Quote:
Originally Posted by Boeing Guy
Speaking as a simple Aviator, I am not as knowledgeable as any passenger or armchair pilot.
Boeing's and all American built aircraft are built with the following principals.
1. The automation is there to aid the pilot, it is he/she who is in control
2. The aircraft are built for the ham fisted redneck pilot who will have no finesse when landing, in fact Boeing's are built to be 'banged in', a gentle landing is not recommended.
Airbus have a different view.
1. There aircraft is flown by its computers, the pilot is there to assist this.
2. They are designed to be handled and land with some finesse, they are not designed to be 'banged in'.
The key is in the Automation, who controls what. Personally I much prefer to have absolute authority rather than ask the very famous question 'What the h@ll is it doing now' (More frequent than you might think or want.)
The A380 may be bigger than the 747, but it is not a game changer.
|
With 40 odd years in the aerospace industry BG I am not sure the term "banged in" is a stress/design criteria
It's not one I have come across anyway.
Have a look at this archive link the pics don't do it justice but read the script and the comments aimed at that little ole US airplane maker.
787 - Problems Joining Fuselage Sections - Fuselage Gaps at Flightstory.net - Aviation Blog