4 ms·
I've always preferred tactile/mechanical controls (buttons, knobs, sliders) to the touch screens we have today. And I always trust mechanical systems over fly-b
by hliyan 9y ago
I've always preferred tactile/mechanical controls (buttons, knobs, sliders) to the touch screens we have today. And I always trust mechanical systems over fly-by-wire systems. For example, I'm very uncomfortable with things like the Tesla's slide-out door handles, electronic locks in hotel room doors, touch buttons in elevators and GPS navigation systems in aircraft.
Smart tends to mean complex, and complex usually means more things to fail. Some things only need shafts, pulleys and gearwheels -- there is no need to bring a microprocessor into the picture...
- Piskvorrr 9y agoBad news: GPS in airplanes is the least complicated piece of kit, and most commercial aviation is literally fly-by-wire.
- mrep 9y agoI can't find the plane/article but I remember reading about a military jet that is practically always in an unstable flight pattern and computers constantly adjust it to make it so the pilots can fly it normally.
- merijnv 9y agoThe would be the F16 if memory serves me well.
- dvtv75 9y agoI recall reading that about the F-117, many years ago. Can't remember the source, either, and I've no idea if it's accurate.
- hliyan 9y agoI recall the main computer of the F-22 core dumping when it crossed the international dateline. And an earlier version of the F-16 flight control computer flipping the plane upside down when it crossed the equator in a simulation...
- marcosdumay 9y agoI think that description fits anything from the B2 bomber or newer made by the US. Stealth implies on some heavy trade-offs.
- FrojoS 9y agoBeing inherently unstable allows it to be more maneuverable.
- GhostVII 9y agoI'm pretty sure almost all fighter jets are like that - the more unstable it is the more responsive it is when turning, since responsiveness and stability are kind of opposites when it comes to aerodynamics.