Originally Posted by
III Corps
You don't have direct connection to the flight controls on most airplanes as your input goes through a feel sensor and that measures the response to the flight control surfaces. I think one of us has a misunderstanding of current flight control systems. Even the old T-38 I flew decades ago did not have direct input to the flight controls. And you didn't really want to spend an afternoon in the 727 or 737 in manual reversion and there IS no manual reversion on the 757/767. Lose hyd and you're toast.
IF, however, you want to argue envelop protection, that is another matter. Boeing argues one way and Airbus argues the other way but one fact remains.. and that there has not been to my knowledge an incident/accident where the envelop protection inhibited the input of the pilot. The Mulhouse accident is the point where a lot of people don't know or understand what happened and had it been a Boeing, it STILL WOULD HAVE CRASHED had the pilots done the same things except the Boeing possibly would have stalled into the trees.
You are working too hard to win a point you already lost.
Your Boeings and your T38 all have a very particular characteristic that is endearing to the whole of commercial aviation and its past, except for the particular Airbus technology in question: the pilot's direct and proportional
control of the control surfaces, i.e. push stick left, see left aileron rise
proportionally. You lost yourself by misquoting me using the word "connection" in place of "control".
Talk about hydraulics and artificial feel all you want, its irrelevant to the point... which is that a "real" pilot in direct control of the control surfaces must be able to maintain a continuous stream of spatial orientation to apply to instrument flight, the A320 pilot is not even allowed to input the same kind of inputs because the computers are already managing the control surfaces. He is merely managing the flight path (effectively 'trimming the computers') and requires far less spatial orientation and control coordination.
That "real pilot" I mentioned requires that same command of spatial orientation and control coordination no matter how the control surfaces are actuated or the forces are being felt through the controls. The gadgets employed to transmit his inputs and provide feedback through those controls are irrelevant to this discussion.
Undoubtedly, the use of the term "real pilot" here will rankle some. I happily fly the bus, and I'm just glad I know the difference between true human controlled instrument flight and this simulated lipsync version. If you taught a guy how to fly using an A320 he'd impact short of the threshold inverted if you let him try an ILS in a Boeing, but put the Boeing guy in for a first crack at an A320 and it isn't going to be a life threatening situation.