travelavnut
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:35 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Thu Dec 18, 2014 2:56 pm

Quoting Chamonix (Reply 50):

Dude, arguments by linking is not allowed IIRC and not very constructive. You cannot just dump links into a discussion, put some context around them.
Live From Amsterdam!
 
Chamonix
Posts: 354
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Dec 19, 2014 10:05 am

FYI: Never knew that Flare and Direct were different (A320 V. A330 respectively) so here's an eye-opener:
http://www.pprune.org/8789396-post1049.html
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:19 pm

Quoting Chamonix (Reply 52):
FYI: Never knew that Flare and Direct were different (A320 V. A330 respectively) so here's an eye-opener:

The real eye-opener ( but not for me ) is, my dear chamonix, that you don't know what you are writing about.
On the net, you have plenty of infos - even complete FCOMs and FCTMs - to help you understand a given system.
1/- First of all, there's no difference between the 320 and the 330/340 in Normal Law - Flare mode
The above means you have to understand the difference between *LAW* and *MODE*, which obviously you still don't.

2/- In Flare Mode, there is a *direct* stick to elevator relationship. It doesn't mean we are then in *DIRECT LAW*}, DC-3-style. That stick-to-elevator relationship goes through the flight control computers for smoother load factors and pitch rate feedbacks.

3/- The main difference between the A320 and the A330/340 is, on the Baby Bus, If you're already in *ALTERNATE LAW* ( for whatever reason...with one exception...) ,*DIRECT LAW* becomes active when you get the gear down AND the A/P is off.
Therefore, on the Baby 'Bus, there is no *FLARE MODE* on *ALTERNATE LAW*.

Instead of trying by all means and all anti-sites to demonstrate to us your dislike of the Airbus systems - which is now well known and well understood ), you'd spend a lot more useful time trying to understand the systems from their legit source.

[Edited 2014-12-19 05:53:14]
Contrail designer
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:03 pm

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 51):

  

Quoting Chamonix (Reply 52):

What's your point? That link only shows a vague comment by some anonymous person on the internet. He called "Stop" and "in his confusion" the PF rotated. What does that have to do with the sidestick?
 
Chamonix
Posts: 354
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Dec 19, 2014 9:55 pm

Trop fort, Pihero!
Là, tu m'as bien cloué le bec!
@+
So what about B777 & B787: Laws, Modes or Conditions?
Modes only on FBW Boeings?
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Sat Dec 20, 2014 3:49 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 48):


Your not really going to find a solution when you mention how an interconnected controlls would not have helped in "x" situation. The real question is how many situations will a potential solution prevent?

With that said, Pihero has proven that interconnected controlls don't appreciably add to the saftey of an airframe with the proper protections involved.
Boiler Up!
 
Chamonix
Posts: 354
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Sun Dec 21, 2014 12:02 am

 
Chamonix
Posts: 354
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:31 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Sun Dec 21, 2014 1:30 pm

@ Pihero (sans rancune)
So it's a Mode, right?:
http://www.pprune.org/8792103-post1069.html
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 5613
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Sun Dec 21, 2014 3:36 pm

Somewhere in a secret CIA storage facility, BEA will eventually discover a crate of yokes to be installed on F-GZCP, and put all these speculations to rest.


David
Reading accident reports is what calms me down
 
Airspeed772
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2014 2:54 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:59 pm

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 24):

It is a fact there have been two major accidents with Airbus airplanes with over 200 hundred innocent lives lost. The preliminary cause of Air Asia accident according to what is being reported by the media points to a stall during flight. Some of the members in this forum to include the MODs has attempted to muzzle those of us requesting an objective discussion on the matter of these airplanes loaded with electronics flying in the vicinity of dangerous thunder storms. Please note we do not hate Airbus nor favor Boeing over Airbus, we are simple saying if there is manufacture defect or lack of proper training of flight crews to recover from such unusual attitudes, then lets discuss how best to fix the problem.
Airspeed772
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9282
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:32 pm

Boy I love hate this argument. It pops often enough here and no one can resist.

The PRIMARY element a connected control device provides is ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATION in the cockpit between the pilots flying the plane. It provides visual and tactile communication beyond the spoken communication that is required. To me that is worth a lot, I think cockpit communication is the paramount tool to addressing problem situations in aircraft and anything that easily (and yes I know "easy" isn't always easy to implement) adds to and improves the communication without contributing to sensory overload is a good thing. In my opinion. Not that I am going to change anyone's mind.

That's it, it's that simple: Communication!

Tugg

[Edited 2015-01-22 13:40:33]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:33 pm

Quoting Airspeed772 (Reply 60):
It is a fact there have been two major accidents with Airbus airplanes with over 200 hundred innocent lives lost. The preliminary cause of Air Asia accident according to what is being reported by the media points to a stall during flight. Some of the members in this forum to include the MODs has attempted to muzzle those of us requesting an objective discussion on the matter of these airplanes loaded with electronics flying in the vicinity of dangerous thunder storms. Please note we do not hate Airbus nor favor Boeing over Airbus, we are simple saying if there is manufacture defect or lack of proper training of flight crews to recover from such unusual attitudes, then lets discuss how best to fix the problem.

