane you can trim:

Airplane you can trim: Straight and level, 250 knots, AP, FD, ATHR off, you retard the the thrust to idle, hands off, the airplane descends at 250 knots.

Airbus: Same scenario, you retard the thrust to idle, hands off, the airplane continues straight and level and starts slowing down, increasing pitch attitude to maintain the flight path.

You can think of the side-stick as a "flight path selector". Whatever flight path you have when you release the stick is what flight path the aircraft will maintain (until you exceed the flight envelope but that's another subject).

So, for example, when you're flying around in the terminal area getting vectors for an approach and they tell you descend from FL 100 to FL 60, you have to retard the thrust levers to idle AND make a DEFINITE nose down push on the sidestick to make the airplane go down.

In my MD-80 days all I had to do was pull the power off.

So you make your nose down input, now you have to pay a lot of attention to the speed to make sure you have EXACTLY set the correct pitch attitude to maintain your 250 knots or whatever (the odds of which are slim to none) so WATCH THAT SPEED and KEEP watching it because you will never actually set this theoretical EXACT pitch attitude to maintain the correct speed for anything longer than about a minute or two if you're lucky.

The reverse is also true in that when you add power, you better PULL that nose up, it won't go up by itself like in a "conventional" airplane that is always trying to maintain its trimmed speed.

There have already been at least 2 Airbus crashes during go arounds where the guys failed to adequately increase the pitch attitude and the airplane just went downhill faster and faster when they pushed the thrust levers to TOGA. (There was more to it than that obviously, but it was a major factor.)

One was a Gulf Air in Bahrain like about 10 years ago and the was only a few years ago somewhere in the Black Sea or some inland lake in Eastern Europe or where ever.

Those 2 crashes most likely would not have happened had they been flying airplanes that you can trim because after setting TOGA thrust, the airplane would have pitched up mightily to maintain the trimmed approach speed with TOGA thrust. They would have had to push the control column forward HARD and even trimmed nose down to achieve those flight paths into the water that those guys achieved effortlessly in their Airbuses.

Another thing: the thrust lever travel is shorter than on other airplanes so the thrust appears appears a bit more sensitive but it's not a big deal, you get used to it pretty quick.

So, once you understand the subtle but important differences between flying an airplane that is always trying to fly the last selected flight path versus an airplane that is always trying to fly the last speed you've trimmed it for, hand flying an Airbus, while not quite as easy as hand flying a trimmable airplane, is nothing to fear. Just scan the hell out of your speed all the time.

And that's my 2 cents worth.

aviatorhi - Sorry but you are talking rubbish. Are you one of those characters that ignores SOPs? You certainly sound it. Just what is your experience that you have reached these astonishing conclusions? How much airline flying, light, medium and heavy and what routes, much USA experience?

John,

There are no situations where it is inappropriate to hand fly.

And in all fairness there are 3 I can think of, CAT II and CATIII ops as well as cruising in RVSM. Though we all well know that's not what we're talking about here.

Parabellum,

I've watched the procedures of other carriers, like the prohibition on the PF setting bugs, and find them pointless, we have no such prohibition, and I have no interest in flying for carriers that turn pilots into drones rather than airmen.

DozyWannabe: >"Airbus FBW Normal Law augmentations ... it's not really anything more than an evolution of the artificial feel technology that airliners have been using for over half a century"

With the greatest respect, I disagree vehemently. I actually think the belief quoted above was a factor in many if not most [thankfully not very numerous] Airbus accidents to date.

Just the fact you can drop out of Normal into Alternate into Direct makes things very different.

So what about CAT II on aircraft with no autoland?

Why not?

reading this thread how privileged am I that for ten years, approx 6000 hours and roughly 10000 landings I hand flew every sector, it was in an Islander mind you!

I'm obviously missing something here. Why on Earth would anyone choose to deliberately use reduced automation in marginal conditions?

I'm a pilot and it's my job, that's why.

Would I be correct in surmising that the first time you'd want to hand fly a raw data NDB to minima in a 35 knot crosswind would be when you're forced to, possibly by a surprising technical problem half way down the approach? Or maybe you think practicing once in a blue moon in benign weather is adequate preparation?

You are absolutely full of :mad: Spandex.

Which bit? I'm a pilot or its my job?

What about cat3 with no autopilot...

Indeed, so the only time you shouldn't hand fly is in RVSM.

FC - CRJ or EMB, or something else?

Well, regarding RVSM...
The regulation actually tells you that you need to have autopilot AVAILABLE:E

Indeed, so the only time you shouldn't hand fly is...never!

Glad we got that cleared up.

We are forced to hand fly our CATIII approaches.

You love your automation... I get it.

I have hardly any use for it besides altitude hold (we don't have CAT II or CAT III anyway).

I don't think you need to be in actual IMC to practice an instrument approach. You can practice just fine in VMC. Just don't look outside.

If I'm doing it in IMC I don't think that counts as "practice" I think I'm actually doing it. Not so?

Unless the A/P F/D are of no help at all, I would feel much better sitting in the back of someone's airplane if they would use them in actual conditions.

As an intermediate step, new guys can learn A LOT about hand flying their airplanes with the flight directors on but the auto-thrust should be off for it to be really effective. With auto-thrust on it's almost pointless.

(Edited to fix the font size. Sorry Sabena, didn't know I was shouting. As time passes I have to tilt my head further and further back to get more and more magnification from my progressive lenses... also, I thought ALL CAPS was shouting... also I'm new to posting and I didn't know how it would look... I'm full of excuses and can keep going if need be... stop me before I excuse again!:) )

There's a time and place for everything. If you read through my posts, you can easily see that I'm a big fan of manual flight. In the A320, I only use auto thrust for automated cat II or III landings and I switch off the A/P and F/D on almost all approaches. The important word is "almost".

I'm absolutely, positively sure that I can get my A320 down to cat I ils minima with 550 m vis in a 35 kts gusty crosswind with A/P, F/D, A/T and one engine off with the needles centered. I even believe that I can land the A320 in actual cat III minima without A/P, F/D or A/T. (Done it in the sim) But, I do think that anybody who fails to see that there are sometimes conditions where using some or all of the autoflight systems is the most appropriate thing to do, are even more dangerous then the guys who always fly through the A/P.. (Unless your flying old equipment, without a modern, reliable autoflight system of course)

There's nothing wrong in using the A/P because it makes your life and work easier in certain conditions, as long as you don't need the A/P to fly the plane, because you're not good enough at flying it yourself. :ok:

Oh, and please, when ATC offers you do a visual approach in Corfu in ideal conditions, don't turn the offer down! :rolleyes:

(Ultra Glide? why are you shouting?)

Why? If it means that you're going to be extended, stuck into the hold or whatever and use a load more gas then I shall make sure that happens. No skin off my nose as I won't be using anymore fuel than planned, but you will. If its a company aircraft following me then I'll do my absolute best to make sure they don't have to fly any further than necessary.