S/A, Airmanship and Professionalism?

[Howard Hughes]

S/A, Airmanship and Professionalism?

Following on from some of the other threads that are now closed, what do you think of the current state of Situational Awareness, Airmanship and Professionalism amongst pilot's?

From where I sit in my regional turboprop, I see a large variation in the levels of S/A, Airmanship and Professionalism, from both sides of the great divides. (QF/VB, EAA/REX, Jet/Turboprop)

In my opinion the majority of us, myself included, need to take a long hard look at our levels of S/A, Airmanship and professionalism. A lot of so called "professional pilot's" have absolutely no idea what is going on any further than the autopilot on the coaming in front of them!

Now I accept that the welfare of our own individual aircraft is the priority, but after this has been taken care of, it is a responsibility that we take into consideration what is going on around us, to help ATC where ever posssible, to provide a smooth flow for the people following and those waiting to depart as we are on final.

Too many times I see people take an inordinate amont of time to vacate the runway when an aircraft is lined up to depart after them, this causes a ripple affect back up the sequence, the worst case of course resulting in a go around, or an orbit, I have recently witnessed from very close range a 737 do a 500' orbit at Adelaide with this very scenario. In any case everyone else following get's vectored or asked to slow down.

With regard to speeds as discussed in an earlier thread, surely we should be able to demonstrate an ability to fly the aircraft to the edges, (whilst remaining in) the envelope at all stages of flight. Given that there are constraints of SOP's, as a professional pilot we should operate the aircraft to it's limit's, to reduce cost's for our employer. If there is a speed range specified, we should constantly be looking to operate at the upper end of that spectrum provided conditions are acceptable.

I guess my point is, if we all take note of what's going on around us, we make our own jobs easier, not to mention that of ATC, resulting in reduced delays for everyone, lower flight times, greater productivity and possibly payrise for all!! (well I guess I am stretching it with the last point)

Now please do'nt let this degenerate into the usual cross airline slanging match, but what do you think?

Cheers, HH.

[blueloo]

Well I guess we can assume it wasnt a QF a/c doing the orbit. They have been prohibited as they are to unsafe below 3000, due to a lack of training.

So if a major airline cant train people to do the basics, what chance is there that airmanship will continue to play a part, when everything you do is dictated to you. Soon there will be no scope for the PIC to act in the interest of not just himself and pax, but rather to help other a/c.

[Howard Hughes]

Now Blueloo,

I did say earlier:

Now please do'nt let this degenerate into the usual cross airline slanging match, but what do you think?

However, does this mean you are saying that QF pilot's are'nt "trained to fly the aircraft"?

Or do you mean that they have "lack of currency" on this manoeuvre?

This is kinda my point, surely as a professional pilot we should be able to conduct such a manouevre without raising a sweat!! However taking into consideration the airmanship aspect, perhaps we should all set personal minimums (ie:altitude in this case) for such situations depending on the conditions.

Incidently the weather was CAVOK and from where I was sitting at the holding point, it looked like a textbook manoeuvre.

Once again though, if the aircraft on the runway had of vacated promptly, the lined up aircraft could have departed and all would have been happy. (This is just an example of a lack of S/A, the example itself is not the topic for debate, but the circumstancial causes)

Cheers, HH.

[blueloo]

I would say its more tongue in cheek. I would think that QF guys are more than capable, rather someone in QF has at some point been a bit of a cowboy and done something maybe a bit silly, and unfortunately QF has had to drop the level to the lowest common denominator.

I wouldnt say that was an attempt at a slanging match at QF, rather a dig at the powers that be within QF that dictate such nonsense rules.


As you said maybe it is required due to a lack of recency. Who knows?

[Howard Hughes]

Blueloo,

Sorry, I misinterpreted, so we agree then?

Do'nt you just wish the "lowest common denominator" would change careers, before all the fun is taken away with "nonsense rules"?

I for one get a feeling of satisfaction coping with an unusual situation, I mean is'nt that what we get paid for? The more repetitive stuff, most normal, able bodied individuals could do.

Cheers, HH.



Edited to remove my stutter....

[SM4 Pirate]

My personal favourite which happens at least once a week with everything going profile or slower, is after vectoring an aircraft for a small delay, positioning behind another frame (10 to 15 miles), when giving direct tracking to the next waypoint to resume own navigation; is a "request high speed descent" call... hello, why did I slow (vector) you? This isn't limited to one company, although the bigger one (here)appears to do it more often...

Believe it or not we are looking for every opportunity to fill a hole with high speeds when we can (excluding the 'Sydney movement CAP'); better to have everyone going fast and down than slow and up... Often it doesn't appear that way, because there's more than one of you up there; the joys of different inbound radials and frequencies...

[Uncommon Sense]

Is part of the problem knowledge?

Personally I have never - never - seen an airline pilot take the time to visit an approach or arrivals sector, plug in and listen for an hour.

Sure, heaps come and do the 60 cent 'tour' (usually run by some PR person in the larger centres who wouldn't know first dark from last dark), but nobody ever sits in and see's how it works and asks good questions.

(Can I really emphasise - you need to plug in and hear what is going on. That is when a lot of people realise that only 5% of the work is actually jabbering to the aircraft, and while the frequency may sound deathly quiet it can be high workload.)

Don't get me wrong - ATC are there to provide the service - the aeroplanes are the 'customers' - but if you don't know how that service actually works and what ATC HAS to do to make it work, how can you get the best out of it, for you and your fellow pilots sharing the sequence?

Having said all that I actually think the Situational Awareness is not too bad - probably the best demonstrated SA is from some of the GA operators who regulalry operate in and out and know where to look for the aircraft they are following on opposite STARS and not even on their frequency.

[Super Cecil]

I think airmanship is getting worse in everything from training through to airlines. I have seen examples from both groups recently, usually common sense works. Good examples; I have seen a Dash 8 let a training machine in and land ahead of them (student was only just solo), and I have seen a private machine in the circuit first and extending to let an RPT land first. Bad examples; I have also seen a private machine let a RPT in first then the RPT flying a circuit 7 mile out and taking 5 minutes to land.

It's only really respect for our fellow aviators. The mob that used to be bad was Impuss, they would taxi out and sit on the runway for 5 minutes lined up before rolling. They would call downwind 15 miles out then expect everyone else to stand back till they landed. I rang the chief pilot to have a chat and he was extremely aggressive and rude, with his attitude you couldn't expect his pilots to be any different.

The airlines don't seem to be any worse than any other sector, with the emphasis on maximisation of income rather than standard of training, the problem will remain. The status quo is having 200 hour instructors trained by 200 hour instructors working for nothing.

[Icarus2001]

The status quo is having 200 hour instructors trained by 200 hour instructors working for nothing.

This cannot happen. If you know anything about aviation regulations you would know that Instructor Training Schools require Grade 1 Instructors to train new Grade 3 instructors. To be a Grade 1 Instructor you need to have logged 750 hours of instructional time. The commercial training prior to getting the Grade 3 is usually conducted by Grade 2 or Grade 1 Instructors which means in the case of a Grade 2 at least 250 hours instructional time which when added to the 200 hours minimum to be a Grade 3 means a total time of about 450 hours minimum before conducting commercial training. All of this whilst being supervised by a senior instructor.

This continual criticism of instructors is just plain wrong and seems to come from private pilots who get upset when someone ten years (or more) younger than them checks them out on an AFR and surprise surprise, they are not as good as they thought they were and require more flying to be dragged up to the required standard. Yes there are some poor instructors out there but there are plenty of good ones. There are poor practitioners in every occupation! Flight Schools train to a syllabus approved by CASA, if you do not like the product then tell CASA!

[Howard Hughes]

Is part of the problem is knowledge?

Without a doubt Uncommon sense!

I have made 5 or 6 trips to the Melbourne Enroute Centre in the last 4 years all part of the famil with newbie F/O's.

On one occasion was I given the opportunity to "plug in", this did prove a most valuable experience. I was able to not only see the processes taking place, but see how each controller interacted with each other. It has definately given me an insight in how to gain optimum performance from the sytem and to help out whenever possible.

Sometimes the words used in a transmission are a subtle hint to speed up, slow down, expedite descent, etc.. Controllers do have there hands tied in some respect with what they can ask a crew to do.

I must say though, my company has offered "famil flights" to controllers for about 2 years now, I have yet to see anyone take up the offer. If any ATCers from Melbourne are interested in a "famil flight" please feel free to PM me.

Super Cecil,

While I agree in principle with your comments, I think you mean 200 hour instructors (well more than likely 300 by time they reach that stage) training the next batch of up and coming hopefuls.

Most low hour instructors I have met have good knowledge, what they may not have is the experience (read "life/working" experience, not total hours), to truly understand, or teach either Situational Awareness or Airmanship.

This is definately not intended as a dig at the instructor fraternity, I mean, I would'nt be where I am now without them!!

Cheers, HH.

[Super Cecil]

So all's well in the world of instruction then icarus, bit touchy there, you be an instructor perhaps? or maybe you used to work for Impuss? how many grade 3's around your neck of the woods? do they work for nothing? the supervisery role of grade 1's seem to be if they are paid then do what you like.

The finished product is not as good as it was a few years ago, if the student will not make the grade then tell them, don't just keep dragging dollars out of them untill they're sick of it then write them out a licence. Some of the one's I've seen lately can't even do a crosswind landing, the only training they seem to do is to log up more hours for the instructor total. There might be required a standard but you would call not being able to do a cross wind landing up to that standard?

The 200 hour total might have been an exaggeration, but whatever the total it doesn't seem enough. The sooner instructing is considered a skill rather than just another stepping stone to to airlines and oblivion then the sooner we will get people who want to teach.

[Icarus2001]

The sooner instructing is considered a skill rather

Well amongst my fellow instructors and students it is. You are the one saying it isn't.
By quoting an example like crosswind landings you then extrapolate that standards have dropped?

So all's well in the world of instruction then icarus, bit touchy there, you be an instructor perhaps?

There is always room for improvement; yes touchy about my twenty year career instructing; yes obviously.

The finished product is not as good as it was a few years ago,

How are you measuring this? Do you fly with dozens of pilots every year? Do you regualrly attend CFI/CP meetings? Do you flight test people and conduct AFRs? How long have you been around aviation to notice this change?

The Summers were always hotter.

The servings used to be bigger.

People used to care more about each other.

Music was easier to listen to.

The girls were more chaste.

There used to be a lot less crime.

Pilots used to be better trained.

All nonsense.

[SM4 Pirate]

I must say though, my company has offered "famil flights" to controllers for about 2 years now, I have yet to see anyone take up the offer.

We have an internal process to get on a Famil flight; with only 9 flights (return) available per major centre per annum; these are all utilised; but as you can imagine that spread across 850+ Operational ATCs limits everyones opportunity; mostly newbies who have either just got their licence or are still licence training do the flights... The knowledge transfer both ways is limited due to experience of those getting the rides. Might know a bit about their piece of sky but not necessarily much about other ATC jobs or the 'system'. I've been in the jump seat about 8 times in 15+ years, 3 of those rides I was hardly welcomed and considered a hinderance to be tollerated nothing more or less. Jokes going back and forth about the need and use for ATCs and what an embuggerance we are to them getting home on time... Or this happened about six months ago "blah blah blah", what a disgrace from ATC etc., you're all the same, inefficient waste of money etc...

Additionally the way we have structured ourselves, Enroute is a different stream to Approach and Tower is something else again... Within Enroute there is a massive divide between non-radar and continental radar sectors and then a big difference between those and arrivals...

Then there are equipment issues like MAESTRO, how does it work, CPDLC, ADS-B, ADS-C, CTMS, PDC etc... local knowledge... etc. So many variables...

There needs to be a much more formal knowledge transfer going on; but until the companies realise (all of them, including mine) that spending a few dollars to save many is a good idea it will never happen.

Re the Famil flights and PM's I'll ask around; I'm sure many would be interested; but if only the hoop jumping could be reduced.

