On 07 Apr 2004 15:46:36 GMT, illspam (Jim Vincent)
wrote:

Regarding the thought in a follow on thread where the thinking is by having the
PIC at the cockpit, he knows exactly what he is doing, I'm told of a story
where the PIC was facing into the cockpit and moving the stick left and right,
thinking he was applying aileron when he was actually doing elevator!

But surely that would be picked up if the PIC and assistant were
interacting, no matter which was PIC? Either way the PIC isn't going
to hear (or see) the expected response and should investigate the
reason for that.

....but maybe that's incorrect - if the PIC was clueless enough to move
the stick the wrong way and not notice the lack of response from the
assistant then maybe he wouldn't notice *any* misconnection. That's
the reason I require a response reporting the direction of movement
without any hint from me of which way I'm moving the control. The
other approach, with the PIC saying what he's doing and hearing 'OK'
or some such, is far more error-prone.

By the PIC at the control surface saying move the control towards me, away from
me, etc. eliminates most if not all potential failure modes and
miscommunications.

That sounds to be similarly fail-safe.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :