Could this happen: a non-pilot landing a heavy jet ??

[teropa]

Hi all,

First, I'd like to apologize if I'm in the wrong forum. I know that some might get annoyed at posts like this, but I gather it's both an interesting speculation and informative for people who have been pondering over the subject. Again, I'm sorry if this strikes as stupid or bandwidth-consuming to those who arrow the skies for living...

Anyways, every now and then there's a discussion over at the flightsimming communitie's biggest sites (Flightsim.com, Avsim.com) about a situation, in which both pilots would become incapacitated and a non-pilot pax (A flightsimmer!) would have to land the plane. One such is currently going on at avsim.com.

I'm going to copy my post from avsim here as my "version" of things that I would do, if I ever encountered such a situation.
I'm a person you would call a "PC-pilot" or "armchair pilot", but a very serious one, aspiring to be a real world airline pilot one day.

I'd like to hear comments about the scenario from everyone, esp. pilots.

-- snip snip --
Hi,
Very interesting...

I have no PPL or above, but have flown Cessnas and Pipers from the right seat quite lot, with no problems.

I had a go in a full-motion, level D MD-11 simulator 6 months ago.

Did a few approaches and takeoffs and landed without a problem.
I admit that it was quite different from what I expected but IMO it wasn't anything so special you all keep talking about. Airplanes are airplanes, regardless of how big they are. The basic functions and laws apply to airliners as well as C172s.

I think that given the right plane (say 767) and some time to analyze the situation, I would have no problem bringing the beast down.

Tell me if I'm missing something, but here's an example, and I'll use the 767 as I'm a PIC767 fanatic :

Both pilots out, plane flying on AP.

- Left seat, check that AP is on and check also what it's doing from the FMC, MCP etc.

- OK, we're on LNAV and VNAV modes cruising along the route seen in FMC, FL380

- contact ATC and declare an emergency (squawk 7700)

- I would be given instructions to change to another frequency and would soon be given instructions by a real 767 pilot.

- 50% chance is that I would be given instructions to reprogram new waypoints to FMC, once the real pilot knew that I was familiar with it.
But I still wouldn't do it "alone" as the pilot would still get me through every step of the reprogramming to minimize all errors.

- 50% chance is that I would be only given instructions to use MCP hdg sel, ALT (V/S) and speed modes, since it's more simple that way.
I really don't know which would it be, FMC or direct MCP modes, but in autopilot definately. _All the way_.

- I would be directed into a CAT III airfield/rwy and be setup for an autoland. Ideally I would only have to use:

* FMC (if not for programming, then at least checks for fuel, app
speeds etc)
* gear lever
* flaps lever
* autobrake switch
* speedbrake lever
* MCP as a whole + Nav1 freq/crs selectors
* Transponder (to code 7700 I believe)

In short:

1. check that plane stable on AP (A/T on, F/D on, _some_ lateral and vertical modes on), and contact ATC and get instructions from ATC and a pilot and do the following with their help:

2. check fuel and position from FMC (also check warning lights on panel)
3. squawk 7700
4. hdg sel in MCP (what I'm told)
5. ALT and V/S in MCP (what I'm told)
6. speed in MCP (again, what I'm told)
7. lower flaps at appropriate speeds
8. tune given CAT III ILS rwy data in Nav1 (freq/crs)
9. select ILS display
10. capture loc, gs / activate APP-mode
11. lower gear at appropriate phase
12. arm autobrake (max) and speedbrake
13. activate L,C,R autopilots above 1500 AGL
14. check final approach speed from FMC, dial it (+additives)
15a enjoy the ride down and check the "become a hero" in after landing checks ;)
15b try to use reverser thrust (might be a little tricky mechanically tho, but odds are that the rwy is so long that brakes are enough to do the trick)

ALL THE TIME MONITOR AIRSPEED AND ALTITUDE


The list above seems premeditated (!) and something that would be very difficult to remember etc., but I just quickly wrote it off the bottom of by head, and really don't think that it would be more difficult than that.

With a plane other than 767 (or other than a Boeing), it would be (for me at least) a different story.

Comments?

cheers,
Tero

-- Cut Cut --

There you have it, comments?

Tero

[PAXboy]

Whether or not an outsider could do this - you must first ask yourself: How many times has it happened in the past?

Take the last 25 years.
Consider how many commercial flights (twins and above) that there were on average at the beginning, middle and end of that period.
Now do some basic multiplication.

Now find out how many times one pilot has been incapacitated.
Now how many times have TWO been prevented from operating?

Off the top of my head, I would say: To the first - less than .01% and of the latter? Zero.

On the actual flying ... having sat in the jump seat on a number of occasions, I think that the things that will catch you out are the wind - those sudden eddies and changes and that it all happens VERY FAST indeed.

Now the professionals can give their opinion!

[skyvan]

An interesting idea, can an armchair pilot land an airliner? There should be no problem.
As long as the new pilot has the calmness to remain in control of his emotions, and the situation, there should not be a problem with him/her controlling a modern airliner to an uneventful landing.
The trick is for him (I'll risk being non-PC by refering to the hero as a male!!) to communicate the predicament, and to keep the AP in. If he can do that, and be talked down, there would be a chance of success.
Having said the above, please remember that I said " a modern Airliner" There are many aircraft being flown about that do not have Autoland capability. If that is the case, then all bets are off. The ability to handfly a B737/DC-9 or bigger aircraft is not something that can be taught on a PC simulator.
From another angle, if I was to talk a non-airline pilot down, I'd rather take a private pilot over a PC pilot, and if the AC is modern, with full automation, I'd rather have a complete novice there, who will not question or second guess me, because his MS FS2000 doesnot have feature "x" that my company's AC has fitted! Sometimes a little knowledge can be dangerous.
Remember, if something like that were to happen while you are on-board, there is a chain of command, and PC pilots are not mentioned anywhere in that. Your most likely involvement would be to operate a radio while an off-duty pilot jumps in to drive, or a cabin attendant makes the MCP selections.
Still, there is nothing wrong with thinking through a possible scenario, it may come in handy one day (or the storyline of a novel) Just remember, if it does happen to you, manage the risk by keeping the AP engaged as long as possible. It will free up your brain power to concentrate on what you are being told/asked by the outside people.
If you get the urge to hand fly, just remember that even experienced airliner pilots normally do 40-90 hours in a full-flight simulator before they fly a new aircraft for the first time. You can only enjoy being a hero if you (and all those behind you) survive.

[teropa]

aisleman,

I'm really sorry, if even after apologizing that post would create such fierce flaming. I truly do not see why that should happen. Are professional pilots a breed that cannot control their emotions and immediately feel threatened if someone suggests he/she could do something without the license that the pilots can? I know that this isn't the case with the majority... Besides, this isn't even the point of the post...


PAXboy,

I appreciate the POV you're bringing to this, but as it is, it's not the issue here whether or not it would happen, rather than could it be done if such was to take place.

skyvan,

Thanks for the informative opinion. Your reply was something that I hoped for :). A "civil" sold reply... lol

Actually, I was also kind of hoping for someone who drives the 767 for living to see if the above sequence would enable the fictional people from the fairly-tale land walk away from the jet...
As I'm just a PC-pilot with ~ 20 landings and a few hundred hours in a real Cessna, it would interest me to see if I was very far from what I _should_ do...

I appreciate the replies, keep em coming!

Tero

[teropa]

aisleman,

_You_ didn't upset me at all !

You just reminded me of something (the attitude of some people) that upsets me, when I get in to too close contact with it ...

regards,
Tero

[greatorex]

A really good question!

In the good old days of flight deck visits, I never ceased to be amazed by the knowlege of young kids about just about everything to do with flying a plane - knowledge that had been gleaned almost entirely from MS Flight simulator!

I've often thought that it would be interesting to put these kids into a real flight sim - I wouldn't be at all surprised if they didn't do a better job of it than us! :)

[Agaricus bisporus]

Teropa, no reason at all why a like minded "amateur" should not do the job in extremis, particularly with the help of the automatics and a skilled operator (pilot) on the other end of the radio.

Consider the number of times complete non aviators have been talked down in hand flown light a/c following the incapacitation of their instructor/pilot. The Brian Lecomber incident in the Isle of Wight , and the subsequent (successful) rerun by a non flying journalist springs to mind.

As a keen flight-sim flyer you should be well placed to handle this scenario, even in a big complex transport a/c.

But remember, we commercial pilot are not paid to pull off uneventful take offs and landings, we are paid (generally guite well) to cope with the emergency situation that without our seldom used expertise would certainly kill all on board. Fortunately most of us never need to earn that money, but sometimes, just occasionally, someone does. And that makes it all worthwhile.

So, of course you can hack it when all is working (my mum once flew an acceptable circuit in a Chinook in the sim, and she knows as as much about flying as I know about Japanese), the trick is to keep it all together whan things go wrong.

On a more serious note I'm concerned at teropa's reference to a post by aisleman that does not exist. Sadly this appears to be yet another example of the over zealous use of the veto by the "moderators" on this bulletin board who seem all too willing to excise entire posts without acknowledgement or explanation. The continued use of such Orwellian levels of control does not bode well for the right of free speech here. I know it is "their train set" but the unfettered power of individuals over the voices of the majority usually ends in mess and tears.

Beware...

:( :(

[curmudgeon]

Agaricus

In defence of the moderators (and I've never knowingly met one) I think that their policy is to delete the offending part of the post and if necessary add a warning to the poster that if such comments continue they will be banned or similar.

This seems to be an old topic on which I can recall a few firmly held opinions before.

It is more likely I suspect that aisleman deleted his own posts, which is quite easy to do.

cur

[Brizzo]

Some while ago I had a good session in a 737 sim at Cranebank, and in the pub debrief we agreed that no, I would not have landed successfully, but that I might have managed a slower crash than some people.

[Jetdriver]

Agaricus.

I really do not know why I am rising to the bait, however your reference to "Orwellian levels of control" is somewhat premature.

The author had the ability to remove their own post, and presumably did !

The only editing you will find from me is when the language is inappropriate or the site rules have been breached to an unacceptable level.

A post is only deleted if the content is so unacceptable that editorial "repair" is not possible. That is is very rare indeed.

I am on holiday and moderating this in my spare time. It will take about five minutes for the jacuzzi to reach the right temperature so you have it.

If you want "free speech" by your own definition then set up your own site. As for ending in "mess and tears", I don't think so .
Anyway the temperature is just right so I am off to soak and relax. Suggest you do likewise.:cool:

[Agaricus bisporus]

Jetdriver et al, yes, you are right, I clean forgot about self deleted posts - silly me.

I seem to have come across rather a lot of censorship on Prune recently and jumped to an umwarranted conclusion. Sorry!

[Eff Oh]

Well guys, I'm sorry, but I don't agree! I fly the B757-200 and B757-300. (Not B767, but close enough.) I do not think that a non, pilot would be able to successfully land a B767. You refere to the "Speed from the FMC" Well that speed only is correct for the weight you are at. You must work out the landing weight and input it to the FMC before it will give you the speed. Do you know how to do this?? Also you mention lowering the gear and flaps at "an appropriate stage", when would that be?? If you didn't you could stall the aircraft, and big aeroplanes don't recover too well from that! Could you recognise if the aircraft was high or low on the profile?? You do not need to arm all 3 autopilots above 1500ft for an autoland. It does this automatically at 1500ft. You would not know the systems well enough to complete this task. Also you seem to have forgotten the fact that at some stage it will dawn on you that you have 230odd peoples lives in YOUR HANDS and a $70million jet under your control. Could you hack it??
Next a suggestion that anyone can do it will be made. "Who needs training, I have FS2002!!!"
I like flight sim 2000/2002 and they are very realistic. But they are NO MATCH for the real thing!! So in short, no, you couldn't land it!
Eff Oh.

[gofer]

If imagination really is more important than knowledge, why contradict yourself with so much text.

