Back to topic,my vote is FSL,but certanly NOT the BlackBox one,it's crap.

We're all entitled to our opinions and that is a great thing.

I have some of the other Airbusses available and for me in my humble opinion the Black Box creation is at the top of the food chain and is being constantly improved with the help of owner input.

Dave

I've read thousands of pages about it over the last couple of years! And I maintain my dislike of the Airbus philosophy. I'll be getting one of these addons though. I find them very interesting and they should be a blast to fly. I get the impression that people don't really understand how an Airbus handles so it would be interesting to see people's reactions when these addons finally arrive. The fact that, for example, you don't command a certain amount of aileron deflection with the stick but rather a certain amount of roll, no matter the conditions, is a really strange feeling that is very different to flying traditional aircraft.

 

That has to feel odd after years of flying normal aircraft

waiting for the fs lab airbus to come out hopefully soon

I think they will both be' good, the

Fslab looks it will be a little more advanced. I'll be getting both since I already own the AirbusX.

 

 

David DD

And I maintain my dislike of the Airbus philosophy.

Out of interest, what is it that you don't like about it? Is it purely that you fly it by setting pitch and bank and not control surface deflection and you don't feel comfortable with this? Or have you something against the FBW protections provided?

 

Ró.

Edited August 19, 201213 yr by Rónán O Cadhain

Thought I would throw my coin in here to answer the original post.

 

I have the BlackBox airbus and at the moment it does not work properly. I do not care what anyone says about it. It simply, at this stage does not work correctly. There seems to be a lot of fan boys on the forum already that are blinded by something but as far as I am concerned there are some real issues.

 

I will be buying the airbus x extended when it comes out based on the look of the original and the improved functionality of the extented. For sure I feel when this is released it will be the best on the market until blackbox achieves what it is trying to do which I am sure they will.

 

But for the first time I am truly optimistic regarding an airbus release and that is the one from flight sim labs. I believe they will get this right and am really looking forward to it.

 

I wish I had not bought the BBS one now and just held off for the airbus x extended which would have filled my need until FSL release theirs. However it will be interesting to watch the BBS develop.

 

I don't think you will be disapointed with the aerosoft offering but if you really only want to buy one I would wait for the FSL version.

 

Regards

Out of interest, what is it that you don't like about it? Is it purely that you fly it by setting pitch and bank and not control surface deflection and you don't feel comfortable with this? Or have you something against the FBW protections provided?

 

Ró.

 

It's both really. Let me put it this way... a few years ago Citroen started selling their cars with a device that makes your seat vibrate when you stray out of your lane on the motorway. This was received with great enthusiasm by many. I think it's absolutely awful. If you can't stay in your lane, then you shouldn't be driving. Staying in your lane is easier than walking. I find it quite amazing that such a device was invented, never mind needed. There's no doubt in my mind that stuff like this makes for lazy, and worse drivers.

 

So onto Airbus, and it's more of the same. Maybe it's a French thing :) I just do not trust these airplanes. While I'm sure they've saved the day on occasion, the situation they corrected should never arise in the first place, and the fact that these airplanes protect you so much means that these situations will arise more frequently because well hey who cares? The airplane will save us.

 

As for the controls, yes that too. Setting pitch and bank instead of control surfaces is unlike any other aircraft. These guys spend years on end flying like this, with no exposure to anything else. You tell me they could fly a Cessna 172 after a 20 year career flying an Airbus? There is no way. And if the Airbus' computers fail? Suddenly they are "flying a plane" for the first time in who knows how long. I just don't see how this is in any way good or safe. The Airbus philosophy saves a few lives today but in the process starts a slow rot in basic flying skills and airmanship that is now beginning to bite us, and will worsen with time.

 

They are awesome machines, I have respect for the technology. I just don't think it's being used in the right place or for the right purpose. Thousands of pilots have completed their careers without ever getting into a highly dangerous situation, with no help at all from computers. To make a rather sweeping statement, I'm pretty sure that in the hands of highly skilled and experienced pilots, traditional aircraft are safer than an Airbus. In the hands of unskilled pilots, an Airbus is probably safer than a traditional aircraft. The tail is wagging the dog. No pilot is ever truly in full control of an Airbus.

...

