Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Flight Sticks  
User currently offlineBryan Becker From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 333 posts, RR: 0
Posted (13 years 5 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1346 times:

Most aircraft are controlled with a yoke. But why did airbus choose to use sticks to fly there aircraft? This question has been in my head for a long time. I'm a real big airbus fan, an I would like it if a real airbus pilot could answer this ,but if enyone else knows the answer you can answer to. An also are they easier to use than yokes or are they the same. Thanks alot a future captain Bryan Becker.

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFP_v2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 5 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1273 times:

Advantages of the side stick:
-clear view of the entire flightdeck
-more leg room for the pilots
-retracteble tray where the yoke would be to put food, magazines etc.

Disadvantages:
-some stubborn old pilots claim the yoke is better, which might affect sales.


User currently offlineIFF/7000 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 5 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1261 times:

It's much easier to fly with a side stick, inputs are smaller and more accurate, it's only your wrist that moves and you've got a real nice clear view of the entire flightdeck.
A disadvantage is that if the copilot moves the side stick on his side the Captain 's side stick does not move at all and viceversa. If both pull in the side stick forces are added ( nose moves 2x faster).
Regards


User currently offlineJG From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (13 years 5 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1239 times:

With a fly by wire aircraft you do not need the added weight or mechanical complexity of a yoke. Just another case of economics. Even the side stick on an Airbus is could be considered too big. A small knob with a disconnect button would be sufficient.

Boeing chose to have a yoke on the 777, but it was not necessary. They probably thought it would be more readily accepted by pilots.


User currently offlineSuperslushy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 5 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1229 times:

Hey Bryan, I asked a question similar to yours a while back, and I thought you might want to check out what others had to say

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/tech_ops/read.main/8579/


User currently offlineBryan Becker From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 333 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (13 years 5 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1189 times:

Thanks guys!!!!!!!!!
you helped alot.


User currently offlineMinuteman From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 271 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1185 times:

Just a few quick notes about the sidesticks on the Toulouse Lawnmower...

1.) the sidesticks are dependent on the displacement of the stick, rather than force applied to the stick (opposite of most FBW fighters)

b.) below 1/3 displacement of either sidestick, the inputs are algebraically summed for both sticks (usually PF + 0 = input).

iii.) beyond the displacement threshold, the second stick to move has full authority and the first stick is limited to 1/3 (remaining displacement is inneffective). I don't recall the latency involved for the second stick.

A couple of reasons for doing this are to counter a "dead-man" input, like an object jammed on the stick or, who knows, maybe a pilot slumped over the controller. Also to counter a dangerous manuever by the "other pilot".


User currently offlineDC10hound From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 463 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (13 years 5 months 11 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

Minuteman,
I've really never heard a 'Bus referred to as a "Toulouse Lawnmower". I'll have to remeber that one! Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Boeing elected to use a yoke on the B777 and designed it to give feedback from side to side, ie: the Capt can "feel" what the FO is doing, and vice versa.

Does'nt give much room for a tray table for dinner, but we are supposed to fly the aircraft, are'nt we?



"Eagles soar. But weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.."
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Airbus Flight Sticks
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airbus Flight Sticks posted Fri Mar 2 2001 04:54:20 by Bryan Becker
Airbus Flight Controls posted Tue Jan 30 2001 04:43:16 by Superslushy
Manually Switching Between Flight Laws On Airbus? posted Tue Jan 31 2006 21:11:15 by Rolfen
Airbus A342/3 Flight Deck Screens posted Sun Jan 22 2006 12:25:57 by IsuA380B777
Airbus A380 Flight Manuals Replaced By Computer posted Tue Jan 18 2005 05:36:11 by Milan320
Airbus A340-600 Flight Deck posted Thu Sep 18 2003 00:51:23 by American 767
If An Airbus, Would This Flight Have Crashed? posted Sat Nov 2 2002 16:03:08 by Rick767
Typical G-Forces For A Commercial Flight? posted Mon Dec 18 2006 03:50:48 by N243NW
Some Questions About Flight Engineers posted Thu Dec 14 2006 13:59:46 by Columba
Airbus In Antarctica posted Mon Dec 11 2006 07:27:04 by Cascade07

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format