From: (Robert Dorsett)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date:         08 Jul 95 15:01:51 
References:   1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1995.991@ohare.Chicago.COM> (Wayne M. Hurwitz) writes:
>In article <airliners.1995.871@ohare.Chicago.COM> (Christoph Bernhardt) writes:
>>>>>>> "JF" == Jean-Francois Mezei <MEZEI_JF@Eisner.DECUS.Org> writes:
>>    JF> In a FBW system, the computer can make lickety split decisions
>>    JF> if something arises. If the information given to the computer
>  I think I'm having a semantics problem.  I agree with an earlier comment
>in this thread that a FBW system refers to the electronic linkage between
>the pilots input to the effector, whether its a wing flap or the
>engine PLA. i.e. the computers simply translate the pilots stick or
>throttle input to an electronic signal that goes to the appropriate
>controller.    This effectively replaces what used to be hydro-mechanical.
>   What everyone else is talking about is the Flight
>Control System, which involves all the other automated functions,
>such as autopilot and navigational control, which are implemented
>to decrease pilot load.  Am I wrong?

Yes.  "FBW" is a colloquialism, which addresses a difference in the design of
the flight control system.  They are not separate components of some "bigger"

The autopilot is normally referred to as "the autopilot."  Navigation
functions are part of some flight management system.  Sometimes, the line
between navigation and autopilot functionality can become quite blurry.

The FCS is the basic functionality which all higher-level systems must
use in order to keep the right side up.

Robert Dorsett                         Moderator, sci.aeronautics.simulation