What some posters do not understand, notably the ex-air force, is that the modern cockpit environment is different from strapping on a jet fighter or a Cessna.

To start with you have hundreds of passengers behind you, think passenger comfort.

More importantly, a few knots too fast, a glide dot too high, a bank angle more than 25 degrees...there is no room for error. Not because we might fall out of the sky but because our OPS department is watching our every move. We have to operate to very strict limitations with regards to handling the aircraft and strict limitations with regards to the energy state and flight path. So add to that mix a rusty hand flown approach and no one who has any experience in modern commercial jets will doubt that the workload goes up quite a bit for both PF and PNF.

So no, flying a 320 or a 737 manually is not difficult, but the work conditions set by our employer and the fact that passenger comfort is also a factor make hand flying more challenging than in a Cessna or dare I say, a fighter jet.

And do not forget that in one month we fly more IMC approaches than any typical jet fighter or Cessna pilot in a whole year!
So yes, when conditions are suitable, I hand fly. Maybe once or twice a week (one week averages 16 flights).

First things first, some of us are not allowed to do any "practice" with fare paying passengers, its written into our Ops manuals…so we don't have the choice.
That is not to say hand flying isn't allowed, merely that it should be carried out in an operational setting that is appropriate.
To all those that roll their eyes and thump their chests ought to try flying for 14hrs across 10 time zones..and then figure out if a no FD/AT hand flown approach is a sensible thing to do..:ugh:
For those who think its easy for the PNF when the other guy is poling it about…try launching out of Moscow, Beijing, LHR, or half a hundred other complex airports and watch the PNF slowing lose the plot.
I will quite happily hand fly out of LAX, JFK, SFO as ATC have a sensible "fly runway hdg…climb 8000' " mentality.
The tough guy mentality has NO place in transport airplanes, yes you do what needs to be done (including visual approaches, manual flight etc) but the reality is that if you don't use a skill you lose it, my operator has instituted manual flying sims into the training syllabus.

"H1" well put there:ok:
You will always get chest beaters on these pages on any subject.

Simply put, hand fly when it's suitable, low work load, alert & enthusiastic & BOTH pilots are okay with it, let the Sims take care of the rest.

Wmk2

I have never been one to "practice" hand flying. I will sometimes hand fly if I am bored or if I think I can do it better than the autopilot (it's not a great autopilot), but I don't do it with the intent of improving my skills. I won't specifically do it before I go to the sim for instance.

The following is just my observations from flying short haul jet transport ops, your milage may vary.

In my experience hand flying lowers the workload of the PF and increases the workload of the PNF. It also reduces the situational awareness of the PF. Although hand flying is a more natural and physically connected process I think it tends to focus your attention a bit more on what you are doing and reduces your ability to absorb what's going on around you. I know that contradicts my statement that it lowers the PFs workload. I suppose what I mean is that the PF has less to do but uses more of their brain to do it.

On the other hand the PNF workload is necessarily increased. Whether or not that matters depends on what their workload was to start with. If there is a lot going on, lots of radio instructions, lots of SOP chatter, in a busy unfamiliar environment then a small increase in the PNF's workload might be detrimental to safe flight. If the PNFs workload is low to start with then it doesn't matter if they've got a few more jobs to do. It all comes down to doing it at the right time and place.

In the space of a month and a half I found myself having to fly 6 full sectors by hand due to autopilot failure. I can't say that more practice would have helped. I didn't feel I was any better at it at the end of the flight than I was at the start of the flight. I did do a better job than the autopilot, but that says more about the autopilot than me.

Ultimately I think that those who tend to do a bit of hand flying here and there probably don't really need to. Those who avoid it are the ones who need the practice, and they're the least likely to get it.

A37575....I like your thinking.

There was a similar debate on PPRuNe two or three years ago where there was a similar clash between the various generations currently flying in the airlines.

IMHO, there were some reasonably naive statements such as, "The days of switching off the F/D and A/T on a visual approach are long gone", and, "You old farts going on and on about manual skills....blah blah", and, "Flight management is the new world...blah blah", etc remain like a hot-iron in my side. I personally cannot fathom the ignorance of the importance of basic flying skills whether it's flying an A320 or a Vampire jet trainer.

