Side sticks and their design criteria are the subject of Special Conditions which means that the current airworthiness regulations don’t address them and as such they are considered to be “novel” designs (it’s been decades, so it’s a silly term, but it’s novel in reference to the published regulations).
These Special Conditions aren’t likely to be clawed back, and if you compare them closely you’ll probably find that they are identical across each aircraft type, except for specific nuances based on the actual system design versus safety concepts.
In a retrofit scenario, which I absolutely cannot imagine actually happening, these same rules would need to apply.
I’d have to do some research but I’m fairly certain that a “retrofit” concept from a conventional yoke to a side stick would be considered to be a “Significant” change under the Changed Product Rules (and maybe even “Substantial”; I’d have to reread the guidance and explore the hypothesis). Either way, the outcome would be that the “old” aircraft type would be required to comply with the latest and greatest airworthiness standards rather than with its original certification basis. And the Special Conditions would still apply.
Realistically, it’s not a practicable design change, there’s not much reason for an OEM or third party to attempt this. There’s a reason the Global 6500 still has a conventional yoke even though the 7500 has a side stick.
Not impossible, just OMG the business case, timeline and cost is just kind of crazy.
By retrofit I meant removing the non-moving non-correlated side sticks on the existing e.g. A320 fleet and installing the haptic cross-linked feedback sticks. I wasn’t talking about retrofitting side sticks of any sort into a non-sidestick design, e.g. 777.
I don’t see even my weak rhetorical proposal as practicable from my very weak understanding of certification. Your post a moment ago blew all my actual knowledge as opposed to general background awareness out of the water. I bow to your self-evident great expertise.
As a general comment …
The frozen, rigid, stupid, and sorry state of international certification regulation can be neatly summed up in your comment that civil side sticks, despite being now 40+ year old tech are still only allowed via the equivalent of pencilled margin notations and sticky notes tucked in the actual certification regs that permit no such new-fangled monkeyshines.
And now we’re supposed to add unpiloted and electric and multicopters to this frozen matrix of 1950s thinking in a timely manner? The mind boggles. In Scotty’s immortal words:
She canna take much more! She’s gonna blow, Cap’n!
Sometimes being retired is a very smug feeling. This is one of those times.
As an aside I think I read recently (sorry, no cite) that Airbus will go back to control yokes instead of sidesticks. The yokes are apparently just better than sidesticks. (maybe it is haptic feedback for sidesticks…not sure)
that’s interesting. I’ve never liked the idea of a side stick simply because I’ve only flown a yoke. I’ve wondered if people who are use to a stick find the side stick an easy crossover. Also, maybe the side sticks are easier to adapt to from the left side to the right.
I’ve also wondered how hard it is for someone to go from left seat to right seat with a yoke. I found the autonomic skill doesn’t translate from left hand to right hand when making difficult landings.
I’ve flown yokes with center throttle(s) from both seats. I’ve flown sidesticks on the right with throttle(s) on the left. I’ve flown conventional mechanical center-sticks with throttle(s) on the left.
That’s far from the complete list of control arrangements that’ve been tried, but it’s a decent sample.
Swapping from one to another even day to day is just the teeniest part of what it takes to fly a different airplane. Once you’ve climbed the learning curve for a new-to-you airplane, the difference of control arrangement quickly becomes a negligible part of your overall performance.
As a wise old A-10 Squadron Commander once said to me:
You don’t fly with your hands; you fly with your mind.
I attended an ICAO conference on urban air mobility and remotely piloted aircraft and the amount of work that’s already gone into it, nevermind the work left to be done, is insane. There is a shift to “performance based standards”, so less prescriptive regulatory text with the goal of letting innovation happen and certifying the outcome and not the specific design, which helps.
Your comment echos the discussion from an FAA representative saying that the technology challenge at the aircraft level was one thing, but how on earth do you insert this modern tech into an operational environment that dates from the 1950s? The ground level infrastructure just can’t easily accommodate. Another panelist talked about the telecommunications problem; there’s no bandwidth. The frequency spectrum dedicated to aviation communications is full, and remote piloting and modern “phone home” aircraft health management technologies are eating up more of it. Adjacent frequencies are dedicated to other tools; that’s the problem with the American 5G cellular spectrum that bleeds into the aviation safety one and does, in fact, disrupt some devices onboard. Where else in the electromagnetic spectrum can these intense communication needs fit, while keeping a safety boundary and keeping aircraft safe?
Was a fascinating conference.
I very much enjoy observing the rulemaking space and seeing what comes out of it (and contributing my comments during public consultation).
Clearly the pilot on the left should only control the front of the aircraft while the pilot on the right controls the back. Like a hook-and-ladder fire engine.
I agree. I can fly under the worst gusting side winds with my left hand. It’s autonomic with no thought involved. When in the right seat I have to think about it. It’s not a natural feel at all.
I’ve watched a lot of airline landings on the web it it looks like some pilots really get it and some are new to the type of plane they’re flying.
You guys are both obviously insane. Evolution has already shown us the correct path. Left half of the brain controls the right side of the body. Right half controls the left. So it should be with aircraft controls. Also, just like our eyes, all signals should be upside down and reversed.
I hope not. Having flown yokes, side-sticks, and centre sticks, I far prefer the side-stick. There are improvements they could make to the stick itself such as making it back-driven so you can feel what the other pilot is doing but it would be a backwards step to revert to a yoke.
The most dreaded unserviceability for an Airbus pilot is this one:
I like to say flying a helicopter is very Zen. You fly a helicopter not by ‘flying’ it, but by becoming one with the machine. As I’ve mentioned before, helicopters are inherently unstable and require constant, minute, control inputs to remain under control. You can’t do it if you think about it. You just have to let your body take control without your mind. It’s all muscle memory. Once you have it, helicopters are easy. But it’s a steep learning curve. (Hovering is the hardest thing to learn. It’s also the first thing you need to learn.)
As part of the new deal, the company will pay an additional $487.2 million in penalties, agree to oversight by an independent monitor, spend at least $455 million to strengthen compliance and safety programs and be placed on supervised probation for roughly three years, according to a Justice Department official.
I looked at the article and I see no details. I am guessing no one goes to jail for this (remember, this is the criminal side of things). The article mentions the test pilots but I am still unclear who was found criminally liable here.
I haven’t followed the links but I imagine they work. My company had extra tickets to this so I went, but it’s not a field I’m following closely. I haven’t attended any other conference on the subject since.
