Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Boeing Ever Adopt The Side Joystick?  
User currently offlineHoward500 From Spain, joined Dec 2004, 77 posts, RR: 1
Posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8822 times:

Hi guys,

Just wondering what your opinions are on this. I mean, in a way it seems logical that a side joystick is the most efficient system yet.... It saves space and thus allows for a useful table to take its place for flight paperwork among other things, plus it requires minimal pilot movement to direct the aircraft.....

Having said this, to me, a good old yoke feels much better than a skimpy joystick!!!!  Smile Plus I see the yoke as a trademark for Boeing, something that keeps their identity..... but is this a pride vs practicality issue?? And of course there is Embrear, Bombardier, Dornier.......

Please dont miss interpret.... this is NOT a A vs B!!! Just looking to see if there are any genuinely intelligent arguments....  Smile


advice is a form of nostalgia
96 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineQwerty From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8807 times:

NO. And I sure hope I am correct.

User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 852 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8798 times:

No, Boeing pilots wants the driving wheel whatever the cost! *lol*

Micke//FÖ  Wink



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8765 times:

No Way.Boeing would never do that.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineIsitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8750 times:

Boeing is not a "monkey see-monkey do" company. Not in this generation at least.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8724 times:

If they can offer interchangeable engines on the 787, why not interchangeability between yolk and sidestick depending on the preference of the operator?

User currently offlineSK A340 From Sweden, joined Mar 2000, 845 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8702 times:

Will BMW put flashers in their side mirrors? Eventhough they are good to traffic safety the answer is NO. Reason: Mercedes "introduced" them.

The same argument can be used on the question in the topic of this thread (with the exception that yolk/sidestick doesn't affect the safety, or does it?). Airbus was first.

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 5):
If they can offer interchangeable engines on the 787, why not interchangeability between yolk and sidestick depending on the preference of the operator?

I think this has been discussed before and the answer is that they have to certify to different aircrafts, one with yolk and one with sidestick.

/Micke


User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5395 posts, RR: 53
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8677 times:

Quoting SK A340 (Reply 6):
Airbus was first.

Actually, if you want to get into it, Lockheed was first with the F-16.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineNucsh From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8661 times:

Why fix what's not broken? The yolk has worked for generations.

I've had the chance to fly in both Airbus and Boeing simulators (A320 and 737-400, both USAirways), and I definately prefer the yolk. Same thing with private aircraft, I've flown C172s and an SR22, I prefer the C172.


I guess it's just all up to personal preferance.  bigthumbsup 



If landing is about "kissing" the ground, you just about raped it.
User currently offlineSK A340 From Sweden, joined Mar 2000, 845 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8660 times:

As I wrote Mercedes "introduced" them, I should have written Airbus was "first". Sorry about that.  Embarrassment

/Micke


User currently offlineKhenleyDIA From Sweden, joined Feb 2005, 426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8642 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 5):
If they can offer interchangeable engines on the 787, why not interchangeability between yolk and sidestick depending on the preference of the operator?

I have often thought about this. As more planes go fly-by-wire, wouldn't it be possible for A or B to offer customers whatever they want? Want a yoke? Okay... plug it in! Want a joystick? Okay. Clearly they would have to make layout change in the flightdeck for this, but I am sure they could come up with a pretty easy and cost effective way to do it.

Besides, when they are working on billion dollar orders, I am sure the buyer wouldn't mind spending a couple hundred grand to equipped their flight decks with the control of their choice.

Crazy thinking, I know!

KhenleyDIA



Why sit at home and do nothing when you can travel the world.
User currently offlineNucsh From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8622 times:

I'm not entirely sure, but wouldn't an interchangeable cockpit, as in the instance of the yolk/sidestick, require different type-ratings per configuration?


If landing is about "kissing" the ground, you just about raped it.
User currently onlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26508 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8594 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 5):
If they can offer interchangeable engines on the 787, why not interchangeability between yolk and sidestick depending on the preference of the operator?

That would change a good deal of the systems and wiring, and not allow for a common pilot type certificate because of inherent differences in flying.