I recall vividly flying an Ansett A320 as the F/O on an NDB approach into Kalgoorlie at night with a ****e-ton of information leaping out at me (from all that crap whizzing around on the PFD and ND) , and choosing to focus on attitude, snap-shot track (that's a bonus instead of heading!), altitude and the ADF needle with the F/D off (the youngish Captain was ready to transmit a mayday on that fact alone, I'm sure).

There are two points: the first is that I was relaxed because I knew the attitudes to achieve the desired performance (we learned those in Ansett way back then) and had that crazy old thing called a 'scan' (the whizz kids might need to google that); the second point is that if I tried to fly the approach with the A/P and F/D, I would have been like the proverbial 'one-armed-paper-hanger': even worse, if I hand-flew and had the PNF twiddle knobs, we would have both been loaded up more than needed.

One of the best things I heard from an old-bold was that Flight Director Bars are 'Suggestion Bars' – never a truer statement (particularly on a Boeing).

These days, I have a varied diet from ILS, LPV and EVS (google it, whizz kids) to totally manual circling approaches – and I love it.

My message is – embrace your inner pilot and fly manual attitude and power whenever you can safely do so; make it the norm when you are cleared to Angels 28 out of Sydney (and take note of the numbers) – the knowledge will serve you well when it hits the fan one day. All the digital stuff complicates the fact that power + attitude = performance. Your job is to know the first two bits; the rest is for show.

Never a truer statement. I think that sums up the whole discussion.

So you're downwind at 4000', gin clear day, number 1 in no traffic and the runway is firmly in sight to both of you. A/P, A/T and F/D's off.
Can someone explain what all this furious knob twiddling is that's required of the PNF , apart from maybe wazzing the heading bug to point in roughly the right direction?

4000 ft,clear day.No 1..? Where that..can't remember last time that privilege except when diverted into Kilimonjaro,,

I'm sure this is not the case, but based on what you've written I would suspect that you didn't know the automation side of your aeroplane properly and hence found it easier to hand fly. I don't see a big difference between that and not being able to hand fly properly and therefore finding it easier to use the autopilot. When you're really on top of an aeroplane you can use the automation to its fullest extent on a dark and stormy night and know exactly what's going on, you can also turn everything off if you need to and also know what's going on. I don't know the A320 but surely you can fly an NDB on the A/P in HDG and VS without becoming a one armed paper hangar?

The newest FOs I fly with are very quick to turn off the automation on an approach. It's not because they are great at hand flying though, it's because they don't have a handle on the automatics and get scared into turning them off. As they get better at it they are able to manage the automatics better and aren't forced to revert to single pilot GA twin mode. I have actually heard the words "this is too hard" muttered under the breath one time just prior to <click click> hand fly time!

Big mitigating factor, it is an old autopilot that doesn't have niceties such as being able to select a defined VS or do a nice localiser intercept at much more than 180 knots. I fully understand that to people new to the aeroplane the A/P actually significantly increases your workload times. But as you come to learn to use the A/P you do get to the point where it decreases your workload. So although I think the new FO who turns off the automatics when he can't get them to do what he wants is doing the right thing for the situation, I also think it is a symptom of not knowing the aeroplane well enough.

Yep, you've described a situation where the PNFs workload is largely unaffected, well done. Maybe we're referring to other times when you are either flying a SID or flying a STAR that doesn't give you the luxury of a visual approach from 4000' on downwind.

Aerocat...I had about 2000 hours on the A320 at the time and about 7000 total. I'm not saying I was the ace of the base, but I certainly embraced the automation. However, I also had the experience to know when A/P was not the best option – the autopilot does not know the meaning of NOW; it is great on a coupled approach, but my fear is that the average airline pilot these days is a servant of automation: I let it give me a helping hand but go back to basics as soon as it mis-behaves. If you delve into the books of Airbus and Boeing, it will say that very thing one way or another.

If any pilot does not have the ability to fly stress-free without an F/D, A/P and A/T, they should look for another job – you simply aren't cut-out to be a pilot. Harsh, I know, but true. Look no further than AF447.

