Photo: BriYYZ, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
A fixed spring, on purpose: published sidestick force data — 1.1 lb breakout, ~22 lb full pitch, roll 3–4× lighter — and no force variation with speed, trim, or configuration.
Sources: Airbus A320neo FCOM; Airbus published data; EASA TCDS A.064.
The A320neo is the aircraft that made fly-by-wire ordinary: a sidestick commanding load factor and roll rate through flight control computers, with envelope protections standing behind every input. The neo generation adds geared-fan and LEAP engines and the Sharklet wingtips.
For a simmer the Airbus is the deliberately artificial feel: the sidestick's centering is constant and synthetic by design, and the aircraft, not the airflow, decides what your hand feels. The profile models that honestly, which is why its force section looks nothing like the manual types.
Airbus launched the A320 in 1984 as the first airliner with digital fly-by-wire and sidesticks, a decision that reshaped the industry. The family became the best-selling airliner line in history, with the neo re-engining of 2010 selling faster than any airliner before it.
The neo's LEAP and GTF engines cut fuel burn around 15 percent and made the type the default narrowbody for a hundred airlines. The aircraft modeled here is the standard A320neo of current fleets.
Each finding pairs our reading with the evidence it rests on. Fly the type and read something wrong? Every claim links straight to the corrections form.
Two independent relays of Airbus's own tables agree to ~0.5 daN: breakout 0.5 daN pitch / 0.4 daN roll (≈1.1 lb), full pitch deflection 10 daN (≈22.5 lb) over ±16°, full roll 2–3.5 daN over ±20° — a pitch-to-roll ratio of roughly 3–4 : 1. The mechanism is spring plus snubber damping.
In normal law the stick is a rate/g demand against a fixed spring: autotrim runs underneath, and the feel does not change from approach to cruise. There is no stick shaker and no tactile stall cue in the stick — alpha protection and the aural warning do that job.
A solenoid detent locks both sticks at neutral under autopilot; pilot force above 5 daN pitch / 3.5 daN roll disengages it. Dual inputs sum algebraically. A back-driven A320 sidestick would be wrong.
| Gate | Knots | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| VsoStall, landing configuration | 113 | Mid-mass ops numbers; FBW invariants don't depend on exact valuesRepresentative |
| VrRotation | 140 | Representative |
| VyBest rate of climb | 165 | Representative |
| VappApproach | 137 | Representative |
The complete starter profile, in the same order and with the same names as the desktop Tuning page. Highlighted rows cite evidence. Hover a row to see its profile-JSON path.
The final overall output scale applied to everything the model produces, before the device cap.
▲ More: everything (spring, loads, effects) gets stronger together. ▼ Less: everything softens together.
Why here: 90%: the synthetic centering must feel solid and constant, so the overall output runs high.
Zero airspeed load and a g-neutral spring — the sidestick is decoupled from the airflow.
The base centring force that pulls the stick back to centre. Every other force stacks on it. Too low and the stick feels limp in normal flight; too high and it fights your hand and masks the smaller cues layered above it.
▲ More: firmer centring that resists your hand at all times. ▼ Less: a limper stick that leans on aerodynamic load alone.
One constant spring at all speeds.
A small neutral zone around centre where the spring stays quiet, so tiny movements at rest don't chatter. Wider is calmer but looser; narrower is more precise but can twitch around centre.
▲ More: a calmer but looser centre with more free play. ▼ Less: a tighter centre that may chatter at rest.
The published breakout is 0.5 daN of 10 daN full — about 5% of travel.
How much of the spring survives at a standstill, before airspeed can build any aerodynamic force. A high floor keeps the parked stick firm; a low floor gives the loose, cable-slack feel of a parked light aircraft.
▲ More: a firmer stick while parked and taxiing. ▼ Less: a floppier parked stick that only wakes up with airspeed.
Why here: The spring is the same parked and at 350 knots: half floor with almost nothing added above it, because airspeed never reaches an Airbus stick.
Enables the low-speed spring engagement window (start/full knots above). Off, the spring is constant at all speeds.
Force never varies with speed: confirmed by the published tables.
The sustained pitch load from elevator deflection and airspeed, balanced independently of roll. This is the main lever behind a type's pitch weight. It does not touch aileron, spring, trim, or buffet forces.
▲ More: heavier sustained pitch forces at speed. ▼ Less: a lighter elevator that takes less muscle to hold.
Why here: 100%, but scaled by the near-zero overall load below: axis balance is symmetric on a sidestick.
The sustained roll load from aileron deflection and airspeed, balanced independently of pitch. Together with the elevator load it sets the control-harmony ratio reviewers talk about.
▲ More: heavier roll forces. ▼ Less: lighter, quicker-feeling ailerons.
Why here: 100%: identical to pitch. The sidestick is symmetric; there is no harmony story to model.