:D Sorry couldn't resist :D

I'm not even good with Flightsim, but if there was nobody else with what seemed like more experience - would I try? Would anybody for that matter ? And could they get it righter than the other alternative !!! If you don't try you'll never know, but given that the alternative otherwise becomes a certainty ......

Those are the real background questions. And the answers lie in the way people panic, or don't until afterwards, if there is an afterwards. Having 270 lives behind me of having 2000 when driving a train, or the 50'000 that we have in every batch in the chemical factory with our computer computer controlled and driven production - that I feel, for many only spurs them on to do better.

PAX have a blind faith that the crew want to go home at the end of the day - otherwise we would never get into something, that we all know logically is to heavy to go anywhere upwards. Every flight is a double miracle - first the take off and then the landing.;)

[Eff Oh]

That quote, "Imagination is more important than knowledge", was made by Albert Einstien, not me. Wish I could claim it, coz it's a good one!! :)

[teropa]

Eff Oh,

I will try to fill in the blanks here. I think you don't give me enough credit here...

Now, correct me if I'm wrong:

Before the pilots left their origin (i.e. preparing the FMC prior to taxi out) they typed into FMC the ZFW for the flight in question. This data is a constant for the flight in question (if the pax and cargo didn't jump out the window lol). The 767 has sensors that "sniff" the amount of fuel in the tanks. Also, if one disagrees with the calculated fuel (found in PERF INIT), one can manually enter the assumed right value.
Now, with this information, the FMC is able to make up the Gross Weight, which simply equals the ZFW + fuel. This weight changes as the flight progresses as the CALC fuel diminshes ... At least in the Honeywell FMC that I'm very familiar with, the Approach page does contain the Approach speeds that are calculated from those very figures. So, to answer your question: I wouldn't have to calculate anything. Please tell me what's amiss here ...


Secondly, if I faced the situation that I had no speed information available through the FMC, I would check what our current calculated GW is and estimate an app speed probably a little above the "right one". Would you say that for a 767 with, say, 20klbs of fuel left with a ZFW of ~ 250 klbs a Flap 30 speed of 135-140 would be so far OFF that it would actually CRASH the plane upon touchdown. I would think that some kind of rough estimation would be enough, IF in the rare case there was something wrong and an app-speed couldn't be read from the CDU. I'd like to add that I would always go for a bit higher estimation for the APP speed, and if it would regardless of that end up too slow, the situation wouldn't go unnoticed as the plane would start to pitch over 5 degrees ANU early in the approach. I'm not blind you know...

Secondly, what is there to explain about the flaps? The 767 (and 757) even has Vfe speeds for every setting beside the flap indicator gauge. Also, in the Pegasus-type EADI the red flap- speed zones are clearly visible in the speed tape.

Well, I'll write some detailed information to be more specific.

I'd make sure that I was ~ 5000ft 20-30 miles out, just to be on the safe side. Then I would gradually slow down and would lower the flaps on schedule. The schedule is this, and I would slow down to below Vfe speed before lowering the corr. setting:

flaps 1, 250 IAS
flaps 5, 230 IAS
flaps 15, 210 IAS
flaps 20, 210 IAS
flaps 25, 180 IAS
flaps 30, 170 IAS

I would lower the gear once the G/S came alive, and I assume that I would do this (to be on the safe side) already 10 miles out.
As for the max speed for gear extension in the 763, it's 270 IAS (primary system, same speed for retraction) and if I had to resort to alternative system, it's 250 IAS. So I _really_ don't think I would mess that up.

As for the profile; are you referring to VNAV or ILS profile? Probably to the G/S as I wouldn't be using VNAV for descent. Too much error possibilities, I would just do it with V/S mode and SPD mode in MCP. And YES, I know how to read the ILS indicators in EADI and EHSI :). After reading my first post, do you really have to ask??

As far as I know, standard B767/757 (excluding the B764) AFDS does NOT activate all channels above 1500 AGL automatically. The 777 and next gen 767-400 AFDS does this, but for the rest of the clan, I would have to press the other two APs on to get LAND3. Of course, if one channel was "busted" :) I could also land it with LAND2 which is similar to LAND3, only difference being less redundancy. I'm not arguing with you on your company's 757 AFDS. If it has the automatic activation of all three channels above 1500 AGL, so be it. I didn't know that the older gen 757/767 had this feature.

To comment on the "would I have the balls to do it". I can only say that yes I would. I think I would do ANYTHING to get me and others safely on the ground. Airline pilots are not gods. I agree that you have a big responsibility, a REALLY big responsibility over the PAX, yourself and the aircraft itself. But you are still humans. So are we wannabees and also the rest of us humans.

I have been in engine failure situations three times in a single engine aircraft with my dad (once at night in the middle of nowhere). Each time we held the act together and managed to get the crippled bird back to terra firma in one solid piece. In short, I would TRY to do my best, and if I failed... that would be too bad. As simple as that. I'd like to add that I'm not a stupid teenager with too much time in my hands. I'm 23 and one year to go till I get my M.Sc in electronics. Just so you don't think that I'm an 8-year-old flying with my dad in cessnas once a year and reading too much pilot-magazines ;) lol...

Feel free to bombard me some more, I'm delighted that someone took this perspective to this :=).

cheers,
Tero

[Pilot Pete]

Good systems knowledge never landed an aircraft successfully.......


NO to answer your question, and this has all been done before if you try a search.

PP

[teropa]

Pilot Pete,

Could you PLEASE tell me: how is it different, if SOMEONE who knows the systems and how to operate them, pushes the buttons and turns the wheels and switches to accomplish an AUTOLAND to nearest airport, FROM one who has ATPL and turns the same switches and buttons in almost the same sequence.

I don't get it. Please be more specific. HOW is it different ???? Does the aircraft mystically "see" that the person pushing the buttons in the front does NOT have ATPL in the back pocket. Does the aircraft mystically do everything wrong and start malfunctioning in every possible phase and system, IF there is someone doing the magic, with MERE systems knowledge in back of his/her head ?

cheers,
Tero

[Pat Pong]

teropa - it strikes me that every time a professional pilot says it can't be done you don't like it. From the tone of your replies I can only presume that you've already made your mind up.

Your technical knowledge is impressive for someone who isn't even type-rated but it is far from complete. Many older 757's and 767's have had retrofits to many of their sysyems, not least the aotomatic arming of the autoplilots.

You state that you would use "vertical speed" mode. In my opinion this would be the least desirable because it offers NO speed protection.

I could create a massive list of questions that you probably haven't considered but I don't want to use up all of Danny's bandwidth.

Anyway, if you're actually interested in my two cents worth - and I speak from considerable experience (several thousand hours on 767's and a similar number on 757's) - then yes I suppose it may be achievable but in all probability highly unlikely.

[teropa]

Pat Pong,

I knew that someone would soon make the remark about me being defensive on the issue. I'll explain a little further...

I'm not fishing for an unanimous agreement that "yes all the knowledgeable sim pilots could do it, sure...".

Neither am I arguing with people here :). I'm arguing the arguments as to why it could not be done. Do you see my point ?

I DON'T claim that I could ever know the same amount about a plane than, for example, someone who's type-rated. Not in a million years (at least I hope so, heh). Nor do I claim that I could handfly one such jet (say 767) for more than some manouvering, clean and up far away from ground. I know that professionals are professional, and it's the same with (almost) everything in the world.

AND like Agaricus Bisporus put it: "But remember, we commercial pilot are not paid to pull off uneventful take offs and landings, we are paid (generally guite well) to cope with the emergency situation that without our seldom used expertise would certainly kill all on board. Fortunately most of us never need to earn that money, but sometimes, just occasionally, someone does. And that makes it all worthwhile. " <<<< THAT I wholeheartedly agree!

But the "need" for such a claim that I (or someone knowledgeable enough) could pull this thing off arises from a couple of things, which I will list here. Also this has nothing to do with pretending to be someone I'm not. It's mere speculation and I think it's interesting enough to "eat up the precious bandwidth" (sarcasm added :=)).

This topic pops up every once in a while in flightsimming community and I believe the reasons to this are:

- the sophistication of systems and modelling in today's "nintendos". It's quite remarkable...really. The core of the simulation is outstanding and many have built whole cockpits around it. (www.projectmagenta.com)

- the amount of information us (serious) armchair pilots have gathered along the years. It's not just playing, hasn't been for years.

- on a personal note: the fact that I handflew a level-D MD11 simulator succesfully for couple of approaches and takeoffs etc. with no problem. It wasn't tough in "all systems OK" -situation. Of course, in the case of emergency the story would be different.. it wouldn't exist :).

- on a personal note: the fact that some PPL owners claim that FS flight modelling even in the smaller planes (whose flight dynamics have been compiled by real experts) is crappy, WHICH I couldn't DISAGREE more. I think that, for example, Ron Freimuth's flight dynamics for, say, 172 is right on the money. So this brings up the controversy in larger airliners as well: there are ATPLs who say that "it's very close to the real thing" and those who say that "nintendos have nothing to do with flying". Again, it seems to be a matter of an opinion.

and finally:

- the reasons to why many just "fly" with computers are various: health, money, family-issues etc. Many would like to think that they have actually learnt something from the SIMULATION of the very thing they would like to do MOST, but can't due to the issues they have. It's got something to do with confidence and the rewarding feeling of "I could probably do that" or at least "I could probably learn that" (!)

My personal opinion regarding the matter is already said. But I repeat it: Given the right circumstances (i.e. fully functional aircraft, OK weather and the simpilot being already familiar with the said aircraft's systems) I think that MOST _serious_ (emphasis on the word _serious_) flightsimmers could pull it off if they kept their cool.

I would also like to REMIND those of you, who now say: "I could ask you a thousand questions that you wouldn't know how to answer" , that _so could I_ (!). Remember that I'm not taking an exam here, especially not the theory-part of type-rating for every possible jet ! No one knows everything about everything, for crying out loud. Point being that there are heaps of knowledge and also little pieces of information regarding different types of aircraft, that it would be crazy to say that if a SIMMER doesn't know it all, he/she's not worthy ! Wouldn't you agree ? Are you aware of every possible modification that has been made for every single jet you see parked next to you in the morning when you toss your flight bag behind your seat in the flight deck. I bet you don't.

I thoroughly enjoy this discussion, but I understand if the Chief Pilot doesn't want it to continue anymore. Although I don't see a specific reason to why it couldn't. I respect everyone's opinion and it's only fun to try to justify one's own POVs and such :)

cheers,
Tero

[ETOPS773]

I think it could be done as long as all systems are all functioning and weather is favourable.

Not only in a 767 though..Wilco did a good job on it,and its very immersive,but so are the PSS 747-400 and 777-200,and scroggs said on the wannabes forum that their A320 was also very accurate.

So,me,who has been in command of a 777 Level D sim, and got the PSS one aswell,I did an autoland and programmed the FMC no sweat. Slight differences but nothing you cannot figure out with logic.

I have been in the jumpseat of an A300-600R a couple of times though and seeing how fast the ground is coming towards you on final,I would definately be anxious to hear the rumble of the gear on the runway,and soon!!

[Eff Oh]

Funny how its the PPL/Simmers who have never flown a large jet, that say it could be done!!! :) I am also 23 and have been flying the B757 for 2 years, the Saab340 for a year and a half before that, so I was brought up with flight sim too. It IS different, as good as it may be, it is NOT the same. Often aircraft and/or ILS are downgraded, or simply not available, making CATIIIB approaches impossible. Also you have the weather to contend with. There are limits as to the autoland capability of aircraft, (Not just the B767.) You made the point before I did, that if I sat in an A320 I would not know how all the systems worked. I would however be able to get the beast on the ground, I would still ask for assistance though. Why do you think that a few hours in a sim, not made by the aeroplane manufacturers, qualifies you to fly a B767??? If that was the case why doesn't the airline spend £50 on a copy of FS2002 insted of "wasting" the £30,000 it cost to train me on the B757????? :rolleyes: Also tell me I get paid over £40k as a pilot on this type when you could do it for a fraction of the cost????
Flight sims are good fun, but that is all they are, FUN! I enjoy playing on FS2002 downloading new aircraft etc etc. Take this point; I can fly a combat mission into Iraq, the former Russian States, Afganistan, on my PC. I would NEVER dream of telling front line fighter pilots that I could do their job!!! I still say you could not do it.

