>>1166265>Does the B737 only have 2 hydraulic systems?73 has two hydro systems but has a third mechanical backup. The rudder has a self contained system that is similar to the new electro hydrostatic actuators.
>AFAIK, no incidents on any Airbus has required any reversion to mechanical controls only. Baghdad incident. I think there is at least one or two more that I can't think of. It's true that a central mechanical backup might be just as vulnerable but that's why I think the consensus is that self contained electro hydrostatic actuators are the safest back up system. But then there are theories that those kinds of aircraft (anything without manual reversion) may be able to be remotely controlled.. Although I know of at least one international billionaire who was able to escape rape charges by flying away on a private jet, but I don't know what kind of private jet. These rumors are supposedly by wikileaks but I'm not sure where i just see articles that say that.
Then september 11th. Despite what you may think have occurred there is speculation that the aircrafts were remotely controlled. One of the sky waitresses, Betty Ong, used the skyphone and said that the aircraft was filled with gas or something and she couldn't breath, which makes it seem like hypoxia from depressurization. Some people think that her call wasn't "supposed" to get through or leak because it differs from the "official narrative." I don't know if that's what happened and I'm not saying this is 100 percent true. Just recounting the speculation I have seen elsewhere. Link to the call in name field.
Interestingly pic related, a dassault falcon 900, offers manual reversion and is still being manufactured. There is only one incident of it causing injuries because the artificial feel system failed and the pilots created oscillations. Newer falcons have fbw that is similar but slightly different than airbus. Idk if i like them because the center engine can explode and damage control lines.
