I think that pilots flying today could be roughly divided into two groups, one group who have attitude as their first go-to because they actually have experience flying aircraft IMC and learnt ( probably subconsciously) that a good scan is built around attitude, and the second group who have never learnt and practiced that.
The root cause of this statement is not the line plot training but the training of the flying school student. That is where the basics should be ingrained. I receive 148hr cadets to start a jet TQ course. Some are good, some OK. They have not had the 'attitude is the heart & start of the scan' pumped into them. Scarily I now hear from a TC on A320 that he is line training cadet pilots with 79hrs total from a MPL course. Can this really be true..correct...good idea? They must have done, hopefully, a huge amount of sim flying IR/IMC to be allowed anywhere near a pax a/c wit only 79hrs air time. Have they been pounded into good IR scanning?
I know nothing of MPL, but the dilution of training seems to be close to bottom.
IMHO the new unreliable airspeed procedures is a knee jerk reaction to a couple of events that should not have led to an accident. It's a one size fits all, in all circumstances, "flying for dummies" solution. I'd rather teach the guys better in their foundation phase, AND practice it.
Amidst all this, one thing I find very unsettling: With a blocked pitot or static source the 1st thing you may notice (on the more modern a/c) is an "IAS disagree" flag. (It is not there on older a/c. You determined something was amiss due to incompatible ATT/Power/Speed interrogation = scan.) You call for the B737 IAS Disagree QRH (non memory). It directs you, after no action, to the "Unreliable Airspeed QRH. Here there are memory items, the definition of which are actions that need to be competed expeditiously. So why the delay going via the non-memory IAS disagree QRH? I am confused, perplexed and consider this not good. It confuses the heck out of the more intelligent cadets.
An added note about all these new additional bells & whistles is it encourages a laziness in scan. You wait for a caution/warning to tell you something is wrong and then react. IMHO it is good airmanship to know your a/c and understand/perceive when it is sick and not behaving itself. You can then be proactive in reducing the oncoming bunfight. After every incident/accident a new bell or whistle is added. After THY in AMS there is a new "airspeed low" vocal. It happens when the IAS is deep in the yellow. I didn't know blind pilots were allowed to fly. There is a caution to tell you that +5 degrees attitude with level flight, an IAS 250kts and accelerating is not correct. There are cautions to tell you that +10 degrees, VSI climbing but speed increasing is not correct. etc. etc. How can a pilot have an IR on type and not know these things?
After flying a B732 I flew B767. We learnt to fly it in the same manner. Keep you eyes around the cockpit. I moved on to a B727 company that had acquired B757. The instructors there taught to "follow the FD!!" and "no need to keep scanning the overhead or instrument panel as EICAS is installed". They advised a lowering of alertness and thereby encouraged reactive operations, not proactive. That was 25 years ago. We've slipped a long way down the slope since then. If you know the a/c, and you should, then do the correct thing to keep it safe, by knowledge. It galls me to have to do something I know will not work and will then need to be adjusted. Someone said you have to be quick to get into the P.I. QRH, but as always don't rush. I am still curious what the PF, who has the failed side, is doing while PM is searching for "IAS Disagree" QRH and it all going to worms. The "Unreliable Airspeed" QRH has not yet been reached. So what is happening during this delay by the low time cadet as PF in RHS?
Last edited by RAT 5; 21st Mar 2015 at 09:30.