Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control

On Jul 31, 12:44*pm, wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
This article is strongly slanted in favor of new stability-augmentation
gadgets for light aircraft:

http://www.flyingmag.com/blogs/going...trol-your-airp...

Not surprisingly, Cirrus is installing the gadget first, and Garmin is writing
the poorly-tested software for it.

And you know the software is "poorly-tested" how?

Apparently the author does not understand the distinction between flying for
fun and flying for transportation. The pilot who flies for fun is unlikely to
want a computer to fly for him, no matter how well the computer does it or how
safe the computer can make things. A pilot who flies for transportation might
welcome more computer control. But putting gadgets like this on every light
aircraft makes no sense. Sure, it might improve safety, but so would
automating the entire flight, giving the pilot no control at all--and yet
complete automation of flights would defeat the purpose of flying for many
hobby pilots.

Apparently if you read the article but you didn't understand it.

The system does not fly the airplane and is not an autopilot.

It "senses that the pilot has lost control" and recovers.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

The early Mooneys had a vacuum operated wing leveler, don't know if it
was required for airworthiness. It could be disabled with a button on
the yoke, that was handy when turning, the wing leveler really
stiffened the controls. Wing levelers, manual gear retraction,
manually pumped down flaps -- those Mooney Rangers were fun to fly.