Originally Posted by Goldenrivett
But you're right, why should we discuss ideas about how to improve such a perfect system.
It's not perfect. As any aeronautical system, it has its compromises and drawbacks. Yet, despite many PPRuNers claiming otherwise, it is well understood and service proven.
What is the point of the discussion? If those who are making bold statements about it have no idea about
: aerodynamics, aeroplane systems, aeroplane performance, instrument flying, multi-crew operations, state of the pilot training today, that moderate turbulence starts at 0.5G so 0.25 is light or that ten degree roll is really insignificant even in transport aeroplane terms, then it really says a lot about the participants in the discussion but not much about the subject matter.
Originally Posted by Goldenrivett
If I understand your brief explanation correctly then you are suggesting that PF keeps the PM informed of his SS movements verbally, in order to enhance their mutual SA of the control input?
Of course you don't. Point is that LH captain clearly stated he lost control and FO has promptly and correctly taken over. Completely unlike AF447 where airspeed indication failure was quickly recognized but nothing was done about it, right copilot stated he lost control but would not let one in the LHS to try to regain it and CM1 anyway instead of taking over and returning the aeroplane to its level, couldn't think of anything better than calling the captain from the bunk to sort out the mess. Nobody said anything about any warning. No "disregard" or "non standard" could be heard. As very wise man once said:
Originally Posted by Wing Commander Spry
Communication, an utterly vital element to Crew Resource Management regardless of aircraft type. Whenever we find ourselves in a situation of ‘unease’ we need to be vocal about what we are thinking but also what we are doing. Once others are aware of your concerns they can be addressed.
Another point that in modern MRJT or LRJT, what your significant cockpit other as PF, AFCS or even you yourself are doing with controls is of no interest to you as long as the aeroplane follows the desired flight path. Whether control input is appropriate is checked on PFD, not by looking at or touching the yoke.
Originally Posted by Vilas
You may have to select commercial pilots from aerobatic teams.
SilkAir used to employ former Black Knights pilot.
Originally Posted by vilas
Pilot pulls back on side stick and instead of seeing the result on attitude only monitors bank. Isn't that strange instrument flying?
Correct, but this strangeness is not limited to instrument flying. A pilot that forgets the basics, tries to make the aeroplane climb where it just can't and holds the yoke/stick into the stall which is only interrupted by ground collision was described by Wolfgang Langewiesche in 1944.
Originally Posted by vilas
The actions were not logical but panic stricken, perhaps not coming from rational part of the brain but primal.
Absolutely! Asimov has called it "reptilian brain", Kahneman "system one" but they agree when it takes over, any rational thought gets sidelined.
Originally Posted by Seagull967
Ah, so easy to sit in your chair in front of your computer and think "that would not have happened to me..."
It is easy and absolutely wrong, that's why I did not and will not say that. Experience of the latest confirmed victims of the impossible climb syndrome among ATPLs is as follows:
RHS: 6900 hrs, 6064 on type
LHS: 14 268 hrs, 6161 as captain on type, type rating examiner.
What little we know so far is that it can happen to anyone.