Basic flying skills vs flight control augmentation: where is the rotary world?
Yes Of Course. but....
'Evening, HC;
Lets beam the Pan AM Clipper Captain miraculously in the cockpit of the Asiana 214 machine. Think he might be able to keep the machine on speed?
( After someone showed him where the airspeed was indicated, naturally )
I'm cheating a bit here: that particular PanAm Capt Ford had a reputation for being a good stick and technically astute )
Lets beam the Pan AM Clipper Captain miraculously in the cockpit of the Asiana 214 machine. Think he might be able to keep the machine on speed?
( After someone showed him where the airspeed was indicated, naturally )
I'm cheating a bit here: that particular PanAm Capt Ford had a reputation for being a good stick and technically astute )
'Evening, HC;
Lets beam the Pan AM Clipper Captain miraculously in the cockpit of the Asiana 214 machine. Think he might be able to keep the machine on speed?
( After someone showed him where the airspeed was indicated, naturally )
I'm cheating a bit here: that particular PanAm Capt Ford had a reputation for being a good stick and technically astute )
Lets beam the Pan AM Clipper Captain miraculously in the cockpit of the Asiana 214 machine. Think he might be able to keep the machine on speed?
( After someone showed him where the airspeed was indicated, naturally )
I'm cheating a bit here: that particular PanAm Capt Ford had a reputation for being a good stick and technically astute )
Yes, but then probably any other captain could, even me!
Required skill sets change over time. I learnt on a Bell 47 and when trying to hover, 99% of my attention was on the tacho - I had to keep it between 3000 and 3100 rpm using the twistgrip throttle, and in reality, nearer 3100rpm due to knackered engines. Every control input had some bearing on the power required so constant adjustment was required. Fast forward to 2005 and now I am flying an EC225 with no manual throttles at all. So that basic skill I learnt is completely redundant.
I trained long hours for an IR - (and long hours after that before I became proficient!) and had to fly endless ILSs manually - since the AS332L didn't have a satisfactory coupler. Eventually I was fairly good at it.
Then, having been on the EC225 whilst 100,000 fleet hours were clocked up in Bristow with only one event that required a manual ILS to be flown, and that was a software bug now fixed (one event in the 100,000 hrs I mean), I realised that an ability to fly an accurate and smooth manual ILS was a redundant skill. Well not totally redundant, I suppose I would need to be able to make a rough stab at it, but no need for perfection for an event that will only occur once in 10 lifetimes or more.
So times move on, skills change and so I have replaced the manual ILS skill with another one that allows me to be comfortable with the automation and know what it is going to do, and know how to make it do what I want, including flying an entire IF approach and missed approach without having to touch the controls. And fly it much better than I ever could!
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Aer
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you receive oversight from the Authority (CASA or whatever) at the same level as a helicopter charter company, and if not, is it not perhaps a little "dangerous" in terms of reputation, to be totally responsible for everything - it's fine until the unthinkable happens (and it will eventually, it is just a matter of time)!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HC,
Mssrs Sod and Murphy can sometimes conspire to thwart the best calculations and assumptions and when that happens the best Statistical Analysis will not provide the least bit of cushion of a sudden meeting between Metal and the Earth.
As "meticulous" as Pan Am's first Chief Pilot was, Those two Gentleman ganged up on him.
http://www.clipperflyingboats.com/pa...s/edwin-musick
Mssrs Sod and Murphy can sometimes conspire to thwart the best calculations and assumptions and when that happens the best Statistical Analysis will not provide the least bit of cushion of a sudden meeting between Metal and the Earth.
As "meticulous" as Pan Am's first Chief Pilot was, Those two Gentleman ganged up on him.
http://www.clipperflyingboats.com/pa...s/edwin-musick
Last edited by Boudreaux Bob; 1st Aug 2014 at 01:30.
Captain?
HC,
Did you mean to write:
"Yes, but then probably any other OLDER captain could, even me! "?
Getting far afield of the EC-225 thread, but then this and several other threads in both the Rotorheads and Rumors forums are onto the point behind my rejoinder. That point being that, while flight control augmentation and automation have indeed improved the piloting safety and mission performance areas, we are not yet in a Starship Enterprise environment, thus possession of basic piloting skills, at a very high level, in less augmented modes of current vehicles ( in fact, the least augmented mode which is possible, given the system design ) is still an absolute necessity.
Not at all disagreeing with the points you made: they are valid.
Did you mean to write:
"Yes, but then probably any other OLDER captain could, even me! "?