A master scale over both sustained axis loads, applied before their independent balance. Profiles normally leave this alone and tune the two axis loads instead.
▲ More: both axes load up harder. ▼ Less: both axes lighten together.
Why here: 4%: effectively zero aerodynamic load. This single number is the fly-by-wire story: the airflow does not touch your hand.
The indicated airspeed where aerodynamic load reaches its designed full level. It anchors the whole load curve to the aircraft's real speed range: a 172 loads up by 110 knots, a jet much later.
▲ More: loads arrive later; the stick stays light up to a higher speed. ▼ Less: loads arrive earlier and cruise feels heavier.
Why here: 280 kt reference exists for the residual 4%; it is bookkeeping, not feel.
How sharply stick load builds with airspeed. 1.0 is linear; about 2.0 matches real aerodynamics, where dynamic pressure grows with the square of speed, so controls are much lighter slow and firm up fast. Felt when holding the stick off centre, not at rest.
▲ More: lighter at low speed with a steeper rise toward cruise. ▼ Less: a more linear build that loads up earlier.
Why here: 1.0: what little load exists grows linearly; a square law would imply aerodynamics the stick does not have.
A cap on each steady pitch or roll force before it reaches the device, guarding against slamming or saturating the hardware in strong maneuvers.
▲ More: stronger peak steady forces before clipping. ▼ Less: a gentler ceiling; hard maneuvers flatten out sooner.
Why here: 25%: the lowest cap in the fleet. A sidestick never fights you; protections mean never needing high forces.
For hydraulically-boosted or fly-by-wire types: how much of the raw aerodynamic load actually reaches the pilot's hand. 1.0 is a fully manual control run; lower values model the artificial-feel systems that isolate the pilot from true surface loads.
▲ More: more raw aerodynamic load reaching your hand. ▼ Less: more isolation, closer to pure artificial feel.
Why here: Active for FBW: it scales the tiny residual load path down. With ForceGain at 4% its effect is academic.
The same relief for roll trim. Most GA types have no real aileron trim, so this stays at zero; types with roll trim get a matching value.
▲ More: roll trim removes more held roll force. ▼ Less: roll trim does less.
Why here: Symmetric with pitch for the same reason.
Rolling surface vibration from wheel speed and surface type: pavement, grass, or gravel under the gear.
▲ More: louder surface texture through the stick. ▼ Less: a smoother taxi.
Why here: 36%: the airframe filters pavement through oleos and mass; the cockpit still reads the texture.
Short discrete bumps from expansion joints, ruts, and rough surface, punctuating the continuous rumble.
▲ More: sharper hits from joints and ruts. ▼ Less: softer ground detail.
Why here: 30%: taxiway joints at 70 tonnes are felt as thuds, not jolts.
Vibration under brake pressure while rolling. Invisible braking feels wrong; too much makes every stop feel like an anti-skid event.
▲ More: more shudder under braking. ▼ Less: quieter stops.
Why here: 42%: carbon brakes and autobrake events register clearly.
The rapid side-to-side wobble through the roll axis at taxi-rotation speeds, the classic worn-nosegear shimmy this type is or isn't known for.
▲ More: a livelier shimmy on the rollout. ▼ Less: a calmer nosewheel.
Why here: 14%: minimal; a damped airliner nosegear rarely shimmies.
The fore-aft pull on the pitch axis from acceleration on the ground. The takeoff surge draws the column aft; braking pushes it forward.
▲ More: a stronger fore-aft pull under acceleration and braking. ▼ Less: a subtler surge cue.
Why here: 24%: takeoff thrust at flex still shoves.
Airframe shake approaching the stall and while the stall warning is active: how loudly this wing announces it is unhappy. Types with a crisp break get modest buffet and let the horn carry the warning.
▲ More: a louder pre-stall shake. ▼ Less: a quieter wing; the horn carries the warning.
Why here: 15%: in normal law you cannot stall it, so buffet is a rare, protected-corner event. The low value is the protection story.
Airframe shake past the overspeed warning, the airframe's own protest at exceeding Vne/VMO.
▲ More: a harsher protest past the redline. ▼ Less: a gentler overspeed warning.
Why here: 62%: overspeed is one place the airframe genuinely buffets and the event is serious.
Transonic buffet approaching the Mach limit. Meaningful for jets near MMO, zero for pistons and turboprops that never get there.
▲ More: stronger transonic buffet near the Mach limit. ▼ Less: a smoother high-Mach ride.
Why here: 42%: real transonic buffet approaching Mmo.
Shake from deployed spoilers or speedbrakes at speed. Zero for types without them.
▲ More: more shake with boards out. ▼ Less: quieter speedbrakes.
Why here: 45%: spoiler extension rumbles the airframe, one of the most tactile events in an Airbus cabin and cockpit.
Low-frequency airframe vibration with flaps extended into the airflow, in the speed window where they actually work the air.