[Howard Hughes]

Gidday SM4 Pirate,

Please check your PM's.

Cheers, HH.

[Super Cecil]

........Too close to the sun Icarus..........

How many instructors do you know who stay in the game? there are good keen instructors still about, the bulk it seems are 22 year olds with less than 1,000 hours, look around.

To extrapolate your comments if standards havn't dropped it's always been standard that PPL's can't do crosswind landings?

There is always room for learning (no matter in what field)everyone will give you that point.

I do fly with dozens of pilots every year, meet a few CFI's and CP's, see the results of different training organisations (some exellent, some not) and I have been in the game for 25 years.

The Summers were always hotter.
This year seems worse.

The servings used to be bigger.
Yes but how come my guts are bigger?

People used to care more about each other.
bout the same.

Music was easier to listen to.
I think all agree with that.

The girls were more chaste.
You were moving in the wrong circles.

There used to be a lot less crime.
Don't the stat's prove that?

Pilots used to be better trained.
That's the question.

All nonsense?
there has to be a bit of nonsense, the world's too serious Icarus.

[Hudson]

Airmanship? Just watch the RFDS boys coming in to land Essendon 17. Low level steep turns on base and final - hack-flick zoom. Not all of them of course - but suspect a couple of experienced cowboys there. Hate to be a stretcher case aboard.

[Uncommon Sense]

Hudson

I am sure you didn't intend to suggest that RFDS don't fly according to their operation. I would put them towards the top of the tree personally in terms of (observed) airmanship, flexibility and challenging rapidly changing environment.

I am not sure from what position you make your comments.

Regarding the famil flights. ATC can only do this on their rostered days off. The famil flight must return the same day (no overnights). So when you consider that days off are getting less and less (due overtime and staff shortages) , and controllers are getting tired (same reasons), it is a very dedicated controller indeed who takes up the offer - especially if the experience is going to be one of getting lectured by a grumpy crew with an axe to grind about ATC (yes - I have had one : I learnt nothing about their operation - they learnt nothing about my operation - pointless exercise that day - BUT fortunately only the once it has happened).

Now if you want to talk about an effective ATC Famil programme look at the FAA system. The proof of it's value was the speed with which it was reinstated after suspension post 11 Sep.

[Blastoid]

Famil Flights

Uncommon Sense & SM4Pirate,

There are 100 return famil flights offered per Centre per year - and only 4 (from what I understand) were taken up in Brisbane last year - don't know about Melbourne.

What I DO know is that you can request a Famil flight with your ops manager and they will ROSTER one for you when they can - I am doing one in Mid-Feb and it replaces an operational shift.

The hoop jumping is definitely an issue - tight guidelines about when, where and with whom you can fly, have to fill out tables regarding ACFT performance (speed, etc. at altitudes on climb, descent, etc.) which I can see would generally mean the crew will get sick of being asked questions ... not necessarily a beneficial experience for them either. Observation is one thing, being annoying is another....

However, I personally persist with jumping through the hoops because otherwise we sit in the ACC, crews fly their aircraft and no communication takes place off the airwaves - something which I believe can benefit both sides - at least I know I benefit on the few times I have taken a jumpseat ride in the past.

[Uncommon Sense]

Blastoid,

Thanks for the clarification.

I can assure you it is not available on a rostered shift in my neck of the woods. You are dead right about the hoops. Would rather have an open discussion.

[Howard Hughes]

tight guidelines about when, where and with whom you can fly, have to fill out tables regarding ACFT performance (speed, etc. at altitudes on climb, descent, etc.) which I can see would generally mean the crew will get sick of being asked questions

Blastoid,

It's good to hear that you are keen, hopefully more of your colleagues will take the opportunity too. I would be more than happy to have any ATC, on my flight and answer all the questions they have.
It is this two way communication that will make all our lives a little easier by increasing our awareness of what is trying to be achieved.

I have a bit of an idea about the information you require, perhaps you could ask to be shown where the appropriate readouts are located, then take the readings yourself at times when the crew maybe busy. (ie: below 10000)

Keep up the good work.
Cheers, HH.