Why? A pilot was able to land a DC10 with zero functional control surfaces, despite not having practiced such a scenario. True, it wasn't a great landing, but if he'd prepared for such a scenario he probably could have done better.
Of course, if the engines had used a processor-controlled throttle system, who knows whether it would have allowed the necessary adjustments to control the plane.
I guess my philosophy would be that if planes are going to go fly-by-wire, there should be a backup "mode" in which, with the flip of a switch, the pilot can lock out all processor-controlled systems that use rewritable code storage. The plane's systems should have code in ROM that will allow the pilot to fly the plane. Perhaps not fly it as smoothly or elegantly as fancier code would allow, but at least fly it.
You should have read his entire comment ... the sarcasm would have been obvious to you....
“The plane’s systems should have code in ROM that will allow the pilot to fly the plane. Perhaps not fly it as smoothly or elegantly as fancier code would allow, but at least fly it.”
Actually, I’ve seen aircraft in test do exactly this, but really, you’re opening yourself up to more trouble here than the problems it would potentially solve.
Fly-by-wire works, it’s reliable, and it’s here to stay. We haven’t had stick-and-rudder guys for decades on commercial flights.
Your safety is more in the hands of the geeks than the golden-arms these days.
So, you might grab a stick of beemans before you board your next flight.....because you want to be ready when the entertainment center says it’s your turn to fly.
TWICE!!!!
That civilian cargo plane that was hit by an Surface To Air Missile leaving Baghdad lost all hydraulics too. The crew managed to land the aircraft wheels up on the runway and survived. No fire. Just a belly landing.
Of course we never heard about that part because it didn't fit the media template.