![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Actually, It's an interesting question. Some gliders have very short
sticks and light control forces (almost any current racing glider comes to mind), while some have long sticks and heavier forces (Blaniks, Larks, and 2-33s come to mind). There have been gliders with small sidesticks (original Zuni, HP-18, Monerai) but sidesticks have not really caught on - probably because they make it really hard to fly left (or both) handed - which can be useful during some cockpit chores. The problem with a real short sidestick is the motion becomes a bit awkward, especially in pitch, while with a longer stick the arm can be rested on the pilot's leg and precise control is easy. I think non-flyers may think aircraft need powered controls just as cars need power steering and brakes, forgetting that cars used to be available without either (VW Beetle, anyone?). And surprisingly large aircraft fly perfectly well with manual controls (albeit usually with wheels and lots of control motion, and often the rudder is boosted) - For example, Boeing 707s (I've flown the KC-135 and it is surprisingly easy to maneuver), all WW2 bombers, even the Spruce Goose, I believe. Control wheels in small airplanes are abominations, mainly there to make the spamcan seem either like a car (Arrgh!) or a DC-3. How manly. Note that the new crop of lightplanes have more sticks in them - including sidesticks, which open up the cockpit a lot. Also, the trend in large military (B-1, C-17) and commercial fly-by-wire planes is also to sticks, since the leverage provided by a wheel is no longer required. Boeing is an exception in it's commercial designs - the 777 could have used a stick. It will be interesting to see if the 787 keeps a wheel, now that the B-1 and C-17 are Boeing planes. Lots of neat technology (and some magic) involved in the design of aircraft flight controls - especially ailerons. Kirk |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andre,
It would be interesting to hear from the Diana designers why they chose the sidestick. You are correct about Airbus, of course. As far as using a short sidestick, try resting your forearm on your desk, and pretend you are holding a sidestick. Simulate moving the "stick" in pitch and roll. You will find that it is hard to get much motion in pitch (especially back) when your arm is resting on something. Roll is OK, but it's harder to roll right than left (using the right hand). The solution on fly-by-wire planes such as the F-16 is to use a force-sensing stick, so there is little motion of the stick. I think Airbus is similar. I've flown a bit in F-16s, and really like it; very responsive and natural. Have not flown any manual sidesticks so I'm neutral on them. I do like the short center stick on my LS6 - I often fly with my left hand while entering data in my GPS, and at high speeds/low altitudes (contest finish) usually have both hands on the stick to prevent PIO's. Kirk |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hanger and gliders hit by storm. | [email protected] | Soaring | 6 | February 1st 05 01:44 AM |
Powered gliders = powered aircraft for 91.205 | Mark James Boyd | Soaring | 2 | December 12th 04 03:28 AM |
Production rates? | Ed Byars | Soaring | 38 | November 24th 04 04:13 PM |
Do you like gliders but hate FAA checkrides? | Bruce Hoult | Soaring | 8 | August 13th 04 05:14 PM |
Underwater Gliders | Burt Compton | Soaring | 6 | November 25th 03 04:43 AM |