Machinbird;
If you are going to have problems with aviating, it is more likely to be a long haul guy that has a problem rather than a short haul guy. They just have that much less opportunity to practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
3rd interim AF447 report
Consequently, the BEA recommends:
that EASA review the content of check and training programmes and make
mandatory, in particular, the setting up of specific and regular exercises dedicated
to manual aircraft handling of approach to stall and stall recovery, including at
high altitude.
IMHO, If they just add to the sim exercises to meet this recommendation, they will miss the mark. Pilots need to become much more involved in actual aviating in between the sim sessions. All that cruise flying going to waste is a crying shame.
A long-haul transport will typically do about 4 to 6 hours
per year of actual handling of the aircraft.
The takeoff phase would typically be in the neighbourhood of 4 minutes before the autoflight is engaged, (if the SID isn't complex, requiring the automation for navigational accuracy in which case its engaged above 100'), and the approach phase which typically is under two minutes in duration.
As you correctly point out, it is not legal to hand-fly in RVSM airspace, so "practise" is not possible there either.
In Canada, the CARS do not require approach-to-stall and recovery training for FBW aircraft for those transitioning from other types. Airlines may do this training by choice but sim scripts are so jammed with required items that the time available for actual hand-flying is minimal to nil.
I particularly agree with your observation that, "
...If they just add to the sim exercises to meet this recommendation, they will miss the mark. Pilots need to become much more involved in actual aviating in between the sim sessions."
These concerns have been around since the mid-80s, expressed mainly by flight crews and flight safety people. AW&ST ran a series on this, first in 1989 and then in 1995.
That said, the record speaks for itself - automation has enhanced safety, (I include under the category of 'automation', the notion of "protections" as well as TCAS, EGPWS, CPDLC, GPS). But the character of accidents is changing wherein almost all accidents are not the result of mechanical failure, navigational error, serious weather encounters or mid-air collision but of LOC and CFIT which have HF elements to greater or lesser degrees.
bubber44;
My first airline job required two captains for long haul flights. My last one
two fos were required. I think if a captain was in the left seat on this flight
there would be no question who was in charge.
Yes, but two F/O's, or one F/O and an RP (who isn't permitted to sit up front below cruise altitudes and who isn't permitted to takeoff/land), are cheaper...
