Hacker News Reader

Comment by stouset | Hacker News Reader

None of this is relevant to the actual issue raised by the GP: the yokes of the pilot and co-pilot are not mechanically linked. They can be mechanically linked even with a FBW system. And personally, as someone with a bit of flying experience myself, I can't comprehend why you'd want them to not be mechanically linked. The opportunity for confusion with conflicting inputs is too damn high.

View on HN

Mechanically linking is heavier than fbw/electrical/fiber optic linking, and what's the point if there's no mechanical linkage to the control surfaces?

With the fbw system, the software makes the choice on how to interpret the control movement, use one or both? If one, which one?

EDIT: Maybe you mean that a mechanical linkage would provide a feedback mechanism, so that one pilot would know if the other pilot was attempting an input? I don't know if there's force feedback on Airbus flight controls.

> what's the point if there's no mechanical linkage to the control surfaces?

In this case, the pilot would have realized the junior copilot was issuing control inputs and (likely) prevented a plane from crashing, saving the lives of all aboard.

Seems like a pretty decent point to me.

> EDIT: Maybe you mean that a mechanical linkage would provide a feedback mechanism, so that one pilot would know if the other pilot was attempting an input? I don't know if there's force feedback on Airbus flight controls.

Yes, that's what I meant. And no, there isn't. At least, not one that would indicate conflicting inputs from the other pilot.

Which is one of the main cause of the crash.. Is there an alarm now indicating conflicting inputs from pilots on Airbuses?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com