By the way you do NOT need to arm all 3 autopilots for an auto land. It will do it automatically at 1500ft RA!!!! Also if you did do that with the flaps (20/30nm) and put the gear down at 10nm the GPWS would be screaming at you! As pointed out decending in V/S mode offers no speed protection and is dicouraged if not forbidden in my company. You could use FLCH, but then again Flight Sim does not have that, and you wouldn't know what it does. I am confused by your comment I'd like to add that I would always go for a bit higher estimation for the APP speed, and if it would regardless of that end up too slow, the situation wouldn't go unnoticed as the plane would start to pitch over 5 degrees ANU early in the approach. I'm not blind you know... I dont understand what you mean, please expain. Also you will find that most B767s,(all in UK) do not have speed tape. What would you do if you moved the flap lever and this happened........ Aural Alert....EICAS Message "Leading Edge Slat Disagree"????? It happens you know, happened in my company twice last week. What would you do if you didn't get 3 greens? WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF.......................Need I go on???

Eff Oh.

[EGPFlyer]

40k??? You're on the beers mate! :D ;)

[tunneler]

hmmmm interesting..................

With a load of luck (you´d need to be a 10 times over lottery winner here) it is just possible that you could bring the aircraft down with minimal damage and minimal casualties down the back........

However, throw in some problems like an engine fire, CB´s dotted here there and everywhere and wx down to absolute minimums and I fear that you and the peeps down the back would be nothing but a smouldering hole in the ground.

Eff oh hits it right on the head when he mentions the fact that Professional Pilots have to go through years of training and re-training......... someone who´s spent many a sad lonely night in his/her bedroom staring at a computer screen just aint gonna be able to hack it. Sorry mate, its a nice fantasy and all that but it would be bordering on suicide, educated suicide but suicide all the same.

[teropa]

Eff Oh,

I _urge_ you to read the posts I've written in this thread, please, all of them. I have no desire to explain all the things over and over again.

Let me ONCE more elaborate:

I am NOT telling you that I could do YOUR job, i.e. operate the aircraft in all conditions, normal and abnormal, emergency or not. No. No. No. Please lose this idea already!!

I'm telling you that I would have little trouble in getting a B767 down in one piece, GIVEN the right circumstances. Please read what I wrote before... this is tiresome.

As you might (should) already know, autolands are very often done on runways that are only CATI or CATII approved. Following is a quote of a corporate pilot:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the CAT II or CAT III runways for autolands, here’s a little secret the FAA don’t want you to know about that.

QUOTE

It is a common practice for air carriers to conduct AFCGS approaches and/or autoland operations when the runway visual range (RVR) is at or below RVR 4,000. It is also common for carriers to conduct these operations during CAT I, or better weather conditions to satisfy maintenance, training, or reliability program requirements. To achieve the necessary autoland rate, some percentage of these autolands are conducted at runways that are approved for CAT I operations.


Serving a CAT I Airport/Runway.

The commissioning, periodic flight inspection, and facility maintenance of an ILS facility serving a CAT I airport/runway does not include an analysis of the ILS performance inside the runway threshold or along the runway. However, a number of CAT I instrument approach facilities have sufficient signal characteristics to support AFCGS autoland operations to CAT I minima. Operations specifications paragraph C61b(2) allows the operator to make this assessment.

END QUOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, how do you respond? That it can't be done ? In an emergency? Now give me a BREAK!

Like I said before, I have no urge to discuss your training costs vs. Flight Sim price any further. I'm not addressing the obvious differences between these two "educational methods". It is NOT the subject of the original post, nor that of this.

If you took the time to read what was posted before, you would know that some 757/767 are retrofitted with this automatic arming of all three channels above 1500 RA. Don't make the assumption that what you know is the absolute truth, because I sure as hell am not doing that. Now I'm wiser when it comes to that little detail in AFDS operation. However, I think you should also acknowledge the fact that A) Many 757/767 don't have the automatic arming of L,C,R autopilots and B) even if I was surprised by this feature in-flight, would it prevent the flight from succeeding ?? Quite the contrary...

Regarding the GPWS. Different carriers have different options in the settings of GPWS and callouts in general. These can be modified very easily to suit each one's SOPs and needs. What would the GPWS be calling in the scenario I described. Even if it did, it wouldn't bring us down, now would it ? And further, could you please elaborate as to why it would do that ??? I'm 10 miles out, 3000ft, flaps 30, 160 KIAS, gear down, speedbrake armed, autobrake MAX, flying on AP (LOC, SPD, ALT HLD active, G/S showing white (armed) and waiting for it to come alive), established on LLZ. Why would the GPWS shout at me ? And if it did, what difference would it make.

Please know that I KNOW that the above config is NOT how it should be at that particular stage in normal ops, but I'm just simplifying a bit because that's just what I would do in the real situation; to have everything setup right enough far out, so I could concentrate entirely on monitoring the course of events.

OK, if you think that the V/S would be a bad choice, I would gladly conduct a VNAV descent. I merely offered the V/S there as a simpler way of adjusting the descent, instead of having to interact with the FMC. Remember that this would be a situation in which things should be done in the simplest way, to avoid confusion and disorientation. But you're definitely right about the speed protection. Again just an example. And I was thinking about the fact that if a diversion would be made (instead of just continuing to destination), it would require reprogramming the FMC, and it might be that we would be (and likely were) already above the profile, which would require lots of other stuff to do to get the plane back on the poor man's G/S. V/S mode is as simple as they come, BUT with no speed prot, true enough.

Regarding the FL CH... <sigh> Would you be surprised if I told you that PIC767 has FLCH modelled, AND that I know how to use it...

Take a look at the training manual that I use for the program in question, here's something about the FL CH:

- It engages the plane in an airspeed-dependant climb or descent.
- It engages the autothrottle in a FL CH mode that controls power
automatically to make the aircraft climb or descend as required.
- It automatically selects Speed (SPD) as the vertical mode since pitch is now dependent on the selected airspeed.
- Resets the airspeed window to the current indicated airspeed.
- If a climb is required the TMC is automatically set to a climb mode (CLB,CLB1 or CLB2 depending on TRP settings).
- This mode will fly the airplane to the altitude set in the ALT window. If a climb is required, it gives you climb power and pitch to maintain the selected airspeed. If a descent is required it gives you IDLE thrust and pitch to maintain selected airspeed.
- In a FL CH descent the autothrottle changes to throttle hold mode (THR HLD) which allows the pilot to alter the vertical speed of the descent by adding or removing power. The autothrottle re-engages in the SPD mode during altitude capture.
- FL CH and SPD are annunciated on the EADI.

To answer your question regarding the flaps:

I would put the flaps lever to the previous position where it was working normally and try again. If the flaps/slats still stayed in the same position, i.e. didn't move at all, I would use the alternate system, that moves the flaps/slats electrically into position. After that I would, however, make sure that the primary flaps lever was in the same position that I electrically lowered the flaps to.

Regarding the final app speed (the part you quoted)

You asked me what would I do if I had no weight information.
Answer: I would use an estimation slightly higher than what I would ASSUME be correct. For example, for a 20klbs fuel left + 250klbs ZFW in a 767 I would use roughly 135-140 (+additives) on final APP (flaps30). And IF that speed turned out too slow, I would SEE it since the aircraft would pitch to unusually high nose-up attitude (>5 deg. ANU) early on in the approach. I would simply increase the speed from MCP if that was to happen. What is wrong with this explanation ? I know that it would not lead to an instantaneous crash if it were 5 kt on the low side, and I would see it. I would watch it like a hawk if I didn't know the RIGHT speed for the weight.

Regarding the gear problem:

I would cycle the lever a couple of times, and if I didn't get 3 green I would eventually use the alternate gear switch, which has a 250 KIAS speed limit for extension. Of course if the lamp(s) were out, I would remove the cover and... heheh just kidding. I wouldn't do that. One delta crew in an L-1011 once crashed while doing that ('73 I believe, in Florida).

Btw. Has the flight with the poisoned pilots turned out to be a disaster otherwise as well..? darn. And I was hoping for the bloody plane to work at least :).

Anything else? And feel free to educate me. This is fun!! But please read carefully what I say in my posts, because it's no fun repeating the stuff over and over.

cheers,
Tero

Oh btw. I'm Finnish, and if my English seems too crappy for you to understand, I will be more than happy to elaborate further :=).

[Brenoch]

Eff Oh, I've flown a bundle of CAT I approaches followed by autolands and been able to walk away every single time..

[max_cont]

I fly both the 757 and 767-2/3 aircraft.

Just to play devils advocate, teropa would stand a much better chance of pulling it off than say a person with no idea of aircraft period.

All s/he is saying is that if everything goes well s/he could program the automatics to land the aircraft. Yes of course s/he could.

What we pilots all know, is that you have to intervene on every flight to correct a situation that if left will escalate to such a degree that it could cause an accident/ incident. We all know that there are limits to what the automatics can do and what the pitfalls are.

A computer game will only give you what the manufactures tell you it’s designed to do, not what actually happens. The reversion to Vnav spd during initial descent on 757 aircraft is a classic example. The fact that the aircraft has a tendency to arrive at the FAF hot’n’high is another prime example of the shortcomings of the automatics.

As an aside all 33+ a/c in the company that pays me, has speed tape enabled and we use vertical speed mode for decent while being vectored to the ILS. This allows us to MANUALLY achieve a constant descent profile with low drag to reduce noise and fuel burn.

The odds that everything goes teropa’s way are frankly not good. When we started to recruit low time S/O’s we found that their system knowledge was almost peerless, BUT below 1000’ agl things that a more experienced pilot would see and correct at an early stage were left and resulted in “incidents”. Only a lot more training and experience solved the problem.

Teropa, the flap load relief will retract the flaps at 162kts on the 767-200 and 757-200. Keep the speed back to Vref 30+5kts and the auto throttle will allegedly compensate for gusts. You can safely use the approach page to get your Vref speed because you will be a bit lighter than advertised for the approach. We use as a rule of thumb, 1 kt/1000kg for the 757 and 1 kt/1500kg for the 767’s

Enjoy your flying. ;)

[pulse1]

This is a silly question which has fascinated PPL's, and now Flt Simers, for many years.

Actually the question should be, What are the chances of an armchair pilot landing a big jet? There must be a measurable risk of even an experienced captain getting it wrong. Read the accident records.

However, I have found myself fanticising further by trying to imagine myself on a pilotless B737 with Teropa, debating as to which of us was more likely to land successfully. Him with his huge knowledge of the aircraft systems, or me with a PPL and a 100% record of landing (hand flying) a "real" 777 simulator at Cranebrook.

I can't answer that but find either prospect terrifying. The chances of a successful outcome would not be one I would place much money on but there is probably a better chance for the passengers than if we did nothing.

To ask Teropa an earlier question in another way. If you had learned to tight rope walk with the rope about 10cm above the ground. Do you think you would be just as competent if the rope was raised to 100 metres?

[teropa]

pulse1,

Heheh, that methaphor you use to bring up the difference between simulators and real aircraft that are 12km above the gnd is a good one :). Illustrates pretty well the HUGE difference between two seemingly similar situations.

Answer: I know I would be afraid up there, but would still try to do it. I also have a couple of nice landings in a MD11 level-D sim, 100% hands on "flying". But regardless, it's only a sim...

I think we'd definately give it a good try, you and I !!