Quoting Nucsh (Reply 8):
I've had the chance to fly in both Airbus and Boeing simulators (A320 and 737-400, both USAirways), and I definately prefer the yolk. Same thing with private aircraft, I've flown C172s and an SR22, I prefer the C172.

I understand prefering a yoke, but a 172 to an SR-22?? That is like comparing an RJ to a 747



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineHeavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 797 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8534 times:

G´day

Not until the day one takes over the other will Boeing adopt the side stick. Boeing just does not do sidesticks (eek) and will stick with the oversized stick they call yoke, though it works the exact same way as the side stick. That of course applies to Boeings more advanced designs only, i.e. the 777 and the future 787 series.

On all older, non electric Boeing models and the A 300/310 the yoke is mechanically linked to control surfaces using pulleys and cables, requiring some force to operate and thus giving pilots a perceived feel of flying the plane.

So much for two philosophies/systems. I am at a total loss as to how the yolk control system works. Some system sensing at which point the yolk is squeezed and then make the plane move that way?  Wink

Cheers

Peter



"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." (Albert Einstein, 1879
User currently offlineHoward500 From Spain, joined Dec 2004, 77 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8490 times:

Thanks for your comments!

It seems to me that an option for a yoked/sidesticked 787 seems slightly strange when it comes to type certifiction but is it really that different? I mean, sure it would take a pilot some hours to get used to the difference but it would be less difficult/logistically complicated than when an A319 pilot transfers to an A330, would it? In the Boeing case would be the same aircraft just slightly different initial feel... Im sure that if they wanted to they could but I dont think it would be worth it...

On the other hand what Nucsh says is quite true why chage something that has proven itself very worthy? Although the answer to this might be "evolution" not "revolution"  Wink

Keep writing!



advice is a form of nostalgia
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4463 posts, RR: 76
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 8430 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello,
Are you guys trying to make an omelet by separating the yolk from the stick? laughing 

Heavierthanair,

On all older, non electric Boeing models and the A 300/310 the yoke is mechanically linked to control surfaces using pulleys and cables, requiring some force to operate and thus giving pilots a perceived feel of flying the plane.

Not right.The main link is to hydraulic jacks.The only "feel" is totally artificial in normal ops.

The argument linking the yoke to a phallic symbol never fails to amaze me.

regards.



Contrail designer
User currently offlineGearup From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 578 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8358 times:

Sure they will....as soon as they figure out a way to make it look as if they invented it, or at least make sure that they don't come close to giving Airbus the credit for being the first to use it on a commercial aircraft.

GU



I have no memory of this place.
User currently offlineMtnmanmakalu From Ireland, joined Nov 2004, 515 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8342 times:

Quoting Gearup (Reply 16):
Sure they will....as soon as they figure out a way to make it look as if they invented it, or at least make sure that they don't come close to giving Airbus the credit for being the first to use it on a commercial aircraft.

Why so angry, Gearup? Why should Boeing change something that has worked for them for many, many years. There isn't a clear advantage either way, so why change?

Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder about Boeing.... I'm sorry you don't make any "adult-sized" commercial A/C in Canada... maybe that's why you are grumpy!  Wink



I do, I don't, whatever.......
User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8274 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8325 times:

Quoting SK A340 (Reply 6):
why not interchangeability between yolk and sidestick depending on the preference of the operator?

Because pilots aren't that fond of eggs!  Big grin

Seriously, though... Boeing has always built pilot's airplanes and pilots traditionally prefer the control column. Embraer and Canadair realize this as well and still build jets with yokes.



This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineGearup From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 578 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8278 times:

Quoting Mtnmanmakalu (Reply 17):
Why so angry, Gearup?

????????????? 'fraid you lost me on that one!!!

GU



I have no memory of this place.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17044 posts, RR: 67
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 8233 times:

Yolk - in an egg
Yoke - in an airplane.

Well if they ever want to get really serious about weight savings Boeing will have to do the stick. It weighs hundreds of pounds less given all the support structure those Boeing yokes have to keep them upright. Big grin



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineMEA310 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2002, 660 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8174 times:

Quoting SK A340 (Reply 6):
Will BMW put flashers in their side mirrors? Eventhough they are good to traffic safety the answer is NO. Reason: Mercedes "introduced" them.