Well said FA, sometimes disconnecting the A/P is the appropriate level of automation. Watching someone try to recover an approach using the A/P, from being left too high or not getting it slower earlier is excruciating. When you tell them to disconnect and handfly its like you have told them they have to walk through the terminal naked!

Don't take this the wrong way please, BUT, we don't know what we don't know. (I am not suggesting you would do as described below, I hope not)

On many occasions I have flown with people who are not good managers of their aircraft nor are they particularly talented at hand flying, however as soon as the workload increases, like intercepting the LLZ on an average day, off goes the autopilot and hand flying starts.

They believed that was appropriate. The dismal display indicated otherwise.
These same people consider themselves experienced and are now training and passing on these little gems to their trainees.

I recall a post from several months back where a 737 F/O asked the captain would he mind if she disconnected the AP as she had an IR coming up and needed some hand flying currency (ie "practice").. They were about 15 miles from touch down slightly off set and on an intercept track to hit a Sydney 16 localiser at around 9 miles I think. Weather CAVOK.

Captain said no problem, fill your boots (or similar expression). F/O says "thanks - most captains I fly with don't like to hand fly"

Approaching LLZ intercept the captain remarked that F/O still had the AP engaged and when are you going to hand fly? Not yet says the F/O - I'll wait until the AP turns me on to the LLZ in case I overshoot the centreline. Captain shakes his head in wonderment. Now on final, F/O switches off the AP but leaves the FD on. Captain says when are you going to switch off the FD and fly raw data like in your CIR renewal?

F/O says she will leave the FD on just in case she has to do a GA. Captain says you don't need a FD for GA. Captain later asks where did you do your type rating, as he was concerned that the F/O had been brain-washed into automatics instead of balanced view of the need to hand fly.

That story is true. It suggests that sort of experience is common in Australian domestic operators ie reluctance to disengage AP even in appropriate conditions.

no excuses in a shorthaul jet. And doesn't the 737 have FD 'pop-up' when TOGA is pushed? (its been a while)

One day you may be on the receiving end of "Murphy's Law" and be served up a turd sandwich...You may then have no choice but to Hand fly with "No Automatics" and plenty of other distractions to be managed...There are plenty of incidents even quite recently where this has happened. At the end of the day, this is what we are paid for.

I do acknowledge that there is a push by the airlines industry wide to encourage the maximum use of automation. However, Flying an aircraft is our bread and butter, and it behoves us all to maintain these "skills", whether that be in the aircraft or if SOP's do not allow in the Simulator. I do believe the Airlines Training departments should be dedicating more time in the Simulator to maintain and hone basic flying skills.

Been a while for me but I do remember having to switch the F/D off on final when the A/P was disconnected. Pressing the TOGA button brought them back up.(Airbus you push for TOGA, Boeing you press:ok:)

Not sure about other carriers, but the training department of my mob have recently made it plain that future training will involve a lot more manual flying as a result of trends being identified in incidents worldwide over the last few years.
That, combined with a greater emphasise on training scenarios in the simulator should go some way toward improving our manual manipulation skills -especially for those of us who do very few sectors (not by choice I'll add).

Looked into it and it seems my memory was right, it does have TOGA FD pop up so the story related by Sheppey is even more ridiculous with the Captain obviously not know a basic AF function of his aircraft in accepting the p!ss weak excuse from the F/O. :ugh:

Although we all have our learning curves, we weren't all born Aces of the Base. I distinctly remember my training on the 737, half way through the sectors, upon receiving track-shortening again, I went to disconnect and turn onto base, keen to show my trainer how well I'd learnt to fly the a/c. He told me to not do so and use the automatics "you need to be able to do everything with both".

Time and a place.

Have lost count the number of times seen in the simulator (737) where the approach is manual flying on final with AT switch off as per Boeing advice and for whatever reason the pilot decides to go-around.

He presses the GA switch expecting the thrust levers to automatically go to GA thrust position. Having already simultaneously called for flap 15 as part of the GA procedure, he is surprised to see no throttle movement even though the FD may pop-up. Frantically presses TOGA again as speed drops off rapidly until he realises something is seriously amiss. Then the penny drops and he shoves open the throttles usually over-boosting in the process.