Btw. I did a high bungee jump 1 month ago. I had _no_ fear up there, it was a phenomenally fantastic experience... but then again... it was "only" 60m high and I had a rope in my leg. What do I know? I'm just a PC-pilot :) And I bet every airline pilot would do the same, without any fear. (harmless sarcasm added again for laughs)

cheers,
Tero

[pulse1]

Tero,

People with no fear frighten me to death!!:eek:

[Eff Oh]

My point about airfield systems downgraded was, what if the ILS was off line, and you had to fly a VOR? I have autolanded off of Cat I approaches many times too. I was't aware that it was a "secret".
I admit your systems knowledge for a non engineer/pilot is impressive. However I still stand by what I say. I have had my lot on this, fed up with it, and can't be bothered to waist my time posting on this any more.
I believe the GPWS warning would be "Too low gear." ie Flaps in the landing config and no gear. From your post "Flaps at 20-30nm gear at 10nm" There would be an immense ammount of noise, easy to lose concentration.
One other thing springs to mind, they wouldn't let you anywhere near the flight deck in this post September 11th environment. ;) The flight deck door would be locked, and bolted! As for the Flap, gear thing, consult the QRH, it will be found to the right/left side of you depending whic seat you are in. That will give you some good info.
Happy landings! (And may they all be simulated unless you have a licence.)

Eff Oh.

[RussLightyear]

teropa,

I've been Flying Instructing on light aircraft for over two years now. About once a month a 'know it all arm chair anorack' turns up to fly a Trial Lesson. To be quite frank, you lot are the worst to instruct. You think you know how to fly already, so when you meander a Cessna all over the sky refusing to listen, the net result after stuffing the aircraft into the runway for 500 circuits is a 100 hour PPL. (The min. hours for the PPL is 45 hours).

You seem to have forgotten about the factors that you don't experience sat in front of your PC. (I.E. :Engine Failure, Radio Failure, Electrical/Systems Failure, Deteriorating WX below Minimums, R/T & ATC compliance etc.... I am just refering to Light GA Aircraft. The same considerations arise on Heavy Jets carrying hundreds of PAX, but obviously at a greater scale.

I have a CPL/IR and 1500 hours including 100 multi engine flying hours. I would not have the audacity to tell anyone I could land a Heavy Jet unless I had undertaken a Type Rating.

[Tight Slot]

Ef oh - if you make a post from the point of a 757 driver then you should really put a bit more thought into it. The GPWS is nothing to do with the situation (ie. flaps in landing config, no gear down), its just a Landing Config Warning, and goes a little something like this -

master WARNING light illuminates

CONFIG warning light illuminates

aural warning siren activates

the GEAR NOT DOWN EICAS warning alert message is displayed

its in Vol 2 15.20.10 of your companies ops manual.

[teropa]

RussLightYear,

I have flown real Cessnas and Pipers from the right seat at least the minimum of 45 hours (to get PPL). I also have at least 20-30 landings in them. In addition I have "non-handling" time in the light GA aircraft ~ 500 hours. I have never counted to be exact. I also "piloted" a MD11 levelD sim without a prob. Not all of us "iknowitalls" are stupid and incompetent. I don't have a problem with real life aviation, nor do I claim to be a pilot as I don't have the darn paper (YET!).

I have no trouble understanding the things you mention, not at all. I guess you really get a lot of that "I knowitall" type. You should be happy.. they bring bread to your table.

There's one thing that I don't understand here: Why such an attitude? Why such a pride? It's as if I'm "robbing" some of your hero-status away by making these "speculations" that are JUST what they are: speculations. Let me tell you something: professional pilots (do you consider yourself one ?) fly to make a living, and I'd like to hope that the majority of them are enthusiastic about their work. I sure would be! I also know that PAX are counting on them to do their work, that's all. The days of boasting with a pilot's license are over, and I really don't understand why you all drift off topic here all the time, just to elevate yourselves above layman. If nothing else, then just to call flightsimmers stupid and a "below average" group of aviation enthusiasts. Makes me angry, plain and simple.

Read the posts that I have made, read the posts others have written and contribute if you like, but don't elevate yourself to a level which supposedly is out of reach of many of us enthusiastic simmers already. I for one intend to act on my future plans, and for the time being I'm just getting what I have.

For you I'd like to say that lose that attitude, I bet you also have had the kind of students who get bored during the ten last mandatory hours. I _know_ that you are never "finished" with the learning, but have you EVER asked those people if they have simming background ? Believe me, there IS another side to this story also!

The posts made here at PPrune often make me wonder if there are a lot of arrogant pilots around, flying the bigger iron and such. It would be disturbing to team up with such individuals, even in a light GA aircraft. I guess you pilots see flightsimmers as a some kind of "rotten apple", which I don't understand at all, but there really should be some self-inspection among you (who think that way) as well.

I'd like to add one more thing here. That ^^^ wasn't all directed to you RussLightYear. It's meant for those who just ignore everything that the non-professional aviators have learnt or will learn. Also, some of the replies in this thread are very educating and VERY adult. Something to learn from and entertaining to read. I sincerely thank those who have contributed something on-topic here... it's valuable and appreciated!

cheers,
Tero

[Eff Oh]

You are quite correct indeed! I stand corrected. Still in aftermath of two long night flights, thinking off the top of my head. (That'll treach me!!) :D
Eff Oh.

[bodstrup]

I think that the real problem for us 'simmers' would be the feel of the controls.

While a autoland might be possible, I feel quite certain that I would end up in an increased amount of self-induced oscilations if I ever tried a manual landing after just PC practice.

The 6-7 cm movement of a PC joystick can hardly compare to a flight yoke with feed-back and much more travel.

Equally, just how much do you kick the rudder pedal to compensate for cross wind etc ?

How exactly do you disengage the autothrottle - which would be a very nice thing to do when you flare (or touch down) ?

Autoland ? - maybe, manual: - probably a crash, but fairly close to the airport ;)

The while a MCP can be emulated (and even bought) for a PC, the feel of the controls can never come across.

Some dead serious simmers have reported landing 777's in the Heathrow simulator (BA ?), but they are probably far between.

Regards
Michael

[teropa]

Dear All,

If you're interested to see what kind of software some of us crazy simmers use, check out this. This is the review of the PIC767 I've been talking about. This is an old review for the previous simulator version, but it hasn't changed a lot for the newer one. Bug fixes, some additions etc.

Anyways, if you're interested, take a look here:

http://www.avsim.com/pages/0301/767pic/pic.html


cheers,
Tero

ps. I just took a bundle of magnificient screenshots from a short hop EFHK-EFTU to illustrate the panel operation and autoland etc. in the simulator, for those who find themselves interested. But I can't post the shots here, so I'm afraid that the (rather lousily pictured) review will have to do for the illustration. If you wish to see more, I'll be happy to email some pictures for you. Just drop me a line in PM or email.

[ILS27LEFT]

I think all advanced PC Pilots would have not problems in landing the A/C they know.
The most difficult part would be to find the right stand on the ground.

Thank you.

[canberra]

anyone seen airplane cour se you have , did you know that it actually happened in the early fifties? thats the reason pilots have different food and dont eat at the same time, or they eat at different times in the raf. not sure if in the real incident if it was a ppl or an airline pilot travelling as slf who landed it, anyone out there know?

[PAXboy]

As I said at the outset of this thread, the chances of both pilots being out of service is minimal.
IF that were to happen, would the airline call upon the Purser or other willing member of staff to push the buttons as directed - or would they gladly accept the offer of a PAX?

Cabin crew are a known entity and under the direction of their employer. PAX volunteers are not. It is better for the airline to have a member of their company crash the machine than to allow an untrained person to crash it.

I realise that the question is not if such a circumstance could arise but could the PC person handle it but let us be clear - the situation will not arise.

I have to say, from the point of view of a pax that has been flying regularly for 36 years - I would not want you anywhere near the flight deck.

[Fokker-Jock]

Now this is what I call an interesting thread.

The original thread asks if a simmer or whatever they are called could land a big jet ?
I fly a 30 ton turboprop. When sitting in front of my computer I have serious problems landing that fu..ing simulator, and to be honest, I believe that comparison will be true if reversed also.

Now I'm not saying it's impossible for a simmer to land a big jet. I for one would of course have given it a try if the situation required me to do so. But would never take it on as a challenge to find out. Now you may have alot of hours in GA and perhaps an hour or two where you've flown a big simulator. But having spent more than a 150 hours in a simulator I can tell you that a simulator behaves rather similar to the airplane in ideal weather conditions. As soon as you try to simulate things out of the ordinary it sucks in comparison with a real one. The calm enviroment of a simulator and the comfort of knowing that if you **** up, you just press the reset button, is in itself a stress relieving factor which you definately would not have if the situation in question arises.

Again, I'm not saying you would fail, but I would not put my money on your performance if it should happend. Another thing I would point out. You guys talk of the autopilot as a solution to this problem ?? I would say the opposite. If you were to take a one hour crash course (considering fuel and endurance) via the radio without the oportunity of hands on training and failing, I would say the autoland, FMC, and FMP, and autothrottle would be more of a confusion than a helpful tool. It is helpful if you fully understand the operation of these systems, but would just be a total mess under stress without any experience of it. I sometimes get rather confused myself of all those systems and sometimes the systems themself get so confused they just reboot. Now what the he.. do you do ?
Personally I disconect all autoflight systems and continue manually. But without a single hour in the aircraft in question I would not go for that either unless absolutely neccessary, and even then I would not put any money on my performance either.

The inclination some of you may have when saying "real pilots try to elevate themselves above others" is a total misunderstanding of the point here. By saying "i think you would fail" and afterwards explaining why is not equal to "elevating above" someone else. But then again what do you mean by elevating. I would elevate myself above the average simmers with regard to my ability to fly an aircraft. Of course, I do this for a living, and have been for some years. If you were to say that is elevating above you then I would say you're trying to elevate yourself up to a level of flying ability you do not posess. Sorry but there is a reason for why I do what I do, as I'm sure there is one for you doing what you do. And I for one would not even consider trying to elevate my self to your ability level in what you do.

Conclution ?: I think you would fail, but hell, if the situation arose then I would rather have a simmer behind the wheel than secretary :p. Let's just hope that in the interest of safety for those on board, this will never happend. ;)

[dick badcock]

Well here are my two cents (pence) worth.

A/P + A/T engaged, CAT II/III approach, near destination (nav aids set), good weather (no wind), a good instructor pilot to give instructions all along, no other failures or problems. YES, it could be done.

Any other circumstances, and I would not be putting money on it ending happily. I fly an aircraft with autoland capabilities (B738) and it is quite easy to do, as long as you know what you are looking at. That is, as I see it, the problem for PCsimmmers. They know what things are supposed to look like, but do not necessarily know when things start to go wrong, or how to correct a deviation. This is something that has to be seen 'in action' and be experienced/felt. No sim can teach you this (not even a level D). All professional pilots will testify that the sim is good, but it isn't the 'real thing'. Mistakes must be made or seen on the line, in order for experience to grow. An example: I made the balls of a visual approach a couple of weeks ago. Sure I had flown loads of visuals in the sim. But in real life things are different. These are things I feel cannot be learned in a sim, but must be experienced first hand. Therefore, a pcsimmer behind the controls is not an ideal prospect for a happy landing in my book.

Let me re-iterate. Ideal conditions, yes no problem, otherwise no.
But as Fokker-Jock says, much rather a PCsimmer gives it a try than anyone else.

DB

FJ, what are you? 0198?:p

[Les Bee'un]

Like others have said, yeah it's remotely possible. In your case though teropa I doubt it 'cos you don't seem to listen. Every time a pro throws you a curved ball you post a whole page of arguements. You going to do that on the radio? Sheesh, all your talking and you'll run out of fuel in a perfectly serviceable airplane.

[teropa]

hi all,

Some interesting replies and comments again!

