pool
21st Apr 2009, 13:47
I am flabbergasted! The horse has actually published an article by Robert Scott (very good, by the way) and recommended it. After reading it, I simply wonder: Did he do the same?
The two excerpts below make me wonder:
Managers who have an in-depth understanding of aircraft operations and the problems facing crews on an ongoing basis, are far more likely to impose a work environment that gets the best out of their workforce and thus contribute significantly to a safe operation. Conversely, managers who constantly seek to extract the maximum effort from heir crews, without regard for fatigue or other performance-reducing factors, are possibly stacking the odds in favour of an incident or accident
How true, but …. Why do the horse and steely never stand up to AAR, who definitely qualifies for such a mismanager?
If I had to identify one area that causes me most concern it would be over-reliance on automation and reduction of manual handling skills. Engaging the autopilot immediately after take-off and disengaging it immediately prior to landing may result in an efficient, fuel-saving flight, but insistence by management that automation is used exclusively leads to reduction of handling skills and confusion when an unfamiliar situation develops. The current increase in loss of control in flight incidents / accidents may well be at least partly attributable to this.
Very true again, but introducing a once a year manual handling in the sim is more pathetically admitting to the problem than solving it.
This is an extremely poor attempt to mitigate a rampant problem within Emirates. The managers guilty for such a demise simply try to wiggle themselves cheaply out of accountability. It is more than naïve, not to mention criminal, to assume that by making the pilots read this truth, it will magically go away –> responsibility for solving the problem disgracefully delegated down the line, without giving the means and authority to do so.
AAR, TCAS and the horse: We have seen enough incompetence. GO:mad:
The two excerpts below make me wonder:
Managers who have an in-depth understanding of aircraft operations and the problems facing crews on an ongoing basis, are far more likely to impose a work environment that gets the best out of their workforce and thus contribute significantly to a safe operation. Conversely, managers who constantly seek to extract the maximum effort from heir crews, without regard for fatigue or other performance-reducing factors, are possibly stacking the odds in favour of an incident or accident
How true, but …. Why do the horse and steely never stand up to AAR, who definitely qualifies for such a mismanager?
If I had to identify one area that causes me most concern it would be over-reliance on automation and reduction of manual handling skills. Engaging the autopilot immediately after take-off and disengaging it immediately prior to landing may result in an efficient, fuel-saving flight, but insistence by management that automation is used exclusively leads to reduction of handling skills and confusion when an unfamiliar situation develops. The current increase in loss of control in flight incidents / accidents may well be at least partly attributable to this.
Very true again, but introducing a once a year manual handling in the sim is more pathetically admitting to the problem than solving it.
This is an extremely poor attempt to mitigate a rampant problem within Emirates. The managers guilty for such a demise simply try to wiggle themselves cheaply out of accountability. It is more than naïve, not to mention criminal, to assume that by making the pilots read this truth, it will magically go away –> responsibility for solving the problem disgracefully delegated down the line, without giving the means and authority to do so.
AAR, TCAS and the horse: We have seen enough incompetence. GO:mad: