Airbus sees the light - but will their clients?

[Centaurus]

It will be a hard sell to convince Airbus operators to allow their crews to practice hand flying; particularly in Asia and the Middle East. Full marks to the manufacturer for trying, though.

Airbus Shifts Pilot-Training Focus to Emphasize Manual Flying

Change Is a Marked Shift From Traditional Principles That Relied on Automated Systems

By ANDY PASZTOR

BETHESDA, Md.- Airbus Group EADSY is significantly revising its pilot-training policies to focus more attention than ever before on manual flying skills.

Discussed at an international safety conference here on Wednesday, the change marks a marked shift from traditional Airbus principles that for decades relied heavily on automated aircraft systems and basically taught pilots to use them to fly out of trouble in nearly all circumstances.

But now, the European plane maker is emphasizing the importance of pilots practicing hand flying, and urging that they do so as early as possible when beginning to learn how to handle a new aircraft.

William Tauzin, director of international regulatory affairs for Airbus, told the conference those principles are an essential part of the training program under development for the A350 widebody jet, which is slated to begin service with lead customer Qatar Airways around the end of the year.

In proposing the training sequence for the A350, Mr. Tauzin said "we decided to put manual flying much earlier in the curriculum," before pilots are taught to perform normal procedures using automation. The program still must be approved by regulators on both sides of the Atlantic.

In an interview after his presentation, Mr. Tauzin said pilots will experience manual flying in the simulator after only a brief introduction to the A350. In the past, they would have spent more than a dozen sessions learning about the plane's various automated systems, and then started flying simulator sessions with the automation turned on.

The goal is to first "just have them feel the plane, and how it behaves without" turning on automation or presenting any complicated system failures or emergencies, according to Mr. Tauzin. Experts say it is a way to make pilots feel more comfortable and confident about their ability to revert to manual flying in an emergency.

Eventually, Airbus seeks to expand the revamped training approach to other models. "There is no reason why we wouldn't apply it to the rest of the fleet," Mr. Tauzin said.

The new focus is the strongest sign yet of industrywide concern about the hazards of excessive reliance on automated cockpits, and worries about pilots who may be reluctant to take over manual control when necessary. The result could be to accelerate the movement of airlines toward training programs highlighting manual flight maneuvers.

The A350 training changes are prompted by "the growing realization that pilots are losing their manual skills, and it's part of the industry's risk-management focus," according to Joachim Wirths, head of operations for Qatar's aviation regulator.

Increasingly sophisticated automation has played a big part in making flying safer than ever in the U.S. and globally, but more recently regulators, pilot unions and outside safety experts have highlighted potential downsides. A comprehensive study prepared for the FAA and released last November found that some pilots "lack sufficient or in-depth knowledge and skills" to properly control their plane's trajectory.

The study found that is partly because "current training methods, training devices and the time allotted for training" may be inadequate to fully master advanced automated systems.

Among the accidents and certain categories of incidents examined in that report, roughly two-thirds of the pilots either had difficulty manually flying planes or made mistakes using flight computers.

Airbus began making limited adjustments to its training philosophy in the wake of the 2009 crash of an Air France A330 in the Atlantic. The crew failed to recognize the plane was in a stall and was confused by cockpit instruments.

Initial changes Airbus introduced after that crash started training pilots how to avoid and recover from such high-altitude stalls. But the training program being developed for the A350 goes substantially further in explicitly emphasizing hand flying at various altitudes and across a wide range of maneuvers.

Some airlines already are far down that path. John Tovani, managing director of flight training for Delta Air Lines Inc., told the conference that pilots "are exploring this manual flight stuff in the simulator more and more," when instructors deliberately turn off computerized systems.

"There are times when you have to take over manually," according to Mr. Tovani, because even the most sophisticated automated systems can get planes into situations and "places from where the pilots are going to have to fly out."

Airbus Shifts Pilot-Training Focus to Emphasize Manual Flying - WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/articles/airbus-shifts-pilot-training-focus-to-emphasize-manual-flying-1403208685)

[C_Star]

Good to hear the industry is finally acknowledging the importance of hand-flying skills.

Having said that, I did my Airbus conversion in Toulouse 3 years ago and was surprised with the amount of handflying and raw-data* we did. IIRC, first 2 or 3 FFS sessions were mostly 'AP OFF'. Also quite a few approaches during later stages of the FFS and a lot of 'Alternate' and 'Direct' Law flying.

My course was already post-AF447, so I guess the ball had already started rolling...