I'd like to comment some of them though...

ILS27LEFT,

Thanks for the statement of confidence ! Although I'm sure that I would skip the taxi-in anyway hehe :).

PAXboy,

If I was a passenger on a plane I didn't know, and there was a pax who knew the plane like the back of his/her hand _in theory, through a flight simulator_. What would I do if I was to encounter such a situation ? What about if I was on the gnd and my family was pax on that plane ?

I would NEVER take an f/a or purser over an avid flight simmer!! Why the hell would I choose a person who has ZIP knowledge on the a/c systems over someone else who's knowledgeable enough to, say, use the automatics, JUST BECAUSE he/she declares to be a flight simulator enthusiast ?? I don't follow your logic here, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

Although, I bet that if it were to actually happen, you would choose otherwise... It's amazing how quickly one can change his mind, and I see no other reason to your logic than the mindset of us flight simmers being utterly worthless by nature. The world indeed is an odd place sometimes...

Fokker-Jock,

I agree with everything you said in your message.

I talked about some pilots elevating themselves to a certain level, which was kind of obscure of me, I have to say. What I meant was that there seems to be an attitude, among _some_ pro pilots, that everyone below their level (i.e. CPL, PPL(IR), ultralight, sailing planes, flight simulators) is plain stupid and their opinion doesn't count. To prove this, all you have to do is take a look at the thread where some of these champs are whining to get a private, closed forum. Excellent. Let there be a closed arena for conversations, and soon the talking would either dry out or become truly boring otherwise... But I don't want to see any off-topic posts in this thread about that, so I'll just leave it at that...

You SURELY are not elevating yourself when stating that you have the ability to fly the plane you fly, much better than those unqualified. You're just stating a hard fact, and that's perfectly OK, of course.

I think I have to elaborate a bit more on the "elevation" thing...
It seems as though the people who see themselves above others, are not just seeing that from the professional POV. These people think that their opinions, regarding matters nothing to do with flying itself, are also far better and MUCH better justified. The comment usually seen in the forums is roughly "you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and your obviously not a professional... most likely a beancounter or a "nintendo" pilot". That kind of comments emerge as funny very often, especially after reading that other people verify the "nintendo" pilot to be a retired airline captain :D.

DB,

100% agreed. Thanks for throwing in an opinion.


LES,

Show me where I have thrown in a pageful of arguments with NO reason !

I have tried to ANSWER the questions and points that others felt needed re-iterating.

Do you expect me to just be quiet (and thus let others prove their case of me being ignorant) when someone tells me that I don't know what something is, when I infact do ?!!

How would you react?

cheers,
Tero

[max_cont]

teropa, I looked at the web sight you posted the link for. The first thing I notice is that the fleet I fly all use different FMC’s. We use the early model through the PIP to the Pegasus type.

You would find that programming an FMC that you had not encountered before a bit more troublesome than you anticipate, I know because all us line jocks, even with training and an instruction book had trouble and we‘ve been using the real thing for years.

I still believe you could do it if all went smoothly and you were lucky.

Did I detect a note of arrogance in your remark about simmer being automatically better than a Purser? In the company I fly for a significant number of CC have a real flying licence; some even have ATPL’s so I would be very careful about that dismissive attitude, you’re beginning to sound like a pilot;)

From my instructional days I remember that one of the obstacles students had was understanding the radio, add a Greek or French accent (or any other) and you begin to get the picture.

I promise you that in my company we have a chain of command and you are not in it. The cabin manager is in charge of flying when all us pilots are U/S.

[teropa]

max_cont,

Yes, the FMC indeed is a newer gen device, and I wouldn't feel at home with the older ones. However, assuming that the older device has some "self-explanatory" items and me having some quality assistance via radio, I think I'd probably "hack it" :).

Hehe, my dismissive attitude was only towards such cabin crew who are not rated in any way... But you know, even I would seriously doubt that a person with no aviation experience/knowledge would pull it off. No way... or at least the chances would be minimal and the radio assistance would have to be top grade and the person receiving the instructions very good in interpreting what he/she heard.

Regarding RTF:

I fly (sic) regularly in Virtual Air Traffic network called VATSIM. See: www.vatsim.net. It basically means that there are real people providing ATC services accross the globe. There are also real ATCOs and real airline pilots participating in the action quite a lot, would you believe. The network goes "by the book" all the time, meaning that we try to replicate everything as close as possible to the real deal. This means that the RTF, procedures, navdata etc. (everything) used is right on the money and sometimes even more "stricter" than the real world comms. I have experience on both. We use real-time radio transmission over the net, which equals the quality of a real R/T. You are definitely right when mentioning the different accents etc. I have flown (sic) many times accross the Europe in VATSIM and some of the controllers are really hard to understand. Interesting point.

I realize the chain of command very well, having been in the military for 12 months :). Although, I'd like to ask you something:
If your family was in jeopardy, would you rather have the senior cabin manager take over or an outsider PAX with heavy simming experience in the type ?

Thanks for your messages, I enjoy reading them.

cheers,
Tero

p.s. the web site where the PIC review is doesn't reveal it all about the product. For example, in PIC767 there's a possibility to use either the regular EADI or the Pegasus type. Also, it doesn't have the picture of the panel with the stand-by instruments on. (merge nicely to the center, to the row where the annunciators are). Plus a number of other things.

[Eff Oh]

Thing is, the Purser would make the decision. Chain of command is Captain, F/O, Purser, (excluding any off duty or positioning crew.) If they decide they don't want you then you have to accept that. It is not a question of you choosing not to use cabin crew. It is the cabin crew's choice whether to use you or not!!!!
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Eff Oh.

[teropa]

Eff Oh,

I know this, and I wasn't arguing it.

I just asked max_cont a personal question.

regards,
Tero

[max_cont]

teropa, in answer to your question the simple answer is the Cabin Manager. Let me explain.

1.This would be the company’s instruction for the succession of command. (They own the A/C)

2.The cabin crew are very familiar with the Flt deck layout and have been trained for pilot incapacitation. Agreed the scenario is only one pilot out of the loop. But most of the senior CC understand how to use the radios and they know how to use Hdg Sel. (we discuss this often)

3.The CC will utilise all assets to achieve a safe recovery of A/C and passengers. You would be considered an asset and may be asked to assist the CC in achieving this.

4.The Cabin Manager has a complete understanding of what is required in the cabin and can plan accordingly. You are completely in the dark over such matters (I assume) and all the passengers’ safety is paramount.

5.If you have never been “solo” you have no idea how that realisation will affect your performance. It is a hugely sobering thought when you look across the cockpit and see no one. Ask anyone that’s been there.

6.The preconceived idea’s you have can lead you to make errors that someone else without all of your knowledge would not make.

7.You may try to be too clever with the automatics i.e. use the FMC to navigate instead of using radar vectors to an ILS with Hdg Sel and Flt Chg under radio guidance from a qualified pilot.

Your assumption that any FMC differences would be apparent is IMHO, wrong. For example the later FMC’s allow you to bring a waypoint to the top of the legs page and execute to fly direct. Older models tell you to naff off. You may or may not input data on blank lines whereas on the new FMC’s you get a prompt if you can. Some of the keys on the FMC that you have in your sim are a mystery to me because I’ve never seen that type before. (And I’ve got a fair amount of flying experience with various FMC’s in 737-300 757-200 and 767-2/300) On the FMC’s I use, you have to input the lower FL with “A” and then the higher FL with “B”, not the way the instruction tells you for the one you use. You can input RTE by airway on some FMC’s without a termination point on others you have to specify an aid or waypoint. Some FMC’s recognise NDB’s without the NB after the ident others don’t. The list goes on and on.

Your systems knowledge is impressive and I still think you could do it, but only if you kept it simple.

Just as a final point, if I were flying as a passenger on say an Airbus or another unfamiliar type, I honestly believe I would need to keep it simple and have help to achieve a safe landing in the event that the pilots became incapacitated.

[Hippy]

Intersting thread. Here's my 2p and a few questions relating to this extremely hypothetic scenario.

I am also a simmer and am very familiar with the software that Teropa uses. If anyone has used even the latest offering from Microsoft 'straight out of the box', make no mistake, this product bares no comparison. I am also an ATSA with 12yrs experience, so know a thing or two about real aviation.

Firstly, taking the chain-of-comand thing into question. I can see that the Senior Cabin Crew / Purser is going to be firmly in command. After all, he/she is likely to be the only person on board aware of the predicament, so I guess they are going to call ops and ask their advice. Surely one of the first actions they'll suggest is to find out if there are any licenced pilots on board. In Tero's scenario there are not, but he puts himself forward as an armchair pilot who is willing to assist.

A question for any CC that may be reading - Do you accept Tero's offer and invite him to the flight deck, or, do you decline his offer and report back to ops that you are on your own?

Let's assume you invite Tero to join you in the right hand seat. He sits down and carmly begins scanning the instruments, giving you a commentary of the current state of the aircraft. How will you use Tero?

Now, on to all this stuff about, the fit might be a bit different & my SOP's say you should do it this way not that way. Let's get real - Tero is going to be terofied, he has stated that there is a type-rated pilot on the radio - he is going to do exactly what he is told. Which brings me to another question. What are the chances of getting such a person on the radio? How long will it take? I know for a fact that we don't have them sitting in the ready room at LTCC waiting for such an event. What is the likelyhood of having one in your ops room? serious question - I dunno.

But anyway, we have SCC overseeing the operation, a pilot on the line & a chap who knows what flaps are & what they do, understands airspeed & recognises when it is not doing as instructed/anticipated, etc, etc - plus, he has a fair knowledge of where all the right (and wrong) buttons and levers are, what they are called and what they will do. Add to this, he is no stranger to basic ATC instructions. I give the team a very optamistic chance of bringing the bird down successfully - given ideal weather and fully servicable systems.

I know I could! :D

Rgds,
Hippy.

Tero - any chance of getting those screen shots onto the AVSIM or Flightsim screenshot forums?

[RussLightyear]

teropa,
You're definitely the very best. My advice to you with all your vast experience is to apply to all the airlines straight away.
Love
RussLightyear

[Pilot Pete]

Anyone done a practice autoland where the a/c has flared at 50ft and closed the throttles(757-200)? Happened the other month to me. Then what you gonna do?

PP

[Les Bee'un]

Dunno. Tell us what you did Pete.

[teropa]

Well hello again!

max_cont,

points 1. - 4. in your latest post:

I agree 100% and have never disagreed with those things as I recall.

point 5.:

I see where you're coming from, but I also see that if it was a life-or-death situation, I would try to do EVERYTHING to save my butt and that of the others :).

I know I could be of help even in the situation of me lying on the cockpit floor shaking, unable to do anything, but able to tell the senior cabin crew member where to find this and that. I dunno.. I would like to think that I could, at least. I have no reason to believe I couldn't, let's just put it that way... One has to have a bit of confidence !

point 6.:

Are you suggesting that I would question any instructions I'd be given ? I would not do that, period.

point 7.:

Same as point 6. Not in a million lightyears would I start soloing in a situation like that. It's no place to "try out" the "skills" I've acquired. No way.

Regarding the FMC. This is what I wrote in my previous post:

"Yes, the FMC indeed is a newer gen device, and I wouldn't feel at home with the older ones. However, assuming that the older device has some "self-explanatory" items and me having some quality assistance via radio, I think I'd probably "hack it" . "

Notice two things: assuming that the device had some self-explanatory items, AND me getting top grade assistance from a pilot via radio.

I wouldn't know what to do with the older models of Honeywell FMC, but if it went to the point that I had to try something, I certainly would. There always the option to dump the fmc controlled lateral/vertical modes, and start using only HDG SEL, FL CH etc.

About the Airbus:

I don't like the Airbus' systems. I have also used a pretty good Bus simulator for some time, and I'd have to agree that without Airbus systems knowledge, ANY professional pilot without type-rating in ANY airbus would be in deep deep trouble. It's nothing like Boeing, one can't basically make any assumptions that are based on Boeing systems in a Bus.