Aren't all lives lost in such accidents innocent? Let's not get too emotive.

No one is muzzling your discussion, but let's not jump to conclusions just yet. Thus far we know little about the Air Asia accident. Just a few pieces of informaiton which may or may not be accurate. They say the aircraft stalled but it's far more likely to do with the weather than with Airbus systems.

Until an official preliminary report is released, rather than media reports or politicians' statements (some of which are ill informed) let's not get into a full blown discussion in a topic relating to Airbus use of sidesticks rather than yokes.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
hivue
Posts: 1903
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:15 am

Quoting Tugger (Reply 61):
It provides visual and tactile communication beyond the spoken communication that is required.

Tactile how? Both pilots are not supposed to be handling the controls at the same time.

As far as visual goes, how about a display that shows the position of the side stick (heck, the image on the display could even be of a yoke -- just like real airplanes have). Then the PNF just has to consult the display when he/she wants to see what the other guy is actually up to. Simpler than linking the sticks and, I would think certifiable much sooner.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19314
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:27 am

Quoting Airspeed772 (Reply 60):
It is a fact there have been two major accidents with Airbus airplanes with over 200 hundred innocent lives lost. The preliminary cause of Air Asia accident according to what is being reported by the media points to a stall during flight. Some of the members in this forum to include the MODs has attempted to muzzle those of us requesting an objective discussion on the matter of these airplanes loaded with electronics flying in the vicinity of dangerous thunder storms. Please note we do not hate Airbus nor favor Boeing over Airbus, we are simple saying if there is manufacture defect or lack of proper training of flight crews to recover from such unusual attitudes, then lets discuss how best to fix the problem

We don't know enough about Air Asia yet to form conclusions on how ergonomics played a part. However regarding AF447, neither airline, manufacturer, investigating agency or regulating agency came up with any recommendations to change the control systems or ergonomics (at least as far as I know). That would indicate to me that these parties all reached the conclusion that the ergonomics were not a fault.

Lack of training and awareness, on the other hand, were starting to be addressed even before the final report came out.

Quoting hivue (Reply 63):
As far as visual goes, how about a display that shows the position of the side stick (heck, the image on the display could even be of a yoke -- just like real airplanes have). Then the PNF just has to consult the display when he/she wants to see what the other guy is actually up to. Simpler than linking the sticks and, I would think certifiable much sooner.

Isn't it easier to just turn your head? The other pilot's stick is in clear view.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
hivue
Posts: 1903
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:12 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 64):
Isn't it easier to just turn your head?

For sure. My argument was meant to be facetious. There seems to be a lot of people who think side sticks need to be linked so the PNF can see what the PF is doing by consulting their own stick.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6264
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Sat Jan 24, 2015 7:58 am

Quoting mmo (Reply 47):
Quoting Chamonix (Reply 44):
And why no autoretract on Boeing?

When the 777 was being designed prospective airlines formed a working group to provide input to Boeing. The auto-retract in flight was not mentioned since there was a warning associated with that condition. You will know immediately if you forget to forget to retract them.

The 787 has auto retract of spoilers when thrust is beyond a certain point.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21480
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Sat Jan 24, 2015 8:31 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10):
And one would thus open the usual can of worms. 

Fish. Tin of fish.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2799
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:54 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 17):
feel what a newbie FO was doing with the stick.

ooooo matron!
Image
 
barney captain
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Mon Jan 26, 2015 5:43 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 64):
Isn't it easier to just turn your head? The other pilot's stick is in clear view.

Not in a dark cockpit.

I think AB makes a fantastic aircraft. Having said that, I DO see an issue with the sidstick and it goes beyond what I feel are the absolutely valid tactile feedback aspects that the other pilot can view. It is that of seeing what the Autopilot is doing. In a Boeing while at cruise, you can instantly see if the AP is commanding any control input to maintain level flight. This comes in to play when entering an area of mountain wave especially. The subtle back and forth of the yoke is a dead give away and usually happens well before any noticeable fluctuations in airspeed or altitude.

I've also had a situation where, while selecting flaps 5 on approach, the flaps were mis-rigged, but beyond that they were perfect. How did we know? With flaps 5 selected, the yoke immediately displaced to the right - but the wings stayed level. The yoke returned to normal as we extended the flaps further - these type of situations would have all been masked with a side stick.

Side sticks are hardly unique to AB, and as such this debate should be more about the side stick in general as opposed to AB specifically.
Southeast Of Disorder
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 9282
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Mon Jan 26, 2015 6:00 pm

Quoting hivue (Reply 65):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 64):
Isn't it easier to just turn your head?