Getting far afield of the EC-225 thread, but then this and several other threads in both the Rotorheads and Rumors forums are onto the point behind my rejoinder. That point being that, while flight control augmentation and automation have indeed improved the piloting safety and mission performance areas, we are not yet in a Starship Enterprise environment, thus possession of basic piloting skills, at a very high level, in less augmented modes of current vehicles ( in fact, the least augmented mode which is possible, given the system design ) is still an absolute necessity.
Not at all disagreeing with the points you made: they are valid.
Last edited by JohnDixson; 1st Aug 2014 at 01:47. Reason: grammar
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Thaïland
Age: 67
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flashback: in 1994, When I was flying in the South Pacific, I was flying 140 nautical mile above the water between the islands NTTA/NTTB : single-engine, single radio, no VOR, NO NDB , NO GPS ..... and Some Time No good weather .... But, with a raft on the left seat as copilot ....
So, lucky my FMS was myself and never shut down....
Please, use the best of the technology for lfying, but time to time return to the basics !
So, lucky my FMS was myself and never shut down....
Please, use the best of the technology for lfying, but time to time return to the basics !
Then, having been on the EC225 whilst 100,000 fleet hours were clocked up in Bristow with only one event that required a manual ILS to be flown
Basic attitude/power/airspeed awareness; basic time speed/distance/ heading/fuel burn nav awareness - only when you're ready to sit in an aircraft that has no pilots up front should you be ready to accept a reduction in skills that need to be well learnt, surely?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 433 Likes
on
228 Posts
We have to adapt to new ways in all walks of life. In the process, some skills that were a necessity in a bygone era become less so in the future.
Put an "old and bold, traditional map and compass only" pilot in a modern cockpit and he would be lost even before he got off the ground - he probably couldn't even switch it on!
As one of the previous category I've had to adapt as things become invented. Some of my skills from "my" bygone era are now far less polished, if they ever were.....but navigating at 50 feet agl in a tactical situation using map and compass and stopwatch in an aircraft with no navaids (not even a heading bug) and being able to consistently arrive at an LS within 15 seconds of the required ETA certainly took some doing.
These days I put in the ALT and NAV modes, look at the GPS kit and adjust my IAS until the ETA is the same as the booked slot time... much simpler but I'm glad of the respite; I reckon I earned it.
Even so, it only gives the ETA to the nearest minute...I must have been four times as good!
Put an "old and bold, traditional map and compass only" pilot in a modern cockpit and he would be lost even before he got off the ground - he probably couldn't even switch it on!
As one of the previous category I've had to adapt as things become invented. Some of my skills from "my" bygone era are now far less polished, if they ever were.....but navigating at 50 feet agl in a tactical situation using map and compass and stopwatch in an aircraft with no navaids (not even a heading bug) and being able to consistently arrive at an LS within 15 seconds of the required ETA certainly took some doing.
These days I put in the ALT and NAV modes, look at the GPS kit and adjust my IAS until the ETA is the same as the booked slot time... much simpler but I'm glad of the respite; I reckon I earned it.
Even so, it only gives the ETA to the nearest minute...I must have been four times as good!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing has changed since Mr. Wright made this observation!
What is chiefly needed is skill rather than machinery.
— Wilbur Wright, letter to Octave Chanute, 13 May 1900
— Wilbur Wright, letter to Octave Chanute, 13 May 1900
Maybe so, but the skills you learnt in manually flying approaches (or even carefully monitoring with the ability to quickly spot errors and take positive action to prevent ****-ups), are the edge which can't be replaced with any amount of technology.
Basic attitude/power/airspeed awareness; basic time speed/distance/ heading/fuel burn nav awareness - only when you're ready to sit in an aircraft that has no pilots up front should you be ready to accept a reduction in skills that need to be well learnt, surely?
Basic attitude/power/airspeed awareness; basic time speed/distance/ heading/fuel burn nav awareness - only when you're ready to sit in an aircraft that has no pilots up front should you be ready to accept a reduction in skills that need to be well learnt, surely?
I think this is an important point: What tends to happen at the moment is that pilots are trained and checked on some of the older skills such as manual ILS, and yes you are right there is a carry-forward from manual flight to monitoring and situational awareness (on its many levels). However it is not a perfect carry-forward. Surely it would be much better to have the training optimised to the current skill set (including of course monitoring and situational awareness), rather than the outdated one and just hope the carry-forward is adequate. Training time is a limited resource, it should be optimised to the current role and not one from 30 years ago.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HC,
How do we arrive a a definition of "Minimum Acceptable Handling Skills"?