Great comparison!



M5 Fastest Sedan On Earth
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3651 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8155 times:

A lot of you are assuming a side stick is better than a yoke, which is not necessarily true. I don't see any huge advantages of one over the other, so why should Boeing develop a side stick?

If it ain't broke don't fix it.....



PHX based
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8155 times:

If the customers want it,

Boeing will probably introduce the side stick.


User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2826 posts, RR: 42
Reply 24, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8116 times:

Quoting Howard500 (Thread starter):
Just wondering what your opinions are on this. I mean, in a way it seems logical that a side joystick is the most efficient system yet.... It saves space and thus allows for a useful table to take its place for flight paperwork among other things, plus it requires minimal pilot movement to direct the aircraft.....

It's also important to note that Boeing does force feedback via the yoke. While the yoke is no longer pysically linked to the subsystems that move the plane, that feedback is important.

Think of it this way. When my car does cruise control, the feeling of the gas pedal still moving via the computer gives me a sense that the system is working and how much gas is being used via a tactile response.


25 Flyabunch : Actually, it was General Dynamics that designed the F-16. Lockeed got the line much later after several corporate mergers and consolidations in the a
26 Starlionblue : Nothing is stopping a manufacturer from implementing force feedback in a stick, so this argument doesn't really hold water. If Boeing go with a stick
27 N766UA : The simple fact is that Boeing and Airbus don't design airplanes in the same fashion. Boeing designs jets based on what customers and pilots want, Air
28 Post contains images Starlionblue : An extremely simplistic and flawed analysis. If Airbus didn't listen to the customers, they wouldn't sell any planes. Talk to some pilots who have fl
29 Post contains images Garnetpalmetto : Gah! I know that. I had just been doing some photo corrections of newer F-16s to "Lockheed F-16" and I had it on the brain, I guess. Thanks, Flyabunc
30 Mrocktor : The yoke is heavier; The yoke is larger, it occupies significant volume outside the cockpit; The yoke is less reliable since it has more moving parts;
31 Keesje : the RRJ (with Boeing consultation) also will have a side stick.
32 Starlionblue : An equally simplistic and flawed analysis. Boeing has more know-how invested in the stick if nothing else. Why reinvent the wheel (ok the stick...) i
33 777STL : Oh now that's clever!(rolls eyes) Or maybe Boeing doesn't see the need to redevelop control and computer systems to replace something that has been p
34 AR1300 : Well,Airbus ''introduced''winglets and wingfences,and Boeing and the rest copied them. Remember, before the A300-600 no Airliner had wingfences or so
35 ZOTAN : Ya, I hate it when the yoke breaks in flight.
36 Ha763 : That is incorrect. The 747-400 was the first commercial airliner to introduce winglets. However, Airbus was the first and so far only manufacturer to
37 Post contains images SFOMEX : It ain't gonna happen. If Boeing is going to lose this war, they are going to lose it on its own merits.
38 AR1300 : I knew that.What I meant is that before Airbus, nobody thought on anything to add to wingtips.After Airbus and the wingfences, all the others also im
39 Post contains links Tito : Actually, for the A320 a near disaster in 2001: http://www.aviationtoday.com/sia/20010801.htm http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0UBT/is_23_1
40 Post contains links Ha763 : That again is incorrect. People have been researching wingtip modifications well before Airbus came into existance. Research into this has been going
41 Chicoco : Maybe im wrong but I think the Gulfstream were first. Im not sure if it was the G3 or G4.
42 Starlionblue : This error could also have happened on a 777 or any other FBW aircraft. Feedback would not have helped. The error was not caused by the stick, but by
43 Monteycarlos : Imagine if everyone followed that logic. You'd probably be writing that post with a stick in the sand and still be living in a cave. Was the F-16 the