RussLightYear,

No need to act like a brat. I just told you what I think. You're just being sarcastic to make a fool of me. You obviously can't stand any criticism without getting the tone right away. I know I can be equally annoying sometimes, but I usually try to back up my opinions in some way. Happy instructing!

Hippy,

Hi there fellow nintendo'er :). And thanks for the support !

Those questions you made are interesting and demand to be answered by pros right away!

I'll sort out the screenshots after I get home from work and post them in the evening. They're actually nothing that special from a simmers POV, just good shots to display panel operation and different parts of it at different phases of flight. Just to demonstrate that it really does what it's supposed to do :).


Pilot Pete,

I've been bombarded by different "abnormal" scenarios throughout the thread, even though one of the main assumptions for ANY serious simmer (not just me) to pull this off were ideal circumstances (i.e. the aircraft working as it should).

Anyway, I enjoy reading about these non-normal encounters as it's a great way to learn... and straight from the PROs themselves, which is great.

What would I do ... hmm.. There are probably two things that _I_ could do in that situation:

1. I could manually add thrust (A/T still on, just fight the throttles a bit, I know this can be done) to make the hard hard landing a little less hard, although flaring at 50ft (assuming speed correct) would probably cause a tail-strike and a very hard and bouncy landing. Not good.

2. G/A. I would disarm the speedbrakes (wouldn't want em to deploy upon the possible contact with the gnd), disconnect the A/P, press TO/GA, rotate, flaps 20, positive rate, gear up.

Once safely cleared the ground I'd start using the automatics again and set the speed not to bust Vfe. ( I'd engage A/P again ALT HLD, HDG HLD, SPD).

I would choose option 2, but I'm REALLY not sure if that would be a wise choice, and now I'm eager to learn what would be!

Thanks,
Tero

[ferris]

I have watched about a dozen guys (ATCers) have a go on an airlines' A300 sim. Pilot ability varied from nil to current, 1200hr CPL twins.
With talk-down guidance, even the nil hour guys were able to make an 'acceptable' landing. With no guidance, about 80% spear-in rate. Interestingly, the experience level made little or no difference. This was hand-flying (no autoland on old A300).
I would have put myself in the category of 'those who thought they could do it if they had to'. Not now. Not unless I had someone talking me through it. And that was only sim.

[SydGirl]

OK I've never been in control of a real life B767, however I do enjoy Flight Sim and hey if both tech crew were incapacitated and there were no other qualified pilots on board then I wouldn't hesitate in using my (yes totally unqualified but better than nothing at all) Sim experience(?) to try and land the aircraft safely.

I sure as hell wouldn't even try and compare myself to a professional pilot, and frankly I'd be happy if I got the bird down with fuselage intact and without loss of life.

My two cents (or pence, depending on where you're from).
SG
:)

[essouira]

Teropa - I'm amazed that you have experienced three engine failures in light a/c - tell us more about this. In all the years I've been flying I have only ever met one person who has lost an engine more than once - and nobody who has lost three. You must really skew the statistics in your part of the world. With that sort of luck, I think you should consider very carefully whether to pursue a career in aviation !

[teropa]

essouira,

First, I'd like to say that I recent your tone, which is ridiculing and full of disbelief.

What is it about you people ?! It seems that your credibility around here equals to Zero in some people's eyes if you don't have an ATPL. Sheesh...

I will not write an essay of those incidents here, but I will tell you this.

All of them were failures of PURELY mechanical nature, and neither me or my father (who was PIC) could do anything about it.
To be more specific, the magnetos were malfunctioning in a way that the engine didn't ignite constantly as it should have. And due to this it lost power. We had to do an emergency landing back TO AIRPORT each time, so I have to disappoint you: no burning wrecks, no victims no nothing. Just a couple of shaken persons with a lot of questions. And I can tell you this, it is not pleasant to encounter these at night...

Fly safely!

cheers,
Tero

[bodstrup]

I also had 3 engine failures in my old Toyota GTi.

Bought a brand new VW - engine burned about a liter of oil per 100 km and dispersed blue smoke all over. After a few arguments, I got a free replacement.

It has now run smoothly for 3 years.

It is just a matter of either driving something old or being a bit unlucky.

I could imagine, that some GA aircraft are not kept to the same standard as those from a major airline.

Regards
Michael

[essouira]

teropa - I didn't mean to hit your "sensitive" button. My tone was not meant to ridicue or upset you but I guess it's difficult to be light-hearted on some threads. I am not an airline pilot either but I don't share your view that they are trying to put us GA people down all the time.

[kabz]

Hey teropa,

I just started an FAA IR and there's no comparison between sitting at a nice comfy desk playing Flight Sim, and sitting in a real plane (172 in my case) desparately trying to concentrate hard enough to

1. Scan the instruments
2. Interpret the instruments
3. Control the aircraft

Here's an example, flying a simple approach style pattern, trying to work a timer, and read the instructions off a piece of paper was enough to cause my scan to break for just a few seconds -- hardly exceptional for a begining IR pilot -- and in that time, the aircraft got off heading, pitched down enough to gain 10 knots, and I had to work pretty hard to get it all back in shape.

Now try talking on the radio, talking with people around you, actually looking at a real, dirty and in the life flight deck, and doing all this at 3 or 4 times the speed of what I can barely cope with in a 172.

This is the bread and butter of professional pilots.

I don't think I'd be volunteering to take the controls of that aircraft if there were other pax on board ...

[teropa]

kabz,

If you'll read through the posts in this thread, you will find that we weren't talking about flying the beast in IMC hands on. Not by a long shot.

The conversation is about whether or not a non-pilot, who has extensive knowledge on a/c systems (i.e. an avid simmer, engineer perhaps) would be able to use the _automatics_ to guide a large transport category aircraft down to a safe landing.

The more I think about this and read the stuff people put in here, the more certain I become about being able to pull it off... Not trying to fish for flames or such, just telling what I _honestly_ think.

cheers,
Tero

p.s. I hope you enjoy the topic tho.. I know I do :)

[Mindthegap]

I have seen pilots who are fresh out of 8 weeks training and, well they landed but had to be talked down until the last 3000 feet. Why do you think that all operators have a safetypilot up front when somebody is fressh out of training. If somebody with full conversion course behind them can´t do it without a safety pilot or instructions, WHY do ypu think you could do it. Many pilots with thousands of hours often end up in a situation like: What´s it doing now?? With all their knowledge and their experience they sometimes are not as much in the loop as they should. It takes experience (which we most often have in the left seat) to be able to land an a/c safely. When you are in the cockpit doing your job you have probably gained some experience, which is essencial to a big factor we pilots have to adjust to , STRESS. With experience this becomes less intrusive in your work. When you, a typical sim-knowitall sits there and everything that you thaught you knew isn´t there and everything becomes faster than you would expect, then things start to go wrong. Ideally, like you said, wether cond. and systemwise isn´t going to happen. There is always things that change, aren´t like you would expect(like in the sim.) I just think you are arrogant to say these things, because experience tells me it is going to end badly.

[teropa]

Mindthegap,

Oh, once again someone who sees me as arrogant because of a conversation that tries to tell that atps are only mortal. Why does this discussion tell us that. Because of the fact that another mortal could use the _automatics_... say with me: a u t o m a t i c s, to land the freakin' plane.

You can keep your opinion to yourself if you have nothing else to back it up than just "things start to go wrong". There have been opinions here that are PRO (with good justification) and also CON (as well with some backin up). I think that I have thus far offered some pretty darn good answers to the questions asked about various things. Why don't you just list the things that start suddenly go all wrong, and I'll see what I have to say about those, ok?

Otherwise...


Tero

p.s. you type rated in 757/767 ?

[Captain Stable]

Good discussion (mostly) so far.

Teropa, much of the situation you pose so far I think would work.

The two most likely snags that I can see are:- In a case of double pilot incapacitation, the cabin crew would be very unlikely to ask if there was another pilot on board, mainly to avoid seriously upsetting all the pax. If they knew there was one on board (which is quite probable) they would have a quiet word with him. They would never ask if there was an experienced FltSimmer on board. Therefore you'd be out of the loop. Assuming you get into the flight deck, in most parts of the world it would be almost impossible for an ATC unit to locate and bring to the mike a suitably type-rated pilot. Assuming that they can, time is going to be very short. You won't have much fuel to hang around while they bring a guy in from his gardening. If he's not from the same company as your aircraft, he quite possibly won't know the equipment and layout of your flight deck. (e.g. Most British 757's have paddle switches to engage the A/P - American versions have pushbuttons)That having been said, and given all the premises in your scenario happen, I don't see much reason, given a fully-functional aircraft (no "Autoland system U/s" in the tech log etc.), why you shouldn't be able to push the right buttons to get it down.

PS Yes, I'm 757/767 type rated.

[tunneler]

On a slight tangent here but bare with me........

You say you have had 3 engine failures that have all resulted in a recovery to an airport. I assume that this occured in a single engine aircraft?

Always thought that an engine failure was the situation when the prop stopped turning and left you with no other choice but to put it down in a field......... a engine malfunction which your magneto problem sounds like doesn´t really constitute a "failure"

I may be way off the mark here but it looks like you are trying to glamourise a pretty insignificant event for your own benefit - true/false?

Im sure that 90% of flying instructors have had some form of malfunction of an engine at some point during their work, alternator failures, mags dropping off etc - but probably only 1% have actually had one engine failure let alone 3.........

Anyone gonna shoot me down on this one?

[teropa]

Captain Stable,

Thanks for the opinion!

I agree 100% with what you say. Although the discussion was not about whether the flight simmer would be invited to the flight deck or not :). That's the only "snag" I have .. heh

On another note, I would be very interested to know if the "approach" I took to Pilot Pete's imagined scenario of a/c commencing flare @ 50ft with throttles (a/t) idle (using autoland).

Could you see my reply to Pete and see what would go wrong/right etc ? No one has commented on that yet...


tunneler,

For crying out loud!!

If it makes you feel better, I'll edit the post where I say "failure". This is a matter of semantics !! Regardless of what I say, the situations ended up in a "hurried" landing into nearest airport with engine giving partial/no power (taking turns).

I almost couldn't believe what I just read. Honestly, seems that some (YOU this time) are really being wound up about this scenario, enough to just dismiss what I have said, to make me look fool enough to easily ridicule the scenario in question.

I've got news for you: it ain't gonna happen. If the discussion is not enough for you (in the means of virtual "slaughter" of a wannabe, that's what you're aiming at, aren't you?), then please post your stupid comments elsewhere.


Tero

ps. have you ever seen an idling prop engine (or jet engine for that matter) give anymore power than a full-stop one ?

EDIT: Sorry about that Tunneler. I just got a little carried away. The situations were real and didn't feel good at all. I just don't like the implications, even if they were done in a polite way.

[Captain Stable]

Yes, I saw that. My advice in such a situation would be to accept the failure, the (very) hard landing and just get it close to where the fire trucks are waiting patiently. Yes, you might damage the aircraft. But you've just saved the lives of the pax. CC will have them braced anyway, and on stopping they're going to blow the slides and get everyone off pronto. No point in messing around adding power, trying for a nice landing and ending up wandering through the perimeter fence, across the duck pond and the golf course, through the village pub and down onto the motorway...

