From: (Merlin R. Preuss)
Organization: Transport Canada Aviation
Date:         15 Jun 95 14:25:28 
References:   1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1995.752@ohare.Chicago.COM>, says...

>The nature of that application of technology is, therefore, the core of
>the issue.  It is arguable that they disregarded studies which may have
>suggested different ways of designing the sidesticks.  Pilots howled over
>the lack of of moving throttles under autothrottle control.  These objections
>were ignored, because they went against the comprehensive flight management
>philosophy.  And after being thorougly trained (Airbus training has been
>called "indoctrination" by some pilots), well, maybe that isn't such a
>big deal after all.

Indoctrination is not too strong a word to use.  It is necessary to instill
in Airbus crews that Airbus is different and to train them to use what
Airbus has provided.  I just wish that people would not focus on the
sidestick and the fact that the throttles do not move.  These are in my
view symptoms of the change in philosphy not the fundamentals of the
change.  For those you must study the ECAM, FMGS and FCU operating
principles and methods.

>So tell me, Clive, do we have to go through this learning curve when *each*
>manufacturer invents its own, highly proprietary, engineering solution?
>For the innovations Boeing has introduced into the 777, it is commendable
>that they have kept the cockpit interface remarkably *conventional*.

A very good question but unfortunately rhetorical.

<<<<<I'd rather be flying, but........>>>>>
Ontario Canada
<<<<<I can't get away right now...>>>>>