C Series Info
10-16-2018, 07:01 AM
#3041
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I guess as to the control feedback, if it was speed stable then sure I'd want artificial feedback. But that's not the Airbus. And because of that and what the system allows Airbus to program into it it's a lot of fun to hand fly.
10-16-2018, 07:30 AM
#3042
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
For the non Airbus folks, somewhere i read online a great history lesson on the A320 and the side stick and I'll try to find it because it's interesting.
As concisely as I remember it was they wanted a side stick, period. Ergonomics and mechanical simplicity along with safety and smoothness were the driving force, artificial feedback would not have allowed it back then.
But of course you're flying a hydraulic airplane you need that, so they went with roll rate and load factor because it worked at all speeds. It was designed to auto trim and be stable in pitch, not speed. The key was it was coupled with the pilots vision, you had to be looking while flying obviously and you'd move the controls and look for the result and react to that.
So the way it works for you normally is if you pitch up to 10 degrees and let go it stays there. Then without any elevator input just move the stick to the right for a roll of say 20 degrees and let go and it stays there. Then you make very small corrections as you see fit, the less you touch the stick the better.
If you come to it then in the sim when they give you a moment to get used to the jet, put it in level flight take your hand off the stick and take manual thrust and speed up and then go back to idle, note the jet stays pretty much at the same pitch. Even fights the big loss and gain in power from under wing engines. At some point throw the gear down and retract it, put flaps in and out and you'll see it maintains pitch. Its moving the controls to make it happen even with the AP off and your hands off.
Even take one engine to TOGA and the other to idle and you'll see it holds the pitch and stops the roll into the dead engine at about 5 or so degrees. Alternate law it rolls off but not in normal. You'll see the ailerons and spoilers deflected if you look.
I think that's why it's fun. I mean it's a plane that will put both ailerons up in flight if it needs to.
I tell guys it will take them a little while to figure it out... like 2 or 3 seconds and then they'll get it. The Hornet new hires seem to be right at home with it.
So for me the options this gives Airbus in safety and smoothness makes it a really good system. From fighting turbulence on its own, including likely preventing a wake turbulence rollover, to making a v1 cut a simple maneuver that it's not even taught until near the end of the 300s.
As to the normal and alternate law, that is really pretty simple. Normal has hard protections for your max performance benefit, if its unsure those hard protections are right it wont risk being wrong and goes to alternate law.
Now normal law and all its coolness was not designed with a landing mode, it did load factor in the flare, test pilots said no to that. So they designed a mode for flare. But it's not designed in alternate law, so it hands you back the airplane once the gear goes down and gives you direct law. Pretty simple in the grand scheme of things. The other airbus heavies have variations to that.
Once you figure out that the stick doesn't shake (no stick shaker) and the thrust levers don't move and you figure out what it does instead the jet makes a lot more sense. At home study of the Bus without seeing it in action is hard, using it is easy.
As concisely as I remember it was they wanted a side stick, period. Ergonomics and mechanical simplicity along with safety and smoothness were the driving force, artificial feedback would not have allowed it back then.
But of course you're flying a hydraulic airplane you need that, so they went with roll rate and load factor because it worked at all speeds. It was designed to auto trim and be stable in pitch, not speed. The key was it was coupled with the pilots vision, you had to be looking while flying obviously and you'd move the controls and look for the result and react to that.
So the way it works for you normally is if you pitch up to 10 degrees and let go it stays there. Then without any elevator input just move the stick to the right for a roll of say 20 degrees and let go and it stays there. Then you make very small corrections as you see fit, the less you touch the stick the better.
If you come to it then in the sim when they give you a moment to get used to the jet, put it in level flight take your hand off the stick and take manual thrust and speed up and then go back to idle, note the jet stays pretty much at the same pitch. Even fights the big loss and gain in power from under wing engines. At some point throw the gear down and retract it, put flaps in and out and you'll see it maintains pitch. Its moving the controls to make it happen even with the AP off and your hands off.
Even take one engine to TOGA and the other to idle and you'll see it holds the pitch and stops the roll into the dead engine at about 5 or so degrees. Alternate law it rolls off but not in normal. You'll see the ailerons and spoilers deflected if you look.
I think that's why it's fun. I mean it's a plane that will put both ailerons up in flight if it needs to.
I tell guys it will take them a little while to figure it out... like 2 or 3 seconds and then they'll get it. The Hornet new hires seem to be right at home with it.
So for me the options this gives Airbus in safety and smoothness makes it a really good system. From fighting turbulence on its own, including likely preventing a wake turbulence rollover, to making a v1 cut a simple maneuver that it's not even taught until near the end of the 300s.
As to the normal and alternate law, that is really pretty simple. Normal has hard protections for your max performance benefit, if its unsure those hard protections are right it wont risk being wrong and goes to alternate law.
Now normal law and all its coolness was not designed with a landing mode, it did load factor in the flare, test pilots said no to that. So they designed a mode for flare. But it's not designed in alternate law, so it hands you back the airplane once the gear goes down and gives you direct law. Pretty simple in the grand scheme of things. The other airbus heavies have variations to that.
Once you figure out that the stick doesn't shake (no stick shaker) and the thrust levers don't move and you figure out what it does instead the jet makes a lot more sense. At home study of the Bus without seeing it in action is hard, using it is easy.
10-16-2018, 08:01 AM
#3045
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,424
For the non Airbus folks, somewhere i read online a great history lesson on the A320 and the side stick and I'll try to find it because it's interesting.
As concisely as I remember it was they wanted a side stick, period. Ergonomics and mechanical simplicity along with safety and smoothness were the driving force, artificial feedback would not have allowed it back then.
But of course you're flying a hydraulic airplane you need that, so they went with roll rate and load factor because it worked at all speeds. It was designed to auto trim and be stable in pitch, not speed. The key was it was coupled with the pilots vision, you had to be looking while flying obviously and you'd move the controls and look for the result and react to that.
So the way it works for you normally is if you pitch up to 10 degrees and let go it stays there. Then without any elevator input just move the stick to the right for a roll of say 20 degrees and let go and it stays there. Then you make very small corrections as you see fit, the less you touch the stick the better.
If you come to it then in the sim when they give you a moment to get used to the jet, put it in level flight take your hand off the stick and take manual thrust and speed up and then go back to idle, note the jet stays pretty much at the same pitch. Even fights the big loss and gain in power from under wing engines. At some point throw the gear down and retract it, put flaps in and out and you'll see it maintains pitch. Its moving the controls to make it happen even with the AP off and your hands off.
Even take one engine to TOGA and the other to idle and you'll see it holds the pitch and stops the roll into the dead engine at about 5 or so degrees. Alternate law it rolls off but not in normal. You'll see the ailerons and spoilers deflected if you look.
I think that's why it's fun. I mean it's a plane that will put both ailerons up in flight if it needs to.
I tell guys it will take them a little while to figure it out... like 2 or 3 seconds and then they'll get it. The Hornet new hires seem to be right at home with it.
So for me the options this gives Airbus in safety and smoothness makes it a really good system. From fighting turbulence on its own, including likely preventing a wake turbulence rollover, to making a v1 cut a simple maneuver that it's not even taught until near the end of the 300s.
As to the normal and alternate law, that is really pretty simple. Normal has hard protections for your max performance benefit, if its unsure those hard protections are right it wont risk being wrong and goes to alternate law.
Now normal law and all its coolness was not designed with a landing mode, it did load factor in the flare, test pilots said no to that. So they designed a mode for flare. But it's not designed in alternate law, so it hands you back the airplane once the gear goes down and gives you direct law. Pretty simple in the grand scheme of things. The other airbus heavies have variations to that.
Once you figure out that the stick doesn't shake (no stick shaker) and the thrust levers don't move and you figure out what it does instead the jet makes a lot more sense. At home study of the Bus without seeing it in action is hard, using it is easy.
As concisely as I remember it was they wanted a side stick, period. Ergonomics and mechanical simplicity along with safety and smoothness were the driving force, artificial feedback would not have allowed it back then.
But of course you're flying a hydraulic airplane you need that, so they went with roll rate and load factor because it worked at all speeds. It was designed to auto trim and be stable in pitch, not speed. The key was it was coupled with the pilots vision, you had to be looking while flying obviously and you'd move the controls and look for the result and react to that.
So the way it works for you normally is if you pitch up to 10 degrees and let go it stays there. Then without any elevator input just move the stick to the right for a roll of say 20 degrees and let go and it stays there. Then you make very small corrections as you see fit, the less you touch the stick the better.
If you come to it then in the sim when they give you a moment to get used to the jet, put it in level flight take your hand off the stick and take manual thrust and speed up and then go back to idle, note the jet stays pretty much at the same pitch. Even fights the big loss and gain in power from under wing engines. At some point throw the gear down and retract it, put flaps in and out and you'll see it maintains pitch. Its moving the controls to make it happen even with the AP off and your hands off.
Even take one engine to TOGA and the other to idle and you'll see it holds the pitch and stops the roll into the dead engine at about 5 or so degrees. Alternate law it rolls off but not in normal. You'll see the ailerons and spoilers deflected if you look.
I think that's why it's fun. I mean it's a plane that will put both ailerons up in flight if it needs to.
I tell guys it will take them a little while to figure it out... like 2 or 3 seconds and then they'll get it. The Hornet new hires seem to be right at home with it.
So for me the options this gives Airbus in safety and smoothness makes it a really good system. From fighting turbulence on its own, including likely preventing a wake turbulence rollover, to making a v1 cut a simple maneuver that it's not even taught until near the end of the 300s.
As to the normal and alternate law, that is really pretty simple. Normal has hard protections for your max performance benefit, if its unsure those hard protections are right it wont risk being wrong and goes to alternate law.
Now normal law and all its coolness was not designed with a landing mode, it did load factor in the flare, test pilots said no to that. So they designed a mode for flare. But it's not designed in alternate law, so it hands you back the airplane once the gear goes down and gives you direct law. Pretty simple in the grand scheme of things. The other airbus heavies have variations to that.
Once you figure out that the stick doesn't shake (no stick shaker) and the thrust levers don't move and you figure out what it does instead the jet makes a lot more sense. At home study of the Bus without seeing it in action is hard, using it is easy.
The hornet does have a CSS mode that is somewhat like flying the bus. No one ever used it. The 757/767 also has that mode however it was used so little it’s often deactivated.
10-16-2018, 08:20 AM
#3047
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,420
I've enjoyed flying the bus the past year after three on the 717 and more than a dozen on the 757/767 (which I loved).
My contention is that the bus is very enjoyable to fly IF you already know how to fly and have quite a few hours behind you. Understanding all the aerodynamics at play while putting the bus through its moves is a lot of fun and I don't feel like a "manager" at all. I truly feel that I'm using my skills and experience to fly this aircraft well.
On the other hand taking someone with few hours and even less airmanship and just telling them to push enough buttons and all will be well is not a good thing.
My contention is that the bus is very enjoyable to fly IF you already know how to fly and have quite a few hours behind you. Understanding all the aerodynamics at play while putting the bus through its moves is a lot of fun and I don't feel like a "manager" at all. I truly feel that I'm using my skills and experience to fly this aircraft well.
On the other hand taking someone with few hours and even less airmanship and just telling them to push enough buttons and all will be well is not a good thing.
10-16-2018, 08:40 AM
#3049
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: 320B
Posts: 369
I've enjoyed flying the bus the past year after three on the 717 and more than a dozen on the 757/767 (which I loved).
My contention is that the bus is very enjoyable to fly IF you already know how to fly and have quite a few hours behind you. Understanding all the aerodynamics at play while putting the bus through its moves is a lot of fun and I don't feel like a "manager" at all. I truly feel that I'm using my skills and experience to fly this aircraft well.
On the other hand taking someone with few hours and even less airmanship and just telling them to push enough buttons and all will be well is not a good thing.
My contention is that the bus is very enjoyable to fly IF you already know how to fly and have quite a few hours behind you. Understanding all the aerodynamics at play while putting the bus through its moves is a lot of fun and I don't feel like a "manager" at all. I truly feel that I'm using my skills and experience to fly this aircraft well.
On the other hand taking someone with few hours and even less airmanship and just telling them to push enough buttons and all will be well is not a good thing.
*for those senior to me: Airbus is a death trap, do not bid.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
