Automation Cautionary Tale
Seems to me those of us heretics who enjoy the pleasure of keeping our manual flying skills in top order are in a minority and it will ever be so.
Diverging views on automation dependency has been with the airline industry since the first glass cockpit 737 came into service in the 1980's.
In a recent issue of Aviation Week & Space technology, correspondent Richard Hipper writes to the Editor and says: Quote:
"The deterioration of hand-flying skills dates to the airline industry's "pushing" automation on pilots as early as 1990 (AW&ST Feb 1-14 p.51). In 1991, I retired after 30 years of military and airline flying. I used to hand-fly airliners to altitude before engaging the autopilot for cruise, then hand-fly to landing, opting for the autopilot when required by company policy.
One IMC night in 1990 - during a flight into the New York area - I was getting a line check from a company FAA designee. I hand-flew most of the flight, including entering a holding pattern and ending with an ILS approach to minimums.
Even though I held altitude within 20 feet and airspeed within five knots, the check pilots critique was :"You have to use the autopilot more." When I asked if there was anything wrong with my flying, he said "no", but I should use the autopilot more. Sadly, up-and-coming pilots might never get that great feeling of being "one" with their aircraft." Unquote
His letter took me back to the time in 1989 when I underwent my first British instrument rating which was conducted by a senior CAA Examiner. Having already flown over 5000 hours in command on the Boeing 737-200, I found the test straight forward and the Examiner seemed happy with the result. The 737 simulator had a Collins FD108 FD which was quite new in those days but old fashioned by comparison with some of today's flight directors.
In fact, most of the pilots in my previous airline preferred to fly without the use of the FD 108 because it was not that accurate and you had to continually fiddle with its settings, especially in the pitch mode. For that reason I opted not to use the FD108 for my instrument rating renewal with the CAA.
At the debriefing, the CAA Examiner asked why I did not use the FD for the test. I told him I felt could fly more accurately without it as my instrument scan was faster than just concentrating on one flight instrument. He didn't agree, saying although my flying smooth and well within tolerances, I should use the FD in future as a matter of policy. We parted ways amicably with my brand new British ATPL firmly clutched in my hand. He had his opinion and I had mine.
Recently, I saw a copy of the simulator assessment sequences used for a major Japanese airline. One paragraph caught my attention. It said candidates must use the flight director until touch down on an ILS. Also, that the autopilot can be used in the test. Once again, the term automation addiction came to mind.
I would have thought that a company wishing to assess a prospective candidates pure flying ability, both on instruments and visual flight, would require the candidate to demonstrate he could fly within required tolerances without the aid of an autopilot and flight director.
Last edited by Tee Emm; 23rd February 2016 at 10:38.