[Eff Oh]

Don't even know why I am bothering. :rolleyes:
To go around on a B757/B767 all you need do is hit the go around switches. The aircraft will annunciate "G/A, G/A" will rotate to 15deg on its own and will apply power to satisfy a 2000ft/min RoC. It will maintain the instantanious track when the switch was pushed. If your systems knowledge is so good, why didn't you know this?? Also by the time you disarmed the speed brake and did all the things you are talking about, you would be on the ground! You do not need to retract the speed brake, if you apply power (the exact amount escapes me) they will autostow. Oh and another thing that springs to mind is that to get the spoilers to extend on the ground, you need to select reverse thrust. Normaly do that on a go around do you??
As for your 3 engine failures, bad luck old boy! I have been flying for 8 years and have had one stop during an aerobatic maneouver. (Was our own fault) Which duely restarted. Talking to a captain yesterday who has been flying for 30years and has NEVER had one fail. So I guess if you did get you hands on this B767, given your track record, it wouldn't be too long before an engine failed, and you had that to contend with too!!!! ;)

Happy (simulated) landings. :D

Eff Oh

[Captain Stable]

If you've got to that stage, you wouldn't carry out a go-around. Accept the crash landing.

PS, Would you give the guy a break? He's not saying he knows everything. He's just trying to ascertain whether he knows enough to be able to land it in an emergency. He's an enthusiast. We were all enthusiasts before we became pilots. We're not gods. We know how much we know, and we know enough to see where the gaps in our knowledge are. Teropa doesn't know enough from FS to know where the gaps are - that's not his fault.

[max_cont]

teropa,your comment about the option to not use the FMC for descent and lateral navigation would be the safest and therefore the most likely to achieve a safe landing in the scenario in your original question.

I have to agree with tunneler re the engine failure. What you have experienced was definitely a malfunction but IMHO, not dire.

If you have doubt about idling jet, or piston engines producing thrust, let me assure you, they do. On the 757 we use RB211 engines and we line pilots call it the “racing snake” because it won’t slow down. If we’re ferrying an A/C we have to use speedbrake on the G/S to stop it accelerating. Only when we get Flap 30 does the A/C stop trying to run away with you.

I have only had one real engine failure when I was instructing. The windmilling engine was ok, but then that prop stopped turning and the drag increase was alarming. I’m rather pleased I was doing some stalling exercises with a student so we had lots of altitude to play with.

As an aside all of the 757/767 fleet (I believe) only has the pushbutton type autopilots. In fact the only time I have ever come across the paddle type, was when we had an old Monarch 757 on loan and that has since vanished. All you have to do to engage an autopilot is push the paddle up.

[Captain Stable]

Incorrect, max, re the autopilot switches. All the (old) BA fleet had paddles. Dunno about the new ones.

[max_cont]

Captain Stable,my mistake. I meant all of the 757/767's that I currently fly have buttons and not paddles. (I work for a UK company) I seem to remember that the paddle version we had on loan didn’t have the auto arm function for the two additional autopilots for an autoland. We had to engage them manually.

[Captain Stable]

Yep - that autoarm is the same for all paddle-type. <sigh> I didn't become a pilot to have to work! :D

Dunno why BA specifically ordered them like that. Presumably the Monarch one you flew they had acquired from BA.

[max_cont]

Now you mention it, I believe it did start life with BA.

I bet Boeing charge extra for the paddle fit as well :D :D

[Tight Slot]

Ef Oh - dont want to pick on you but you've made a clanger again. You mention that upon touchdown, with the Speedbreaks in armed (as would be the case), we need to select reverse thrust for the spoilers to deploy - not so. Thats the situation in an RTO, with the lever not in the armed position.

In a normal landing, with the lever in armed, the spoilers come up and do their job after the gear is on the ground (not tilted) and the thust levers are at idle.

ref vol 2 9.20.8

Cheers,

[expedite_climb]

Tight slot, I reckon you are correct re the speedbrakes, but dont forget that the original point is still irrelevant (i.e. they don't need to be disarmed), as if they were to deploy on touchdown, they will automatically retract when thrust is added for a late go around.

[Eff Oh]

Again spot on. When the red mist descends the keys are whacked furiously without too much thought! Keep those manual refs coming! ;)
EffOh.

[NorthernSID]

How about putting it all to manual and flying speed /alpha/ attitude controls speed/power controls RoD etc with flap selection when told - keep it simple and get him/her correctly configured at ToD/ glide slope/ 2000 ft/7nm and get him in the correct steady descent. Or does this assume some PILOTING skills!!

It's worked on the (few) ac I've flown

Or am I being too simplistic - don't all shout at once

Just remember, flying isn't difficult; operating is!

Awaiting the tirade :)

[Captain Stable]

Putting it all to manual???? For a non-pilot? I think you'll find that everyone will agree that under the situation suggested, the passengers' best hope is to keep as much of the automatics as humanly possible, if not, then more!

Putting it all in manual and having him hand-fly it his brain is going to be so full that he's either going to be working so hard to fly it he won't be able to talk back to you, or he'll ba talking nineteen to the dozen whilst the machine goes into a spiral dive.

[scroggs]

Just like to say thanks and well done to all for an interesting, thought-provoking, and (ingeneral) good-tempered discussion. I suspect quite a few observers are learning a lot here.....:)

[FlyingV]

Hi teropa,

Just one small point based on your initial post.

If I was the ATCO who received your mayday, my first instruction would most definitely NOT be to change frequency. If you get that wrong, we might have difficulty finding you again. In which case, you can forget about the rest of your scenario.

I'm not actually a traffic controller but I think I'm right ! (does anyone ever fantasize about being an ATCO :D )

I have never found a working version of a Rallye100 for FS2000 so I can't make any direct comparisons between real & sim :)

Regards,
V.

[jumpseater]

If I were in steerage and the purser asked 'did anyone not have the fish?', I would put my hand up. On getting up front assuming a/c in the cruise and stable, first thing I would do is look for the operating manuals to find where the radios are located. Then broadcast a mayday on whatever frequency was selected. Assuming its an ATC one the next thing would be to find another pilot on the same type to talk to on that frequency. If it were a company/ops frequency I would initially use that as a relay station. I would not want to try anything in manual at this stage, if the plane can do the work then let it. Assuming again that assistance will allow the a/c to be set up for an autoland thats what I would do, also asking for directions to the nearest airport with the longest runway. If the longer runway was further than the nearest runway I would go to the longer, weather and fuel permitting. I'm confident I could get the aircraft on the ground, on the airport, near the runway, again assuming everything was serviceable. I have had the opportunity to fly a real 737/75-76/ and Bae146 sim and know how hard it can be to hand fly a big a/c, particularly trying to correct an over correction, if you follow. I could get it there but the end might not be pretty :eek:

[Jetdriver]

By the time you had looked up how to operate the radios from the "operating manuals" you would have already run out of fuel !

[jumpseater]

Well I had a rough idea where the switch was before looking, however it took me 3m:40s to find the info in our manual Vol2 systems page ref 1.20.1. I can then get quickly to section 5 which deals with panel layout controls etc, so I could at least be talking to some one pretty quickly!. So Mr Driver if we only had 3 mins and 40 secs before the fuel ran out, I doubt if anyone would be of much assistance :p

BTW i do have fs2000, but its never been out of its box, I have a few hours gliding, a few hours light a/c and a couple of hours in the big a/c sims, and quite a few trips up front pre 9/11 hence my nick. I have been in the business for 20+ years in varied disciplines, I try not to let my ego write cheques I am unable to cash, so I feel the last sentence of my previous post was not unreasonable :)

[Jetdriver]

Wow 3min and 40 secs ? I have over 10K hours in Boeing jets and it usually takes me longer than that to find the right manual for what I am looking for never mind the right page. Clearly I need fltsim 2000 ( whatever that is). :)

[jumpseater]

JD as I said my fs2000 not even out of its box, some of my friends can't understand that!. I used to work in a Product support section and also work in an airline ops room environment, so I can usually find the right manual/MEL and page quickly for queries I have to deal with. What use I can make of the info vs the use you can make of it, is an entirely different matter! Course those I use are current on a shelf and in order, not underneath the capts coat, lunchbox, duty frees and flight bag. Those I use would usually have all the pages in the right order too! ;)

[Pilot Pete]

Delay in replying due to 4 early starts (flying the real thing. Calm down, just a statement of fact not an expression of superiority!)

Teropa

You have impressed me with your arguments for your perceived ability to carry out the task, but you have been very defensive when others have suggested problems or their belief that you would not be able to do it.

I think what most people are trying to say is it is fine sitting in front of a sim with every thing going as you would expect and are used to, but the real world is just not quite as cosy as that. I am trying to be diplomatic in saying that I truly think you would give it a very good go and maybe you would pull it off, but, I think you need to realise that it would not be as straight forward as you appear to think it would be. Don't come back with 'why won't it be as straight forward', it's just one of those things with so many variables involved, you may be able to sit here now with what appear to be good answers to many problems, but do not under-estimate just how different it is when you sit behind the controls of the real thing for the first time and how a lot of what you thought you knew just won't come to hand. As MINDTHEGAP mentioned it is truly amazing just how difficult it all becomes once in the real world even after a full type rating course. I remember my first couple of trips and there was a LOT of intervention and prompting from the line trainer.

As for the flare at 50' during autoland I would tend to agree with Captain Stable (I think that's who said it) in that in your position I would just let it do it and drop hard onto the tarmac, you'd probably survive it even if the a/c didn't. What I did was to disconnect the autopilot, add thrust, re-establish the flare and land (nice long runway), but of course both I and the Captain spotted what it was doing very early so thrust was not all the way back at idle with the speed washing off quickly, but I would certainly not advise this in your senario. If the runway had been shorter then it would have been a G/A, as mentioned just press the button(s) and make sure the auto-throttle gives you G/A thrust (in the fully functioning 757 you can just firewall them).

Who knows the probability of a successful landing? You're not gonna get a type rated guy in the tower unless you're VERY lucky, just don't under-estimate how difficult what you are suggesting actually is to do.

PP

[teropa]

Pilot Pete,

I'd like to comment a little on me being defensive about a couple of things.

I started off with a "nice to know" topic, where I was aiming at a couple of replies from a few of you guys (pros), to correct me in the simplified list that I wrote in the first page.

Yes, I knew that I would get some of the "forget about it you lowly simmer.. you don't know first thing about real flying..." -stuff.
Even tho I have plenty of flying experience outside my "many a sad nights in front of my PC", it sure has no bearing on this issue. And maybe it shouldn't.

What I didn't know was that a majority of the replies were like that. Like one of the moderators (and some others as well) has said, I really would like to "be given a break". Instead, I've been given replies that dismiss me (and other non-pro aviation enthusiasts) without any backing up of their opinion, I've been thrown a bunch of abnormal situations, malfunctions that would happen onboard the "real thing", that I've tried to answer the best I could, and I've also been called a LIAR (inbetween the lines tho, but anyway). I would say that I have kept my cool pretty well during the course of my replies. To be PERFECTLY honest, I've tried to act a little over-friendly to keep this thread going, even though the situation hadn't really deserved that.

I know what I'm capable of, and what I could do if I had to. I'm not sure if everyone here can say that about themselves, regardless of their training. It really seems to me that the "road" of this thread is going to be bumpy if continued, and there is no point in trying to "convince" (which wasn't my aim for this topic) any of you about what could be done in the situation by a non-pro.

Now, honestly, I appreciate the _information_ given in this thread.
I also appreciate the opinions of some who have not taken their ego to "the battle". As far as I'm concerned, I'm back to lurk-mode :) now, and am not going to continue on this topic anymore.

Thanks everyone and fly safe!!

cheers,
Tero

[Pilot Pete]

Teropa

just to finish then, and I am not just trying to have a go as you will have seen from my previous reply,

I know what I'm capable of, and what I could do if I had to.

That sadly sums it all up. Non of us know until we are faced with the situation, we think we would react correctly and appropriately and training goes some way to enable this, but if we are honest none of us know for sure if we can handle what is thrown at us. That includes professionals and I am therefore sure it includes you.

It's all just opinions and I thought that is what you were trying to solicit.

Anyhow, all the best.

PP

[teropa]

PP,

I do agree with what you wrote, just to clarify.

All the best to you as well!