 

As for the controls, yes that too. Setting pitch and bank instead of control surfaces is unlike any other aircraft. These guys spend years on end flying like this, with no exposure to anything else. You tell me they could fly a Cessna 172 after a 20 year career flying an Airbus? There is no way. And if the Airbus' computers fail? Suddenly they are "flying a plane" for the first time in who knows how long. I just don't see how this is in any way good or safe. The Airbus philosophy saves a few lives today but in the process starts a slow rot in basic flying skills and airmanship that is now beginning to bite us, and will worsen with time.

...

You do realize that Rónán flies the A330 for a living right?

The fact that, for example, you don't command a certain amount of aileron deflection with the stick but rather a certain amount of roll, no matter the conditions, is a really strange feeling that is very different to flying traditional aircraft.

 

Hi TheBFG thanks for your interesting posts in this topic but could you please explain the above quote to me? I'm still learning all this stuff. Are you referring to the way that the Airbus controls aren't directly connected to the control surfaces so that instead of moving the ailerons directly the pilot is telling the computer make the plane maintain a desired angle of bank?

 

You do realize that Rónán flies the A330 for a living right?

 

Wow we have an actual Airbus pilot on here? That's so cool! =D

I may bve wrong but I think jetblue had a emergency landing at las a few months back where it sounds like the plane could have been in direct law. If they were in direct law then they seemed to handle it just fine.

 

EDIT.. according to what I just read it was a double hydraulic failure on that flight and I also found some airbus documents that alt law is possible but that once the gear goes down it says flight controls will be direct law...

 

 

So if that is what happened to that flight those bus pilots not only handled direct law fine, but also with a lot of control systems out.

You do realize that Rónán flies the A330 for a living right?

 

I did not! And I'm sure he'll come and chew my theory out, but I look forward to it as I'm also learning :) I don't mean to sound like a Boeing fan or anything, I just find this approach by Airbus to be very interesting as I'm not sure it's for the better at all.

 

Hi TheBFG thanks for your interesting posts in this topic but could you please explain the above quote to me? I'm still learning all this stuff. Are you referring to the way that the Airbus controls aren't directly connected to the control surfaces so that instead of moving the ailerons directly the pilot is telling the computer make the plane maintain a desired angle of bank?

 

That's right. If you move the stick left a certain amount, the aircraft will roll left by a certain amount, no matter what the conditions. The ailerons will increase/decrease deflection to maintain the amount of roll that the sidestick commands. Now if you've banked to 25 degrees, the aircraft will also automatically adjust the elevator to maintain altitude, something we normally do by applying back pressure to the stick. Now return the stick to center, and the aircraft will stay at 25 degrees of bank and keep flying in circles all day long at the same altitude. This isn't with any autopilot engaged.

 

The idea is wonderful and I'm sure it makes for some extremely accurate flying, but... you're not really flying the plane are you?

I did not! And I'm sure he'll come and chew my theory out, but I look forward to it as I'm also learning :) I don't mean to sound like a Boeing fan or anything, I just find this approach by Airbus to be very interesting as I'm not sure it's for the better at all.

 

 

 

That's right. If you move the stick left a certain amount, the aircraft will roll left by a certain amount, no matter what the conditions. The ailerons will increase/decrease deflection to maintain the amount of roll that the sidestick commands. Now if you've banked to 25 degrees, the aircraft will also automatically adjust the elevator to maintain altitude, something we normally do by applying back pressure to the stick. Now return the stick to center, and the aircraft will stay at 25 degrees of bank and keep flying in circles all day long at the same altitude. This isn't with any autopilot engaged.

 

The idea is wonderful and I'm sure it makes for some extremely accurate flying, but... you're not really flying the plane are you?

 

Wow that pretty much takes all the skill out of turning it lol a child could fly it accurately in turns like that =). Thanks for the explanation!

Wow that pretty much takes all the skill out of turning it lol a child could fly it accurately in turns like that =). Thanks for the explanation!

 

It probably does make it easier for the pilots but I am sure they could still stick and rudder the plane if they had to.

It's both really. Let me put it this way... a few years ago Citroen started selling their cars with a device that makes your seat vibrate when you stray out of your lane on the motorway. This was received with great enthusiasm by many. I think it's absolutely awful. If you can't stay in your lane, then you shouldn't be driving. Staying in your lane is easier than walking. I find it quite amazing that such a device was invented, never mind needed. There's no doubt in my mind that stuff like this makes for lazy, and worse drivers.

The purpose is not to tell the pilot that you're free to kick the airplane about however you like like there's no tomorrow, it's to put a safety net there in case god forbid a situation like that ever does arise. Most pilots will go their whole careers with out even coming close to activation the Airbus FBW protections.

Consider it like a sea cliff, and the local council putting a net at the bottom most of the time in case some day, a child or small pet, wanders off too close to the edge, slips and falls. The net sometimes isn't there, like when storms get really bad and it has to be taken in, but even if it was there all the time, you don't all of a sudden get careless around the edge of a cliff, pushing people off for the craic and going Jeronimo!!! Bouncy Bouncy Bouncy!!!! You still treat the cliff for what it is, a 200ft shear drop, just like you treat the plane like a €300m piece of kit. What it does do is let people say that these cliffs are safer than others, and some day, that net probably will prevent deaths, but it doesn't give visitors to the cliff to treat it with any less caution than you would if the net was not there...

 

In cars, like you mention with the Citroen, the reason you'd stray over the line is if you were falling asleep at the wheel, again, it's not designed for you to swerve back and forth across the road until you vibrate and then swerve the other way. It's a method of stopping you crashing into others if you fall asleep at the wheel. In Ireland we have vibrator strips built into the edges of our motorways as standard, so no matter what the car, if you dose off a sway to the edge you'll get woken in a shot and know to take action. Again though, it isn't supposed to encourage you to fall asleep at the wheel, only to be there in the event you do, as we all know, it's something that happens time and time again, and usually it ends in tradgedy...

 

So onto Airbus, and it's more of the same. Maybe it's a French thing :) I just do not trust these airplanes. While I'm sure they've saved the day on occasion, the situation they corrected should never arise in the first place, and the fact that these airplanes protect you so much means that these situations will arise more frequently because well hey who cares? The airplane will save us.

See above.

 

As for the controls, yes that too. Setting pitch and bank instead of control surfaces is unlike any other aircraft. These guys spend years on end flying like this, with no exposure to anything else. You tell me they could fly a Cessna 172 after a 20 year career flying an Airbus? There is no way. And if the Airbus' computers fail? Suddenly they are "flying a plane" for the first time in who knows how long. I just don't see how this is in any way good or safe. The Airbus philosophy saves a few lives today but in the process starts a slow rot in basic flying skills and airmanship that is now beginning to bite us, and will worsen with time.

Well let's see, I've taken a 152 or 172 up into the air 3 times this summer in the past two months, and judging it purely on the lack of smoking craters, I'd say I haven't lost it, and that's after a 23 year career... ^_^

On the topic of airmanship though, airmanship isn't all that much about the ability to manipulate the controls and get the plane to do what you want it to, heck my 9 year old daughter was able to fly a 172 straight and level, and change heading with a little instruction in VMC with reasonable accuracy. Airman ship is the decision making process, on your routing, your fuel uplift, whether to hold or divert, and all the other decisions that you take every time you fly, that require the bank of experience and knowledge you've gained in your time flying, that's what airmanship really is... Not whether or not you have to hold a little pressure on the stick to keep it in a bank...

 

What I will give you on this point, is that is does take a little time, a very little time, to adjust to, but that's the same whenever you move onto a new aircraft.

 

They are awesome machines, I have respect for the technology. I just don't think it's being used in the right place or for the right purpose. Thousands of pilots have completed their careers without ever getting into a highly dangerous situation, with no help at all from computers. To make a rather sweeping statement, I'm pretty sure that in the hands of highly skilled and experienced pilots, traditional aircraft are safer than an Airbus. In the hands of unskilled pilots, an Airbus is probably safer than a traditional aircraft. The tail is wagging the dog.

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head there. In the hands of a skilled pilot, you'll never notice the difference or protections, however, even the best can screw up, and usually it tends to be the best that screw up, so the added net of safety there certainly doesn't hurt.

 

No pilot is ever truly in full control of an Airbus.

Explain please... :P

 

 

I did not! And I'm sure he'll come and chew my theory out, but I look forward to it as I'm also learning :) I don't mean to sound like a Boeing fan or anything, I just find this approach by Airbus to be very interesting as I'm not sure it's for the better at all.

That's the attitude... ^_^

 

Wow that pretty much takes all the skill out of turning it lol a child could fly it accurately in turns like that =). Thanks for the explanation!

:huh:

 

Regards,

Ró.