3 ms·
Maybe, surely more so if the pilots resisting that intended change in control were given priority. I very much like how the redundant sticks are /forced/ to st
by mjevans 9y ago
Maybe, surely more so if the pilots resisting that intended change in control were given priority.
I very much like how the redundant sticks are /forced/ to stay in sync. What's done to one IS done to the other as well. That's a critical safety feature in the human interface.
I think a complete human over-ride of 'higher level' functions (disable the auto-pilot) should require 'two keys' like in War Games (with the nuke silo). The lower level systems still have to exist, and there should be a way of troubleshooting (graphs probably) their inputs and outputs over time.
- hlandau 9y agoIIRC, Boeing 777s (which are FBW) will automatically disengage the autopilot if you start forcing the stick to a different position. The flight envelope protections are implemented by adding a physical resistance to the stick, but can be overridden by using force, which seems a highly intuitive and deferential implementation. It certainly seems a lot more responsible than Airbus's design, both for the above reasons and for the mechanical linkage you mention.