▲ More: a rougher ride with flaps working the air. ▼ Less: smoother approach flap.
Why here: Config changes at 180 knots drum the airframe.
Airframe drumming from retractable gear hanging in the airstream. Zero for fixed-gear types, where the airframe never changes shape.
▲ More: more drumming with the wheels hanging out. ▼ Less: cleaner gear-down flight.
Why here: Gear in the slipstream is a steady rumble.
The dedicated stall stick-shaker buzz, fired by the aircraft's own stall-warning system. Only types with a real shaker get a value; everything else relies on aerodynamic buffet and the horn.
▲ More: a harder stick-shaker buzz. ▼ Less: a subtler shaker.
Why here: Airbus has no stick shaker; protections replaced it. Enable is off.
Whether this feature is active in this profile.
No shaker exists; alpha protection and the aural warning carry the stall cue.
Random shake from short-term G variation in rough air, so bumpy air is felt and not just seen.
▲ More: rough air hits the stick harder. ▼ Less: calmer chop.
Why here: 30%: high wing loading; chop is damped to a firm ride, and the FBW smooths gust response further.
Rollout vibration while reverse thrust or beta-range props are working. Zero for types without reverse.
▲ More: a rougher rollout under reverse. ▼ Less: quieter reverse.
Why here: 44%: reversers at rollout shake the airframe honestly.
Continuous powerplant vibration following RPM between idle and full power, the ever-present reminder that something is burning fuel up front.
▲ More: more engine through the stick. ▼ Less: a quieter powerplant.
Why here: 10%: high-bypass fans on wing pylons barely reach the stick. The quiet is authentic.
The one-shot kick when the wheels meet the runway, scaled by sink rate: a greaser whispers, a firm arrival thumps.
▲ More: a harder kick at touchdown. ▼ Less: softer arrivals.
Why here: 88%: seventy tonnes arriving is unmistakable; firm airline touchdowns read as such.
The short shudder of gear extension and retraction in motion. Zero for fixed-gear types.
▲ More: a stronger shudder while the gear cycles. ▼ Less: a subtler gear cue.
Why here: 52%: the gear cycle is a whole-airframe event.
Continuous vibration only while the sim reports the flap surfaces actually travelling. It follows real actuator motion and failures, not an estimated timer.
▲ More: more vibration while the flap surfaces travel. ▼ Less: quieter flap runs.
Why here: A distant hum while the tracks run.
The small airframe settle when flap-surface travel completes, driven by the surface arriving, not the handle command.
▲ More: a firmer settle as flaps reach the notch. ▼ Less: a softer arrival.
Why here: A soft settle per detent.
The short mechanical click on each flap-handle detent. The handle, not the surfaces.
▲ More: a sharper detent click. ▼ Less: a fainter click.
Why here: 24%: the flap lever detents are light.
Resistance proportional to the aircraft's pitch rotation rate. It settles the stick after abrupt pitch inputs; zero on both axes turns rate damping off.
▲ More: the stick settles harder against pitch rotation. ▼ Less: less resistance to quick pitch changes.
Why here: 4%: the FBW does the damping; the stick needs almost none of its own.
The roll-axis counterpart: damping against roll rate to stop post-input wobble.
▲ More: more resistance to roll rate. ▼ Less: a livelier roll axis.
Why here: Symmetric with pitch.
How far autopilot commands may physically move the stick. Kept tiny in MSFS, where a moved axis can read back as pilot input; zero disables following entirely.
▲ More: the autopilot visibly moves your stick further. ▼ Less: a barely perceptible follow.
Why here: 5%: the real sidestick does NOT move with the autopilot, so follow is nearly off. The residual keeps a faint life in the stick.
Whether this feature is active in this profile.
The real stick does not move with the autopilot.
How firmly the stick holds the autopilot's commanded position while following is active.
▲ More: a firmer hold on the AP's commanded position. ▼ Less: softer, easy to override.
Why here: Minimal, for the same reason.
Research pass validated the existing profile against Airbus's published sidestick tables — no value changes; the A320 is now the best quantitatively grounded starter in the fleet.
Initial starter baseline.
If your time in the type says this page got something wrong, correct it here.
This page is built from cited references, and real time in the type beats a citation. Quote the claim that reads wrong and tell us what the actual aircraft does. Corrections go to the maintainer for review and feed the next revision of this research.
What the research could not pin down. If you fly the type, or can point at a source, a correction on any of these feeds the next revision directly.
The engine has one spring strength for both axes; the published 3–4 : 1 pitch-to-roll ratio awaits a per-axis spring capability. Snubber damping is likewise recorded but off — enabling a delayed velocity loop is a bench experiment, not an armchair change.
No neo-specific force publication found; none expected — same sidestick unit.
Open conversation about flying and tuning the Airbus A320neo, in the community forum. Corrections above go privately to the maintainer; hangar talk is public.