Helmet Fire
I wish people would understand the realities of Cat A/Class1/Class 2(e) et al.
Here is an aircraft that has staggering performance for which someone pays handsomely, buy very little to help stop us flying it into the water on a inky night.
That is exactly the point I have been making on the other threads (are you there FLI?) about the CAT A issues. When are we going to get spending on that which kills us most????????????
We have been 'reverse-engineered' into the focus on these performance related issue by the legislation. In pre-sim days it was difficult to explain to the studes why we spent two thirds of a proficiency check dealing with single-engine issues but the bottom line was that this is what the law required us to do. Was this frustrating when you were operating from a 3000 ft + runway then chucking the Cat A book out the window as soon as you you crossed the coast? - you bet. Thank goodness the simulators arrived and - in the right hands - this fantastic tool opened our eyes to what things may be like if we were abe to rethink prof-checks and add more LOFT. The rules don't go away but now we have a way of dealing with it that is more in line with the threat. All you need is a Sim (or capable STD/FTD), an enlightened operator or customer (to pay) and training staff that know and understand that a sim is NOT an instrument of torture.
Quote
Much of the discussion above has mentioned rig positions and moving rigs as a danger. I am assuming the concern here is if the aircraft does not have radar, or am I missing something? How many accidents have occurred with CFI unseen rigs V CFIT? Is it a biggie?
I think Malabo's post goes some way to answer that but the question really begins like this - "Can the EGPWS work offshore with no database of obstructions in the operating area?" if the answer is "No" then we have to ask "How accurate does this database have to be to be viable, practical to use and practical to manage?" We must now defer to the experts but for us end users we obviously want perfection but, like everything alse that comes our way (seats, stab systems, wipers, lighting, doors etc) we can learn to live with something less.
Why don’t we have a radar altitude hold function for these machines (particularly off shore)?
Our 76Bs were fitted with the DDAFCS that delivered a fully coupled four-axis system with a good rad-alt hold. It wasn't perfect because you could get yourself into a bit of a scrape if you tried to accelerate too hard between platforms. Power demands could suddenly put you into an overtorque. Nonetheless this was a GREAT system. You coud do the entire flight from 100 ft on departure fully coupled and, with practice, put the machine on short finals before 'decoupling'. Between platforms on a busy shuttle you could take the pressure off for a little while by plugging in the rad alt hold and let those inner tensions go. This helped to pace your periods of intense concentration.
The kit is out there, you just need enlightened customers or ops directors to shell out for it (sorry about the pun)
G