Tero

[Tight Slot]

....and they all lived happily ever after, the end.

[Dimensional]

And now -- on a completely different tangent (sorry Tight Slot) -- what about your average PPL (with or without IMC/IR)? Reading this thread has made me think, to be honest I doubt very much I'd be able to prevent the "smoking hole in ground", but would possibly the possesion of actual *piloting skills* would make up for less knowledge of systems? I'd have thought your average IMC/Instrument rated pilot would understand rate based autopilots enough to get the a/c within a few miles of a suitable airport (wahoo! radio nav :cool: ) -- but any manual flying would be much harder (read: different) bewcause of inertial effects and such -- although would another type rated pilot, same company or not, be able to tell me how to set up a simple autoland? A/T coupling would make things easier but wouldn't the thrust available on a large jet make the "constant aspect"/ point-and-power type approach possible (understanding the lag in throttle response on a high bypass turbofan)...?

Just a thought, feel free to laugh/ridicule me as you decide necessary. I doubt, and hope it'd never be necessary, but it'd be nice to know.:D

(Incidentally, my own knowledge of wide/narrowbody jet systems comes from a couple of old ATPL manuals -- hence any glaring errors! I think I'll stick to my 152 -- single engine, single pilot, no automatics, 1xVOR 1xADF and DME, and only 25kHz VHF COM/NAV :) )

Also, would it be worthwhile someone producing a sort of guide for your average PPL-level pilot/simmer to do something like this? Obviously type / a/c specific. It'd make interesting reading, even if it's of no practical value whatsoever :)

[PAXboy]

Teropa, I have followed this thread from start to finish and, like PP, was interested in your comment I know what I'm capable of, and what I could do if I had to. I'm not sure if everyone here can say that about themselves, regardless of their training.
It is true that I have seen someone as unlikly as a ladies hairdresser react with calm and responsibility in a moment of great terror (not on an a/c). However, it is true that NONE of us know what we are capable of and that must, therefore, include you. You know what you know on the ground.

In your favour, I should like to add that a large part of the problem that was not acknowledged by many that responded to you, was that English is not your first language. Given that it is not, may I say what very good English your write? Some of the words that you have used may have been read in a way that you were not expecting and thus gave rise to the strongly worded replies.

For my part, just reading your words, you sounded arrogant but, given the foreign language, that may not be the case.

Happy flying, wherever it may be. :)

[teropa]

PAXboy,

Thanks for the compliment about my English :). The truth is that I got a whopping 299 out of 299 points in my A-levels English in '98, so I guess I can at least make myself understood... ;) Trust me, Finnish is something you wouldn't want to read, and I hear that it sounds horrible, too !

But the "tone" in my writing is a completely another thing. I know that even native speakers sometimes have trouble getting the right tone into the message. And it's always easier to interpret something the "wrong way" than the other way around, you know what I mean..

Anyways, I know that I'm not the least arrogant person in the world, and tend to "rev-up" sometimes, but my intention in this thread was not to put myself or others to the brink of explosion.

Point well taken, and I'll just retreat to my PC Dash 8, which seems to be again a whole different story!! :) Next week I'll be flying again IRL with our club's beloved C172 at night, and I'm _sure_ I'll enjoy it even more. What we all should keep in mind is that it's the love for aviation that keeps us going !


Best regards,
Tero

[overstress]

teropa

I have a question for you!

I am an airbus pilot with 7000 hours and I cannot land any MS flight sim without crashing.

What do you think could be the the underlying cause - my (non-pilot) brother (who owns the computer) thinks it is very funny!

PS - I seem to be OK at arcade-style PC games

[Hippy]

I'm not Teropa, but...

...(and I hope you are being sincere here), with so little to go on, it is almost impossible to say what your problem is. If you could tell us what aircraft you are trying to land, where and what shape you are trying to land it in (Speed, flaps, weight, weather, type of approach, etc...) we might be able to help.

First thing I would suggest you look at (especially if trying to fly an airliner) is weight. Flightsim will, by default, start you with full tanks. If you want to take-off, fly a cuircuit and land, off-load some fuel first. You wouldn't do it in your Airbus with full tanks, would you?

Rgds,
Hippy.

[teropa]

overstress,

Hippy read my mind. Those are the things I would look at initially.

It's pretty funny :D that you can't land the sim, but there could be a number of reasons to that, I'll try to list some (in addition to what Hippy said):

- the plane you are using ? most MS default aircraft are horrible, (and I'm sorry to say that most freeware a/c are equally crappy) and have little to do with their real-life counterpart. Their handling is WAY too sensitive and usually they're also too powerful. To really measure the correlation between your piloting skills and the sim peculiarities would be for you to try PIC767 (the program I've been babbling about), or even better (you being a Bus pilot): the PSS Airbus Professional A320. There are many active Bus pilots taking part in the PSS forums over at: www.avsim.com and telling folks how to use the bird. They claim that the plane is as close as it can get with a desktop sim. The same goes with PIC767. Those are the programs to judge the sim by. In short: SOME planes are just UNFLYABLE, and if you happened to try one, then you'll get a VERY wrong picture about it.

- controller sensitivies ? Too sensitive and the a/c are all over the place. Each airplane has its own RIGHT values for every controller, and to get these right, one just has to harrass other simulator pilots who are type-rated IRL and ask what settings they find closest

- realism settings. If these are put to the "easy, non-realistic" values, real pilots WILL have trouble understanding the a/c, will seem to fly on rails and performance-wise just "not there". So put the sliders all the way to right.

- Weather (did Hippy mention this). Clear all weather and try again.


hope this helps,

Tero

ps. you ARE using MSFS2002 right? The other sims are just not on par with MSFS. Although, and this would interest some of the anti-simmers here, X-plane (a desktop sim) was given FAA approval to be used as a motion-sim software, as a training tool all the way to ATPL. Those who are "in the know" claim that MSFS will perhaps get this certification already for the next version. Remains to be seen.

Interested? see: http://www.x-plane.com/FTD.html

[PK-KAR]

Here's a thing for some of you... fresh off the Sim !
Hand flying a B732 -9A and very primitive a/p...

Hi All,

After coming out of a 732 Level B, 3 Axis Sim (and I'm no pilot, just an FS2002 Simmer)... My conclusion are as follows:

MS FS2002 is NOT representative of real handling of aircraft. Although it gives you a hell of a lot of head start comparing with someone with no/few exposures to front seat flying, hand flying is a whole different ball game.

One thing I find difficult initially, is getting used to scanning instruments on FS (on a screen, hence not a lot of distance to cover while scanning instruments and looking outside). This was critical during when hand flying for landing.

The next thing is trying to get used to the flight control forces involved. One thing about FS2002 is that even under the most realistic setting, the flight controls are very forgiving. The full sim isn't forgiving. Roll maybe easy to play with (too easy), yaw is difficult because you're using it during the most critical phase.... landing... and the someone needs to get used to in order not to make themselves sick is pitch. Finding the right trim setting needs attention.

After reading what Jetguy and Skipper said about pitch and pilot induced , I thought, they maybe right, but I was confident that I could attain smooth controls... during my first take off and landing on the 732 Sim, I struggled to control pitch, roll was easy, and rudder was hard to control but not beyond hope. Pitch was at times, beyond hope.

I did manage to land the 732 safely the first time but it was one hell of a struggle. The fact that I did not decide to go around was short of a miracle. The second cycle was worse. It wasn't until they told me what I did wrong that I got a smooth flight... take off, cruise and landing...

After a few goes , during a cycle, managed to do handle engine fire, failure in hyd sys A and B, and landed the plane in mild turbulence. This is not unlikely in a "walk into a cockpit to find dead pilots" scenario... But without the previous goes, I would have crashed... albeit within the airport grounds where emergency services would be on standby...

So there goes my opinion on this matter. Hand landing a 732 for a non pilot is hard... very hard... For simmers, they have a better chance if they respect the forces involved, though expect very very heavy damage if you don't think ahead. Prop pilots could do it if they think jet speeds and think even further ahead and remember the pitch sensitivity.

Remember, the words used here is COULD and CHANCE... But as far as I am concerned, it was one hell of a night ! Thanks to the airline who'd wanted to prove this point, gave me the chance and wished to be undisclosed.

[teropa]

Hi all!

I would like to bring this thread back up now. The reason ?

Well, I still do think that given a nice weather and otherwise good circumstances, an experienced non-licensed simulator "pilot" could pull this off.

I'm not going to spend any more time in trying to convince people with minute details about every other system that I know how to use in _theory" and in a pc sim (the pic767).

But I will say this. Yesterday I spent 2½ hours in a full motion B757 simulator. So did a friend of mine who has never even steered a Cessna for real. End result ? Many successful hand-flown approaches and landings, with and without the f/d. Some 30 and 45 degree turn practice and a couple of stalls. Plus some other stuff. What is interesting is that neither me or my friend had trouble in keeping the jet in a somewhat stabilized ILS approach (max dev. ½ dot) manually, and then performing a succesfull landing. Also, we didn't use the autopilot to stabilize the approaches, but everything from FLAPS1 was done manually, with A/T off as well.

I had LOTS of fun (and I know I wouldn't have any fun in the situation that would result from both pilots becoming incapacitated), and I'm still not pretending to be anything I'm not. I realize that the real pilots do not train to fly from A to B safely, they train to do it SAFELY in the most disturbing weather with severe malfunctions present as well. But..., now I know what the almost real thing feels like... :). Our host, a 757 training captain, told us that the sim they are using feels like 99.5% real. I'll let him be the judge of that...

Comments anyone ? And let's keep this interesting and civil, heheh...

rgds
Tero

[BOAC]

I am an airbus pilot with 7000 hours and I cannot land any MS flight sim without crashing

Course, we are all assuming he can land.................!!:O

[pulse1]

Tero,

I think that, as someone has already said, the key word here is "chance".

I have no idea of the statistics but I imagine that the chance of an experienced ATPL breaking the aircraft on landing is something like 1 in 10,000. (Forgive me if I under estimate the competence of airline pilots. Whatever the odds are I am happy to accept them every time I fly without worry)

The chance of the F/O breaking it might be 1 in 8,000.

The odds must shorten dramatically once you get to pilots with no experience on big fast jets.

I safely landed a 777 3 axis sim 5 times out of 5 but I would put the odds of me breaking the real thing as something like 1 in 3. With your extensive sim experience you might extend those odds to 1 in 10, not odds I would want to take unless I had to.

[flyingdream]

I also have a question.

I am 20 years old, have been flying since age 16 and am now lucky enough to fly B737-800. I have also spent a lot of late-night hours on FS98-2000-2002. Even during these days I try to fly FS.

And I must say that even after 500h+ FS wich approx 100h were on DF737-400 I didnt have a chance to land the real thing based on the knowledge gained from FS.

Thoug sometimes FS is more fun than the real simulator. (you are your own instructor, and do not fail important stuff all the time)

So my question is: Is there any good airfiles nowadays for fs2002.
I have some freeware aircrafts but some fly like a bag of peanuts.

From the good old days of fs98 I remember that I downloaded a lot of planes from flightsim.com and they flew quite good.

From where do you get all your models?


/FD

[teropa]

Pulse,

A very good point! With amateurs it's just a matter of time when the accident would eventually happen, without the required training and so on and so on...

But to use the word "chance" in another meaning... There's still a chance that it could go ok :). Only kidding here, and point taken. :)

Flying dream,

Check out Pilot in Command 767 by Eric Ernst (an active AAL 767 pilot) and guys. It is THE software I use. It has nearly perfect airfile, and I mean it. After all, even the full motion simulators are about correct handling characters coupled with a lot of physical gizmos and the illusion of flight.

If you want to know more about it, email me at: [email protected]. Also, earlier in this thread (posted last year) is a link to avsim for a full review on PIC767. Also, there's one review out by another active 757 pilot. It can be found at: www.frugalsworld.com



rgds
Tero