* As much as you can call flying the Bus 'handflying' :E

[mustangsally]

So it takes the past twenty years of using in understanding the automation, for the importance of understanding basic push, pull and turn. I've worked with large jets, both Boeing and Airbus. Every school house event in the past twenty or thirty years was, "gear up, autopilot on." Then all heads down loading what ever event was coming up next. Maybe a stall series would be by hand and a steep turn or two, and that was it. I have spent years training after the simulator. I'd ask the new guy to hand fly to at least 10,000 by hand. The only exception was in heavy ATC environments. I would even encourage the new guy to hand fly for the first thirty minutes. It is up at FL at heavy weights that the cross check and smooth small inputs are most important. Captain Eddy Rickenbacker was not in favor of autopilots. "I hire pilots to fly, not drink coffee." There is a middle road, glad to see the hands/eyes coming back into training.

[Amadis of Gaul]

With all due respect to the late Capt Rickenbacker, it bears remembering that he lived and operated in a different time and a very different environment.

[Hobo]

"the growing realization that pilots are losing their manual skills"


Unbelievable that this has taken so long to grow....

[dubbleyew eight]

I hope they don't end up like CAsA.

you've got to fly like this 'cause that old way is dangerous.
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
you've got to fly like this now.
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
you've got to fly this way....
....oh this isn't foolproof either.

....hmmm maybe we should go back to the way they used to do it...:rolleyes:

[1jz]

Human is the weakest link in the ergonomics of man n flying machines. Initially aircraft manufacturers believed that taking away the tasks of humans from them and making a machine do it all would do the job. But, nice to see that they are starting to understand "WHO'S THE BOSS" and rather too much of automation is a bane or boon.

[Airbus_a321]

Very good trend, now even the manufacturer are playing the same song, that a lot of the real and only BOSSES of the Aircraft want to play. Back to basics. Yes - Get rid of all this fancy and usless computers and electronics in the aircrafts. Saves a lot of money.
I am BOSS pilot. I am god pilot. Back to Lindbergh-century. Get rid of everything. Why we need that stuff. We take our Bosspilot full-head-leather-cap, pilots-leather-jerkins, etc ...No more managing the aircraft and it's profile.

Why flying RNAV etc pp. Back to basics. Who cares about traffic around. I am BOSS PILOT. Who cares about the additional workload of the PNF/PM in nowadays air-traffic-scenarios? I am BOSS PILOT. I have everything under control..... I must hand-fly...up to the moon. Congrats! That's the ideal attitude to be a 21century pilot !

Back to the roots. Back to stone-age......we are on track. yippee !! :D

But, why not get just rid of an modern airliner flightdeck and instead take just a SEP and fly. Then you are the one and only big boss of the aircraft and YOU have everything under YOUR control. BTW: welcome to CRM :{

[Judd]

Back to the roots. Back to stone-age......we are on track. yippee

And your point is?

[1jz]

The term BOSS relates to the relationship between humans and machines and their interface. Better understand what the point was rather than catch a word and start criticism. Automation is important but, when and if time comes, the flight manager should be capable of acting as a pilot and deal with the situation. Worlds trend is changing because they want to make the weakest link much stronger by training, procedures, regulations and practice. Otherwise best bet would be a UAV, why would they need an on-board IT specialist to fiddle with automation only.

[dubbleyew eight]

an automated system is only as good as it's sensors and only as good as the connections to those sensors.

if you could guarantee that all faults would occur on the ground and all faults would be detected by the power on self test then pilots would be a memory.

as an old control systems engineer :-) I can assure you that pilots have a good future.

[bubbers44]

Pilots have a great future as long as there are people in the back.

These people know that all automation has a failure rate. Most airlines realize this too so putting pilots in the loop, not as programmers but as competent pilots capable of flying comfortably when it all fails is mandatory, not an option.

[cattletruck]

I imagine the airbus is a great plane to fly manually so it's nice to see some encouragement to do so. Automation is just a tool and has its place in the flight envelope even though the bean counters would like to see it used everywhere - but do they fly planes - no.

One extra item of concern to make the manual flying experience even better is stick feedback. I believe an airbus was lost because though the stick was at its most aft position the nose refused to go up because the trim was set wrongly and the problem was unfortunately not identified.

Now if a bit of stick feedback was built into the controls then flying the bus would be absolute bliss.

[aviatorhi]

Maybe the term BOSS refers to some man machine interface... But airbus_a321 is surely lacking some grey matter.

[glendalegoon]

amadis of gaul


I'll side with eddie any day.

[parabellum]

Well, as a first step to improving hand flying how about we scrap the MCPL, insist that new pilots get a minimum of 1500 hours GA or similar and banish being able to buy one's way from school to the RHS of a jet? I'm not joking.


Also, it is very important that pilots fully understand the capabilities of automation and not just how to use it on a nice day. All too often there have been cases of a serious problem and the immediate reaction has been to dump the auto pilot and hand fly! Nothing could be more dangerous, (Kegworth). On a two pilot, no FE aircraft it is far safer to use the auto pilot whilst two sets of eyes and two brains properly analyse the problem and take the correct actions.


Remember what the instructor used to say?, "Never rush a fire drill"

[stilton]

I don't understand the rationale for using automation so as not to 'load up the PNF'


Seriously ? that's his or her job and if they find the workload too oppressive they could find a nice quiet job as a librarian.


What nonsense, just another excuse by the 'gear up, autopilot on' fans to minimize the necessity for that scary 'hand flying' :rolleyes:

[Bus Driver Man]

I don't understand the rationale for using automation so as not to 'load up the PNF'

The problem is that if your company's policy is to use as much automation as possible, the PM isn't used to this "higher" workload.
I have seen Captains who's stress level rose dramatically when I disconnected the AP on a CAVOK, low traffic and low workload day. Just because it was something they weren't used to do.
Some companies make it kind of "non-normal" to disconnect the AP.

But I fully agree that if you aren't capable of doing the PMs tasks on a low workload situation, you've got the wrong job.

[stilton]

Yes, and a good point, perhaps there needs to be more practice in being a fully 'involved' PNF !

[Amadis of Gaul]

amadis of gaul


I'll side with eddie any day.


And who would blame you? My point was more that perhaps if Capt Rickenbacker lived and worked today, his own outlook on automation usage might have been different than all those decades ago. I'm not saying he'd be in favor of hiring pilots to drink coffee, but I imagine he would recognize that conditions have changed.

[misd-agin]

In the days of FBW and flight control logic are you *ever* really doing manual flying?

If you stay inside the middle of the envelope it's fairly straight forward. The edge of the envelope is a different matter and often approached, or breached, unexpectedly. That's were the confusion and fear factors complicate the situation.

[drfaust]

Well on the Airbus the FAC, ELAC and SEC combo's are doing a lot of dirty work for you, like trimming in normal/alternate law and showing you the limits of the envelope. Still doesn't change the fact that it's a good thing to be able to bike around raw data based on pitch and thrust.

Practicing it will increase your capacity and awareness. The result will be familiarity and comfort with hand flying in normal circumstances, so when things get a bit more serious you'll simply have more capacity to deal with it and won't put yourself in the position of forgetting the pure basics. I find that a worthy cause, even if it's an Airbus.

One side-effect in the industry might well be that experience starts getting valued again. Might serve some Turboprop drivers some justice in the marketplace.

[parabellum]

Stilton - You don't say which part of the earth you operate in but you can take it from me that there are plenty of TMAs in Europe and the USA where it is possible to overload the PNF with constant hdg, alt and config changes plus check lists. To not use the autopilot under these circumstances is just plain stupid, as it is to dump the auto pilot as soon as anything goes wrong.

[No Fly Zone]

Ya, but... With the current generation transport aircraft, both AB and Boeing, just how manual can you get? That computer is still monitoring everything and it cannot just be turned off. Rudder and stick time on big airplanes is a very good thing, but in the end, the drivers must have absolute mastery of the controlling software. The truly effective pilot must know that damn automation almost as well as the engineers that wrote it. Do they? A few of the interested and better trainers may, but I'd guess that the vast majority of the operating line staff do not. I think they should. Improved training is expensive, but if we are to maintain the improved safety records of the last decade, it just has to be done. Someone on that airplane must the the knowledge and ability to command those damn computers and make the airplane fly the way s/he wants it to fly. :8 If not, :zzz:.

[55Jay]

You've gone way over board.

There's a reason Navies still teach kids how to use a sextant and they are expected to practice it from time to time. Sure, it's tradition, a bit of nostalgia, but they must be prepared if, for whatever reason, the electronics aren't available. There's no pulling up to a petrol station for directions.

Pilots must be comfortable to carry on should all electronics go Tango Uniform. The only way to obtain and retain proficiency with a manual skill set is to use it.

[Capn Bloggs]

Practicing it will increase your capacity and awareness. The result will be familiarity and comfort with hand flying in normal circumstances, so when things get a bit more serious you'll simply have more capacity to deal with it and won't put yourself in the position of forgetting the pure basics. I find that a worthy cause, even if it's an Airbus.
Hit the nail on the head. The more hand flying you do, the better you get at monitoring, not to mention interpreting/recovering the situation if it all goes suddenly pear-shaped.

the drivers must have absolute mastery of the controlling software. The truly effective pilot must know that damn automation almost as well as the engineers that wrote it. Do they? A few of the interested and better trainers may, but I'd guess that the vast majority of the operating line staff do not.
How complex is an Airbus??

[stilton]

Parabellum, the answer is US, Europe, S America and East Asia. Many of the busiest airports in the world.


I understand what you are saying but the PNF should be able to handle mode control changes, talk on the radio and all the other normal duties that accompany that role. Some airports are more demanding than others and use of the autopilot can help lower the workload. Problem is when it starts being a habit and you can't cope without it.


How would you cope with an autopilot failure for instance :eek:

[aviatorhi]

Ya But Nothing No Fly Zone,

Controlling the computers is nothing and most children can do it. Handling the aircraft is the fail safe, one which we are sorely lacking in through this industry.

[parabellum]

How would you cope with an autopilot failure for instance
Well, for me it would be back to basics but for the younger generation it could spoil their whole day!:)


(Had a lightening strike coming out of KL one evening, that knocked out the auto pilot!).


What No Fly Zone is saying is what I said in my first post, it is very important to know the capabilities of the auto system, what I should have added was, 'but not at the expense of hand flying experience'

[stilton]

I agree PB,


Thing is, nearly all of the airports I fly in and out of are very busy and take all of your attention. There are very few 'quiet ones' if your PNF can't handle it and needs you to use the autopilot at the expense of your limited available manual flying there's a problem with their abilities. That's what needs to be fixed.


Anyway, best wishes.

[Centaurus]

position of forgetting the pure basics. I find that a worthy cause, even if it's an Airbus.

Hit the nail on the head. The more hand flying you do, the better you get at monitoring, not to mention interpreting/recovering the situation if it all goes suddenly pear-shaped

Pity the pilot failed to use his flying "skills" before the stick shaker occurred in the Eindhoven incident (see Rumours and News) "Pitch up upsets due to ILS false glide slope:ugh:

[Don Bobbio]

Inhoud toevoegen

[Tee Emm]

Airbus sees the light - but will their clients? It will be a hard sell to convince Airbus operators to allow their crews to practice hand flying; particularly in Asia and the Middle East. Full marks to the manufacturer for trying, though.
All is not lost however. Emirates bites the bullet and reluctantly gives its pilots one hour every six months to actually hand fly the simulator raw data no automatics (shudder) . A courageous decision :E

From Flight International 17-23 June. Captain Martin Mahoney, Emirates senior vice president flight training, was reported as stating: “Emirates does not want its pilots to practice manual flying with paying passengers on board, so they give them simulator time to do it. In addition to the normal twice yearly line proficiency and operational proficiency check sessions, Emirates gives all its pilots a manual flying training hour in the simulator every six months”

In other words, two hours a year in a simulator where the automatics are turned off and the pilot flies by hand. Two hours a year will make a pilot proficient at manual flying- and that only in a simulator? Pull the other leg.

[The Flying Pram]

Emirates does not want its pilots to practice manual flying with paying passengers on boardWhat the ....? Sorry, but I EXPECT the people up front to be able to fly the damn plane...

Given the choice between Emirates or a 70 year old DC3 I will take the latter, thank you very much. At least the Dak drivers know how to use stick, rudder & throttles - there's no automation to do it for them!

[A-3TWENTY]

The point is:

Some companies clearly state they don`t want you to fly manually.

Others don`t say that , but if you have a QAR event you are punished. So nobody takes the risk (Asia).

As simple as that.

[DozyWannabe]

In the days of FBW and flight control logic are you *ever* really doing manual flying?

Drfaust is right in that the flight control computers on FBW Airbii and Boeing types do take some of the "donkey work" out of manual flying - so in the sense of doing all your trimming and commanding flight surface deflection rather than pitch/roll rate, the experience is technically different from "traditional" flying.

On the other hand though, the truth is that even in any non-FBW airliner with hydraulic or hydraulically-assisted controls, the pilots are still always at one remove from the surfaces in a purely physical sense. Such systems also transparently alter the control input to deflection ratio depending on factors such as airspeed and altitude.

Overall, I agree that increased emphasis on hand-flying skills should be a positive step, regardless.

[1jz]

True that. FDM is not supposed to be a An element to be used for punitive actions. Airlines should understand the need to change the trend and emphasize on pilot skills otherwise there is a latent threat growing within every airline that will God forbid strike one day.

[henra]

In other words, two hours a year in a simulator where the automatics are turned off and the pilot flies by hand.

You wouldn't be able to keep your PPL with that number of hours...
But then it's not in the actual plane anyway.
Wow.

[Capn Bloggs]

Two hours may not be much, but it's better than nothing, and a start!

[drfaust]

If two hours of manual flight is all anyone does a year, kindly inform me before departure so I can disembark. :)

[RetiredF4]

Then you better start booking ships for long range trips.
Welcome to reality.

[1jz]

Can we expect regulatory authorities to mandate hands on flying?

[aviatorhi]

I would hope that regulatory authorities simply relax their functional mandate of automation in the newer aircraft. Airlines should follow suit, I can think of two operators of the A320 at which disconnecting the AP above 1000 feet requires a written explanation.

[1jz]

Just like ADvisory circulars etc are followed by airlines.. Manufacturers shall issue circulars to mandate manual flying. Otherwise, an uncapable person in the cockpit is a threat himself.