44 Post contains images Gearup : This is really a silly debate. One day an airline who is considering a 787 purchase but has much Airbus sidestick experience (Air Canada is a possible
45 Monteycarlos : Not to be technical, but didn't the Boeing candidate for the JSF contract have a sidestick and well as numerous other Boeing Military aircraft?
46 Mrocktor : Thank you. Hurrah for standard operating procedure. Yes, you would. A jam just before VR is neat. Take it from someone who actually works with safety
47 Garnetpalmetto : Nope. The following US military aircraft have sidesticks or will have them - none of them are Boeing products. F-16 (Originally General Dynamics, now
48 NorCal : The military using side sticks makes more sense since they are constantly moving that throttle in a dog fight, and thus it helps to have one hand devo
49 TinPusher007 : I know this is off topic, but I have about 250+ hours in a C172 and had the opportunity to fly an SR-22. Can you honestly say you liked the 172 bette
50 AeroWeanie : To turn this whole discussion on its head, Boeing was actually one of the first manufacturers to put sidesticks in aircraft. During WWII, B-17s (and B
51 N1120A : LH has stated that they would like all stick cockpits (eventhough it would not help commonality one iota) and Boeing has flatly denied that they will
52 Starlionblue : No difference between yoke and stick in this respect since the yoke is normally only used with one hand. The other one is for the throttles.
53 FriendlySkies : Lufthansa already told Boeing they wanted a sidestick. Boeing said, while not a direct quote, F*** you, LH! Unless every airline in the world wanted
54 Gearup : With respect, you don't know what you are talking about. If LH wants a sidestick, they will get one and do you really think, sidestick v yoke debate
55 Post contains images Udo : I'm sure Boeing was very sensible in rejecting the request...considering the fact that LH is a potential customer for B787 and B777F. Yeah, especiall
56 Ar1300 : I didn't know that.Thx for the info. Mike
57 ContnlEliteCMH : In addition (correct me if I'm wrong) the yokes always work in tandem, no? That is, when one pilot commands right aileron, both yokes reflect that. Y
58 Popfly : Excellent topic question, but absolutely amazing responses. My neighbor was a very senior Boeing program pilot and I once asked him if Boeing had ever
59 Mrocktor : So there are two reasons: the first is completely unfounded (as the safety record of the Airbuses proves) and the second is based on personal prefere
60 Post contains images Keesje : Boeing recently tried to convince us the world preferred speed (sonic cruiser), the 7e7 had enough seats (before adding), composites could not be dama
61 Starlionblue : Quite right. Also let's remember we are only talking about the Airbus stick and Boeing yoke right now. Not yokes and sticks in general (although they
62 Starlionblue : Quite right. Also let's remember we are only talking about the Airbus stick and Boeing yoke right now. Not yokes and sticks in general (although they
63 OldAeroGuy : Not quite right. The 777 yoke does not directly control the flight control surfaces. The Boeing fly-by-wire philosophy is that a given yoke input pro
64 Pihero : OldAeroGuy, There is no conclusive evidence that one is better than the other. I agree .Everything else is a matter of personal preferences by people
65 OldAeroGuy : Thanks Pihero. At the risk of being inflammatory, have you flown both airplanes through such a maneuver? If so, what are your preferences and why?
66 Popfly : I just love it when a guy who knows what he's talking about does it so eloquently. Thanks OldAeroGuy.
67 ContnlEliteCMH : Yes, do tell! Don't dangle a delicious morsel like this in front of us and not tell us!
68 Howard500 : Thank you all for your comments First of all, please, some of you are leaning towards the typical A vs B confrontation. DON’T! Stop that! Both compa
69 Gearup : Come on now! ya can't leave us dangling on this one. This is one post I really would like to gain a better understanding of. Would you be so kind as
70 Sebolino : Actually, I hope Boeing doesn't wait for a crash to improve their planes ! It seems that some people forgot that Boeing is introducing many improveme
71 777STL : Again, now you're assuming that a sidestick is superior to a yoke, which as many people have pointed out is up for debate.
72 N1120A : There is no technical basis for a stick either, it is a matter of preference Well, considering that every order to this point has been that 787 with
73 Pihero : OldAeroGuy, Popfly, ContnlEliteCMH, Gearup, and taking into account Howard500's post which whom I heartily agree, First, my apologies for an incomplet
74 OldAeroGuy : Thanks Pihero, Accurate and valid comments. I think Boeing's response would be along the lines of "if you need to pull 3.0 g to avoid that other airpl
75 Gearup : Thanks Pihero, that was interesting and informative. GU
76 Sllevin : Just ssome additional sidestick trivia: North American was probably the first to truly introduce the sidestick as we think of it today. It was introdu
77 Pihero : OldAeroGuy, "if you need to pull 3.0 g to avoid that other airplane (or ridgeline, building etc.) and the airplane control law will only allow you 2.5
78 OldAeroGuy : Agreed.
79 Boeing7E7 : Not entirely true. 1: The Yoke provides visual feedback, a sidestick does not. 2: The control system and the way it responds to input and provides fe
80 Popfly : Boeing7E7, I think you just hit the sweet spot in the discussion. The importance of sidestick versus yoke comparison is almost trivial in the face of
81 Starlionblue : As I said, the yoke or stick in themselves have nothing to do with visual (or tactile) feedback. Both can be built with or without.
82 Boeing7E7 : And what sidestick does this in commercial aviation???
83 Post contains images Starlionblue : As far as I know none do, but that doesn't change my statement
84 Post contains images Gearup : Nope, cannot agree with you there. You are expressing a subjective opinion which illustrates your preference for Boeing. When you make a general stat
85 Post contains images UAcsOKC : I believe the SUD Caravelle had wing fences also, and it was a 1960's aircraft. certainly there are more out there, but just like everyone in aviatio
86 Ha763 : The Caravelle had stall fences, which were placed mid wing and not at the wingtips. This was to prevent the spanwise flow from building up a boundary
87 Monteycarlos : Two things interest me about this discussion... Firstly, Airbus has a system of laws relating to much of the Autoflight systems on their aircraft? I c
88 Post contains links Starlionblue : You should find plenty of info here http://www.airliners.net/discussions/tech_ops/read.main/100417/4/. and here http://www.airliners.net/discussions/
89 Monteycarlos : As the 787 is to be FBW, will it be a similar system to the 777 in this regard or will it move to a more controlled autoflight philosphy such as with
90 Starlionblue : ***Wets finger and holds up to the wind*** Similar to the 777.
91 Howard500 : Pihero, Thank you for your kind comments and for your very valuable imput. Same goes to all of you who have developed my original question so well. Ho
92 OldAeroGuy : To be clear, in Normal Mode and in the normal part of the flight envelop, the Airbus and Boeing control laws are relatively similar. Pitch control in
93 Pihero : OldAeroGuy, you're quicker than me.So I'll just confirm what you haven't about the Airbus: You said : "I believe that for Airbus Direct Mode, the same
94 OldAeroGuy : Nope, just an engineer whose job, in part, depends on doing unbiased analysis of competing airplane design features. Thanks for the compliment, but i
95 Mrocktor : Old Aero Guy, As has been stated your posts are well thought out and well written, however in the post where you quoted me you threw up a (very intere
96 RayChuang : I think the primary reason why Boeing stayed with the yoke on the 777 and 787 is the fact they wanted pilots who are used to flying the common cockpit
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will Boeing Ever Launch The 747X posted Sat Mar 17 2001 02:47:44 by Madog
Can Boeing Ever Replace The 757? posted Mon Aug 28 2006 23:10:24 by KSUpilot
What Will Boeing Announce At The Paris Air Show? posted Thu Apr 28 2005 16:28:51 by NYC777
Will UsAirways Ever Operate The CRJ-900? posted Wed Apr 6 2005 23:56:08 by Cumulonimbus
Will CLE Ever See The CO 7E7? posted Wed Jan 5 2005 04:34:27 by TriJetFan1
Will BA Ever Retire The 747-400? posted Fri Nov 21 2003 09:12:18 by United777
Will Boeing Eventually Rename The MD-11? posted Thu Jan 17 2002 20:26:12 by Bobcat
Will Spotting Ever Be The Same? posted Fri Nov 16 2001 03:02:18 by Brett80211
American Aviation: Will It Ever Be The Same? posted Mon Nov 12 2001 23:06:51 by DeltaBoy777
What Will Boeing Do After The 767-400? posted Mon Aug 6 2001 14:37:35 by VS744