How should we test for that Standard (whatever it might be)?
How much "in-service" or "recurrent" training do we devote to maintaining those handling skills (whatever we define them to be)?
How do we arrive a a definition of "Minimum Acceptable Handling Skills"?
How should we test for that Standard (whatever it might be)?
How much "in-service" or "recurrent" training do we devote to maintaining those handling skills (whatever we define them to be)?
HC,
How do we arrive a a definition of "Minimum Acceptable Handling Skills"?
How should we test for that Standard (whatever it might be)?
How much "in-service" or "recurrent" training do we devote to maintaining those handling skills (whatever we define them to be)?
How do we arrive a a definition of "Minimum Acceptable Handling Skills"?
How should we test for that Standard (whatever it might be)?
How much "in-service" or "recurrent" training do we devote to maintaining those handling skills (whatever we define them to be)?
It should of course be risk-based. As I said, we have a limited amount of training resource, and so that training should, to some extent at least, be directed towards preventing the next accident. Such accidents don't occur due to an inability to keep the needles bang on the middle during an ILS, and neither of course do they occur due to an engine failure at critical decision point. And yet we spend lots of time training for both these things, whilst not really addressing the things that actually do cause us to crash.
On your specific questions, there is no absolute "right answer" of course. However if we are concerned about retaining manual flying skills, boring down an ILS with minimal control inputs so as to keep everything hunky dory, is not the way to do it. The better and smoother you are, the less you get a feel for the control response and the less confidence you are likely to attain in your ability to recover from an upset or other unexpected event. Resilience is not built by repeating the same old exercise-by-numbers over and over again to perfection.
The better and smoother you are, the less you get a feel for the control response and the less confidence you are likely to attain in your ability to recover from an upset or other unexpected event
Bob, I seem to remember someone (might have been HC) pointing out that in the Sumburgh crash, a yank (not that kind ) on the lever would have been better than the smooth application of power that actually happened.
Would you disagree?
) on the lever would have been better than the smooth application of power that actually happened. Would you disagree?
Manual ILS on an AS332L for example. So, you glance at the GPS track and adjust the heading to the final approach track as the loc is intercepted. Unless the wind changes significantly as you descend, only tiny changes of heading are now required, and a slight poke of the pedals was the normal way of doing that. You know the expected rate of descent and set it by reducing power as the GS is intercepted - experience tells you what collective pitch you need for the conditions. Now, to maintain the GS you just need tiny adjustments (best done on cyclic pitch trim on the 332L, but that is an argument for another day).
So to fly this magical ILS that is going to give me superhuman manual handling skills, I just need the odd prod on the pedals to change the heading by a degree or two, and a bit of action on the pitch beep trim. At the end of all that, it was super smooth, needles were pretty much in the middle and I am a hero for being able to do it so well.
BUT HOW ON EARTH DOES THAT HELP ME IN AN UPSET, or other unexpected situation where bold and confident control movements are required? (Clue: it doesn't!)
I haven't even moved the cyclic!
Sorry sceptical folks, but you really need to think this through. The better I am, the smaller my flight envelope is. That is fine until the unexpected happens, and due to the usual chain of improbable events I find myself in a flight condition I haven't experienced for years, and requiring control inputs much more severe that a prod of the pedals and a bit of beep trim. I freeze.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There once was a very famous Eket Pilot who had a control touch that John Brume from having his flightly Kip. There was nothing about his technique that involved finesse or smoothness and until One developed an immunity to thinking the Rotorhead had come unglued, it made for a long day of work.
I guess hollering that infamous departure call of "We're outta here!" and yanking the sticks to accomplish what was intended worked in the end, but there was something to be said for adding some "Smooth" to his technique.
I suppose there is some confusion about making large movements of the controls abruptly and doing so "smoothly". I suggest abrupt and smooth can have some commonality.
But, if you are down to "Abrupt" and are forced to abandon "Smooth", you have diddled the Pooch somehow.
I guess hollering that infamous departure call of "We're outta here!" and yanking the sticks to accomplish what was intended worked in the end, but there was something to be said for adding some "Smooth" to his technique.
I suppose there is some confusion about making large movements of the controls abruptly and doing so "smoothly". I suggest abrupt and smooth can have some commonality.
But, if you are down to "Abrupt" and are forced to abandon "Smooth", you have diddled the Pooch somehow.