For sure. My argument was meant to be facetious. There seems to be a lot of people who think side sticks need to be linked so the PNF can see what the PF is doing by consulting their own stick.

"Need"? Of course not. Sure you can turn your head, you can ask and talk about what you are doing, you can do all that and pilots do all that. But it is fairly simple thing that you can "feel" what someone else is doing as well. again, it is another method of communication. That people here do not think that is important is not my problem nor I am here to convince you.

Just curious, do the rudder pedals move in tandem? With active feed back (Airbus or Boeing or whoever)?

Quoting barney captain (Reply 69):
I've also had a situation where, while selecting flaps 5 on approach, the flaps were mis-rigged, but beyond that they were perfect. How did we know? With flaps 5 selected, the yoke immediately displaced to the right - but the wings stayed level. The yoke returned to normal as we extended the flaps further - these type of situations would have all been masked with a side stick.

Side sticks are hardly unique to AB, and as such this debate should be more about the side stick in general as opposed to AB specifically.

To me "side stick" is not the issue, "active feedback" is the issue. When the Airbus is in autopilot does the joystick move as the AP moves the various control surfaces? On a Boeing you mention theflaps, does the AP provide to that control? I know in Boeing's the throttles and yoke do show the AP actions. To me this active feedback is good information to the pilots, in addition to what is shown on the displays.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
Productivity isn’t about getting more things done, rather it’s about getting the right things done, while doing less. - M. Oshin
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:52 am

Quoting Tugger (Reply 70):
Just curious, do the rudder pedals move in tandem? With active feed back (Airbus or Boeing or whoever)?

Airbus and Boeing both have rudder pedals which are mechanically linked together.

Quoting Tugger (Reply 70):
To me this active feedback is good information to the pilots, in addition to what is shown on the displays.

It could equally be something else to misinterpret. The really important feedback is what is presented on the PFD. If you look at the animations of the AF447 accident the copilot's sidestick is constantly moving. How much value is feedback like that, when a look at the PFD shows the aircraft pitched up, which is the main indication of what was happening.

For me the crucial issue was the way the stall warning came back on as the nose was pitched forward. The instinctive reaction is to do the opposite and pull back again, whereupon the stall warning stopped. That aural feedback was fatal. Forget about cross-linking sidesticks for better feedback. That's a waste of time, effort and weight. If the stall warning had remained on while the aircraft was stalled the crew would surely have realised what was going on and initiated recovery correctly.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2799
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Tue Jan 27, 2015 9:13 am

I would have thought that if the side stick was dangerous in any way that it would have been mentioned significantly more often in accident reports, less ease being let by, by the certificating authorities and ultimately in the end there would have been significant design/philosophy change. There seems to be no such actions/changes taking place and the people who are running these organisations are the best in the world at what they do so it would only be logical to assume that there are no fundamental problems with the current state of airbus' control philosophy.

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 71):
If the stall warning had remained on while the aircraft was stalled the crew would surely have realised what was going on and initiated recovery correctly.

Maybe in this particular instance, but in other instances it could have proven worse to have a continued unverified warning. I would guess there is not an arbitrary reason why it went off.

Fred
Image
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Mon Feb 02, 2015 12:58 am

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 72):
Maybe in this particular instance, but in other instances it could have proven worse to have a continued unverified warning. I would guess there is not an arbitrary reason why it went off.

IIRC it's intended to prevent false stall warnings on ground at very low airspeed. Airbus uses airspeed as part of it's air/ground logic. If in flight it indicates a stall and the alert should still sound.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
User avatar
shengzhurou
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 5:07 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Feb 13, 2015 7:22 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):

well, the asiana part is that either nobody paying attention how low they are or speak up. airbus won't save them
Sheng Zhu Rou
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6278
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:08 pm

Quoting shengzhurou (Reply 74):
the asiana part is that either nobody paying attention how low they are or speak up. airbus won't save them

The only difference is that on an Airbus, the autothrust would be in speed mode, and speed would not have varied from VRef until the flare.

And ... even if the autothrust were disengaged, (not normal during an Airbus visual approach), the autothrust still would have gone to TOGA below a certain angle of attack.

But you are right, if no one is minding the ship, with your thumb up your ass .... yoke vs sidestick would make no difference.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13829
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Why Did Airbus Eliminate The Yoke?

Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:36 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 75):
The only difference is that on an Airbus, the autothrust would be in speed mode, and speed would not have varied from VRef until the flare.

And ... even if the autothrust were disengaged, (not normal during an Airbus visual approach), the autothrust still would have gone to TOGA below a certain angle of attack.

But you are right, if no one is minding the ship, with your thumb up your ass .... yoke vs sidestick would make no difference.

Dont forget the Vls-8 wakeup
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CosmicCruiser, jetblueguy22, longhauler and 15 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos