How much "Hands ON"?

[jrs2-benson]

Just a quick one. Talked to a Shed Captain who said that he had the oportunity to check out on the B737-400 as F/O, but declined. He gave his explanation that the amount of time spent hand flying was very small. Are there any commnets on this. I have jump seat ridden a few times, and each time the pilots have hand flew the t/o's and approaches (with BIG cheesy grins).

[jorgvaz]

:confused: what type of airplane did this captain fly?
and...how old is he?

[jrs2-benson]

JORGVAZ.

He was a Shorts 360 (Shed) Captain based in the channel islands with around 4000 hrs Shed time. I believe that he was early 40's.?.?

Edited to answer the Whole question:-)))

[dolly737]

In the airline business the amount of hand-flying is somehow determined by company philosophy and, subsequently, SOPs in the form of "recommendations".

I've seen both extremes: From (almost) no restrictions - manual from T/O to TOC and TOD to landing - to switching on the A/P after flap retraction on T/O and turning it off on final.

['%MAC']

I know many pilots who would rather sit left seat in a turboprop then right seat in a baby boebus. The pay is probably better for him in the left seat, and he probably gets to sleep in his own bed under his own roof... luxury.

[Intruder]

The longer the airplane range and the longer the typical leg, the less hand-flying will be done.

Few pilots hand-fly an airliner for any significant amount of time in cruise. Hand-flying is prohibited in level cruise in RVSM airspace (automatic altitude hold is a prerequisite). Therefore, most hand-flying is done during takeoff, landing, climbout, descent, and approach. The fewer number of cycles a pilot flies, the less hand-flying he is bound to do.

[Herod]

Quite apart from the fact that, in busy airspace, hand-flying is a flight safety hazard. One pilot flying on instruments and the other doing all the other bits (R/T, setting cleared levels, adjusting heading bugs etc), means nobody is either looking out or gathering the whole picture of what is going on. If you want the fun of hand-flying, go down the aero club. The heavy metal is a serious job (but the best fun all the same!).

[411A]

Herod...
So, hand flying is a safety hazard in busy airspace, is it?

I would suggest that....if pilots' CANNOT (or, to be more precise, not able to) hand fly in busy airspace...they need to be sent back to the simulator for RETRAINING.
And, the business of asking the other guy/gal..."do you mind?"...would respectfully suggest that co-pilots be REQUIRED to hand fly in the TMA from time to time. I have seen all too many occasions where....if they had to...they could not, due to very little practice.
The junior guys/gals need to be able to IMPROVE their skills. If the senior guys don't want too, then fine, let them sit on their hands and watch the autopilot do its thing.
Quit trying to "dumb-down" the profession.

[moleslayer]

I'm definateley with HEROD on this one, hand flying in busy TMA's is to be discouraged, and is in my present company.
There are plenty of other oppurtunities to hone your 'piloting skills' at the quieter aerodromes,and is greatly encouraged by our training department.

[Captain Stable]

Practising hand flying is an imperative. It should be done as often as possible.

It is important to do so when the other pilot is not busy, however, and for that reason if for no other, it is polite to ask the other guy if he minds. Mainly because, when you are PF and the AP is in, it is doing the flying, you are monitoring it and the other guy is doing eveything else - getting Wx, talking to handling agents, paperwork, etc. etc. As soon as you take the AP out and hand fly it, his first priority is monitoring you.

This is NOT something that should be done in a busy TMA. The automatics are there for a reason - and that reason is that they reduce the workload. Increasing the workload at such a time is a dangerous practice and to be discouraged.

[411A]

A close look at the comments by Centaurus (on the thread "raw data & manual flying") will reveal the folly of not keeping hand flying skills up to speed.
Training guys see this every day...and the picture is not pretty.
I rest my case.:D

[Herod]

What you rest your case as, 411A, is the guy who busts his level in the TMA, causing at the very least a hassle in the centre. YOU may be busy demonstrating your undoubted skills at handflying, but who is monitoring you? Certainly not PNF, who has enough to do or, if he is monitoring you, is ignoring everything else. Believe me, the powers that be didn't put auotpilots in there just to make life easier for pilots, they are in there because they are a SAFETY AID and , when appropriate, should be used as such.

[411A]

Herod--
It has been my experience in over twenty years check and training that....many Captains cannot do the PNF duties...and still keep an eye on the First Officers.
It is also my opinion that...IF they cannot do so, then they need to be permanently retired...to their respective gardens.
And you call yourself...a "professional"?
The young guys NEED the experience, not every approach, but none the less...the practice.
To deny them this oppontunity...is gross negligence on your part, IMHO.
You don't like my hard line approach?...too bad, but I must insist that the young guys/gals have the BEST training available.
Old fuddy-duddies like you just...get in the way.
Move on...or move out.
And I'm 58...whats your excuse?

[Hand Solo]

Theres a time and a place for hand flying and the London TMA isn't it. Yes, it is vital to maintain hand flying skills, instrument scans, etc. etc, but do it at some sleepy european airfield where there's not much congestion, light RT loadings and no low level altimeter setting changes. Don't practice it in some of the most congested airspace in Europe. PNF has enough on his plate without having to monitor a rusty PF trying his hand for a bit of fun. If you have to do it for real then so be it and do the paperwork afterwards, but don't practice in the busiest airspace you can find just for the fun of it.

[411A]

Not ..."for the fun of it", Hand Solo, 'tis called...proficiency.
Have noticed over the years companies like (for example) British Airways...have layers of BS in their ops manuals...that is just that... BS.
I have trained over the years many guys/gals that are able to hand fly the most complicated SID (now DP's) from any European or UK airport (including LHR) accurately and precisely, using (what a surprise) VOR's and NDB's...without the FMC's that are standard fit in todays airliners. Yes, the autopilot can do it accurately (usually, not always)...but the PILOT needs to be kept in the loop, and like Centaurus (another thread)... notice that many....are not.
Still, many will disagree...but that is my opinion.:D

[Centaurus]

I must say that I am in total agreement with 411A on this subject.
I have examined my own conscience on this subject over the years determined to go with the flow - be a good boy etc and follow the automatics line as the be all and end all of flying jet transports. But for me to deliberately choose to drop raw data skills in favour of finger flashing FMS skills was as difficult as to get my good spouse to give up smoking. Impossible!

I thought that Captain D.B Davies put the subject of hand flying skills in perspective in his fine book "Handling the Big Jets".

He wrote:
"Finally, do not become lazy in your professional lives. The autopilot is a great comfort, so are the flight director and the approach coupler. But do not get into the position where you need these devices to complete the flight.
Keep in practice in raw ILS, particularly in cross-winds. Keep in practice in hand flying the aeroplane at altitude and in making purely visual approaches.

As we get older we all become slightly more lazy, slightly more tired - and this is a bit of a trap. The demand of jet transport flying can best be met by enthusiasm. Personal enthusiasm for the job is beyond value because it is a built-in productive force, and those that have it do not have to be pushed into practice annd the search for knowledge.

Enthusiasm thus generates its own protection. This is the frame of mind which needs to be developed for the best execution of the airlines pilot's task".
............................................................ ................................

In the simulator I have seen enough incompetence at basic hand flying skills from experienced automatics experts to seriously wonder how the hell they would survive if the automatics weren't available. Worse still was the alarming lack of raw data skills by inexperienced first officers who had grown up with automatics straight from flight school. These are check and training captains of the future, for Christ's sake...

One wonders how these people ever qualified in pure flying skills to have graduated to the flight decks of modern jet transports. Proven ability to pass batteries of theoretical aptitude tests, perhaps..

There should be no sweat flying in the London TMA (for example) on raw data using normal average piloting skills. The PNF should also have no problem monitoring both the PF flying and the myriad of things happening on the radio. So why the drama of anyone daring to fly raw data in controlled airspace?
Unless of course both pilots are hopeless at hand flying skills due to over emphasis by their management on automatics use.

It is not a case at "showing off" hand flying skills - as someone rather testily claimed earlier. It is a case of honing one's skills as a professional operator. To claim that is hazardous is rubbish.

[Captain Stable]

My emphasis is slightly different.

It is vitally important to maintain your hand-flying skills. In that I agree totally with 411A.

However, it is also important to maintain proficiency in all skills, includinf FULL use of the automatics. You may need them when the guy next to you keels over sideways and dies.

That such skills with the automatics are in danger is not in doubt. I have seen captains completely incapable of setting an FMCS waypoint. They are, however, less endangered than those of hand-flying. Every trainer has seen people in the Sim who go to pieces as soon as they hit the A/P disconnect.

So we are agreed (I hope) that it is important to practice those skills.

There is a time and a place for them. In the middle of a busy TMA when the other guy is extremely busy and the R/T is loaded is not one.

Good CRM also would dictate that you get the other guy's agreement.

[411A]

Captain Stable

Have to agree with your comments.

My concern with younger pilots comes from first hand experience.
At a previous airline, the usual progression of a new First Officer used to be 737-200 to TriStar. When the airline added the A300-600 equipment to the fleet, these F/O's when progressing to the TriStar had approximately 500-1000 hours A300-600 (glass) experience, and their instrument scan had gone up in smoke, together with their hand-flying skills.
As for FMC skill...well that was first rate.

And as for FMC instruction for guys that had never seen one before....the old story of..."don't worry, you'll get the hang of it...", just simply does not cut the mustard. Hands on experience in a trainer is imperative, IMHO.

And, the lack of proficiency in hand flying is most apparent with long-haul crews. Who wants to bother with a hand-flown approach in poor weather after 10 hours+ in the seat...unless of course agumented/double crews are used. And with airlines using guys to the max these days, this must become a problem.

['%MAC']

Automation research is the new fad in human factors research, and as such many papers are available on the subject. One such paper is “Differences in Aircrew Manual Skills in Automated and Conventional Flight Decks” by Veillette, P. R., available in the Transportation Research Record 1480. The conclusions and recommendations from this research are enlightening.

“Tests of statistical significance confirm observations that significant differences exist between the manual performance of the automated and conventional groups. Analysis of aircraft state parameters leads to the conclusion that pilots of automated aircraft, while flying manually during these maneuvers, consistently exhibited greater deviations from assigned courses and parameters and greater deviations from nominal pitch-and-bank attitudes. Occasional deviations were great enough to present a hazard to the safety of that aircraft and others in the terminal area.” (p. 47)

Veillette adds that “during visual approaches to landing pilot instructors would command a small aircraft to appear in the windscreen moving left to right. None of the automated aircrews spotted the intruder, whereas nearly all (11 out of 12) of the conventional aircrews did.” (p.49) The author points out that this is cause for concern.

My deductions lead me to believe this may be a geographical (or using the word loosely, cultural) issue. It would appear that most pilots having completed their training in the United States and flying for an employer based in the US see the issue as delineated by the quite, reserved, mild mannered, model of self restraint and understatement that is 411A. Other cultures may also subscribe to this philosophy, if it is even so easily segregated in our society.