came here to say this. never felt "confused" on the EMB throttles. if you blow one up I'd like to know exactly which lever I'm on. not some computer saying "don't worry ab initio two-striper. I got u"
That throttle thing is the only thing that kind makes me go ooof. I like the idea… but maybe they should have made the dials used to select the thrust percentage or idle one engine not be on the overhead panel and be more prominent. I can see that being a cause of design induced human error where you accidentally idle one of your engines trying to do something else on the overhead panel and then not understanding why an engine has suddenly lost performance.
Hello Mr Attenborough, oh, er, you sounded like him for a moment! :-) Those Avionics look pretty sweet, I bet with a little tinkering it's possible to get root access and change the wallpaper to something better than a bunch of boring maps 😀Okay. That was a joke! This is awesome, I'm glad they've included a set of physical buttons to control everything across all screens. A big step up from the Falcon 900 I was familiar with in the early 90's.
Cross-pilot input feedback (active sidesticks) should be mandated on all new designs. Not convinced by the single throttle either, as much as it's a proven design. Good on Dassault keeping touchscreens away from overhead panels.
I’m trying to find out what system they have for the sidestick in the 10X… do you know if it’s duplicated electro-mechanical movement (as with Gulfstream) or haptic warning… or ?
i can allready think of all kinds of problems for that single throttle..seems like it could cause more accidents than preventing them. Bad move dassault... bad move..
The cockpit of any Boeing Business Jet looks like a museum against this jet. But any Boeing cockpit looks like that against an Airbus, Gulfstream or Bombardier Cockpit with sidesticks anyway 🙂
I’ve always loved the Falcon series, Dassault makes an amazing jet. However, the single throttle lever is going be a huge problem. The entire world trains to handle multi engine emergencies using individual throttle levers, now you’re telling me to forget all of that training and muscle memory and look up at the overhead panel to handle an engine abnormality or emergency? Not intuitive at all IMHO.
One of the reason that the British Midlands pilots of the B737 shut down the incorrect engine was they closed the throttle of the engine they thought was giving the problem and by coincidence the airframe vibration subsided. If they had taken time to diagnose using engine instruments and warnings it probably would not have occurred. I have time on a Falcon 900 and with the engines close together on the tail very little yaw with a failure, and of course zero yaw if it’ the centre engine.
It’s actually not a bad idea. In modern FADEC controlled engines, you’re not moving the thrust lever very much yourself. If at all. If an engine fails, there’s no reason once the fuel is shut off, one lever for both can’t be used.
This is why I love flying the 737. Yes it is a throwback design to the 60’s. But it also a pilot’s airplane. You have to manually move switches, interpret data, and think your way through situations. In short, you have to be a pilot… I understand that this is the future. But as these aircraft become increasingly more sophisticated our role is morphing into automation managers. My favorite words to hear when I’m flying are “cleared for the visual approach.” Autopilot and auto thrust off. Time to look out the window and be a pilot…
I disagree even Bomardier and other planemakers like Hondajet do not want to use the outdated yoke or other systems still found on Boeing jets. The Falcon Eye sytem greatly enhances visual awareness and makes the plane safer.
@@techdefined9420Any of you care to talk about Cessna? Even though Cessna is a branch of Textron Aviation, their Cessna Citation Longitude which is their current latest private jet still uses yokes just like with Boeing jets.
@@wololo10 "yeah sure" En fait c'est possible avec les control de vol électronique vu que tu peux paramètrer exactement comment l'avion se comporte et Dassault sont des expert en commande de vol électronique donc je veux bien les croire.
@@anteekoElectronic flight control does not change the aerodynamics of the plane. And it should be pretty obvious that a business jet is not designed to be as maneuverable as a fighter jet.
@@skirata3144 "Electronic flight control does not change the aerodynamics of the plane. And it should be pretty obvious that a business jet is not designed to be as maneuverable as a fighter jet." He said "sharp" not "manoeuvrable". Sharpness, precision is totally within the domaine of the electronic flight control which Dassault are expert at. One example: all 320, 330, 350, 380 flight command react very similarly. Thanks to the electronic flight control being set up with similar parameter to shorten pilot training. It is the advantage of letting a computer fly your plane.
And ... what if there is a problem with the ... let's say graphic card... is there one per screen .. can a screen be displayed on an other one if it break ?
yes, everything is backed up. It have been for the bast 15 years in either EASy cokcpit or vision flight deck. so in flight no problem but before the next flight, you cannot dispatch without working PFD. But usually you can swap with the ones with wich you can dispatch while INOP
Love the 10x They might be jumping the shark with the new interior design. How do those funky seats turn into berths. I think they d could lose customers to the Global 7500/8000 just on this alone. Nuage seats with their zero gravity concept and more traditional appearance is much more appealing, I think. But i love Dassault, hopefully, I’m proved wrong.
Dassault jumped the shark on the 10x. I don't like anything about this airplane. It's the just because you can doesn't mean you should design. The 7X and 8X are everything a Falcon should be, and what their customers love about the brand. This feels like a Bombardier or Gulfstream cosplay but getting everything wrong. Flightdeck ergonomics are atrocious, the interior is not gonna win them any favors either. Dassault on a 1 way trip to nowhere.
Have you seen how many pilots have croaked at the controls or been dragged out of the flight deck in last 2 years? They cant make driverless cars work.
Guys, take a look on what's going on in the military. There are programs like X47b and Euron.. autonomous fighter jets.. I think it's a matter of time.. today, an Airbus is fully capable to fly from pt A to B, land safely and almost taxi to the gate.. technology already exists... I agree, people might not be prepared for this just yet..
Theres a big difference between a military mission with 1 pilot, and removing said pilot. Whole nother ball game with 300 people on board in the middle of the Atlantic. How would miracle on the hudson have gone down with autonomous control? Never ever in the hudson with everyone living. Ask those 200 people that lived. Not ONE would get on a AI flown plane. I wouldnt
@@maj1664 good luck finding a insurance carrier to cover that first AI only passenger flight. And as soon as a AI plane taxis into a terminal, thats all she wrote.
They work extremely well. The GVII (and soon to be GVIII) series have hand grips around all of the touchscreen’s so in turbulence your hand is steady allowing your thumb to be very accurate with any selection.
@@wgeffon it’s not so much turbulence, it’s having tactile feedback from an actual button press. It would be almost impossible to use in a smoke filled cockpit, you’d have no idea what you are pushing. It’s all down to cost, once developed the touch screens save money and time on manufacturing. They’re a solution to a problem that never existed
@@jonathanbeattie3410 Your points are well taken. But, in a smoke filled cockpit, I’d still have no idea what button I was pressing. I know the general layout of switches and buttons in the Challenger I fly but if I can’t see them, it’s still a guess.