In my book, for a GA with manual throttles, it is prudent to first push open the throttles to approx. GA position while pitching to 15 degrees and calling for Flap 15. That is the priority. Then if you need FD guidance for GA (not important at that stage of the flight) then press TOGA. Blind reliance on pressing TOGA expecting the AT to give you GA power, is like crossing a road without checking all clear left and right. Not a wise move.

^^^ on that note, I like the airbus TOGA mode activation; slam em forward. does the thrust and AF mode.
not a big fan on the airbus AT system overall but that is nice

I think you have just described what happened with the Asiana 777!

Errr no, on the 777 if you hit the TOGA switches (in the same place as the 737NG) with the auto throttle arm switches in the arm position (normal) you will get GA thrust.....of course an aviator will have one hand on the thrust levers and one the yoke..just in case:ok:
The FD will pop up and give you GA guidance, but will disappear again when you select another mode....which is why...regardless of SOP's I always ensure I have my FD back on by 300 AGL on a visual approach...as it's going to help me not f@@k up the ensuing low level GA that will invariably be required when I least expect it whilst hand flying.

I've noticed in this discussion pilots tend to be ego centric and not think outside their own sphere. There is no single answer because there are so many different types of operation. As others have pointed out; aircraft types have different levels of automation, air force is different to airline, short haul is different to long haul, expat is different to legacy, Europe is different to Australia etc etc etc. The matrix is large.
At this stage of my career I've done them all and in my current operation the airlines policy of maximum use of automation suits me just fine.
New gen airliners are actually easy to fly manually, and I will postulate that when you really drill down into the causes of most recent accidents, the ability to accurately fly an IFR approach or departure was irrelevant.
I don't expect pilotless airliners for a couple of generations but the automatics are going to get progressively better. Sooner or later the insurance actuaries will have a case that the accident rate is lower if you eliminate manual flight altogrther. There will be a slight risk but it will be judged to be outweighed by the advantages.
We're not there yet but it's close...

I wonder who will tell the passenger's families that the deaths of their loved ones were as a result of the 'safest option' being not to allow the pilots to actually practise their skills and that regretfully, the automatics just weren't up to it on the day. I mean things like the QF32 engine failure NEVER happen do they. Oh, wait.... :ugh:

Let's not mention Asiana or AF447 (or the Turks)...

The Asiana accident was more to do with a lack of understanding about the auto throttle system and mode awareness, also a lack of applying the correct technique to capture the 3 degree profile from above. Using FLCH is not the Boeing FCTM recommended technique. :=

WTF did pilots do before the AT and FDs were so good? For the life of me I cannot understand all this "it's too dangerous to fly with the AP and AT off in IMC, especially anyone on an Airbus. Now, I agree not always, but ****! To me this is nothing but an indication to how low hand flying and instrument scans skills have degraded.

Yes, I know, I'll be graded as a hairy chested chest thumper, but it wasn't that long ago when I started it was expected you could handle that.

No it wasn't sleeve, they had no flying ability; they didn't have the speed in their scan because they probalby never did any handflying. Pure and simple. If you can't hand-fly, you can't truly monitor the performance of the automatics if you stuff up the settings you put in to the AFS.

Comes full circle to the idea that when the aircraft is not doing what the pilot wants, lower the level of automation. I guess that does assume correct interpretation of the instruments. The Asiana accident is shocking, once the speed deteriorated below the command airspeed bug with no reversal, that was the clue to do something. Even had they thought the AT was engaged, they could have at least used the muscle memory to click the AT disengage, then advance the thrust levers. What is more disturbing is that this happened after Turkish Airlines 1951 where they got to 83 kts. I know that this was originally about how does one find an opportunity to hand fly, but it would appear the problem is not so much the ability to hand fly, but rather the interpretation of what the instruments are telling the pilot. The AF447 pilot did not understand that had he maintained pitch, wings level and a set thrust, the airspeed, heading and altitude would have been about what he wanted (again basic instrument skills lacking). The long and the short of it all, you cannot properly hand fly an aeroplane without understanding the instruments.

Bleeding hell, what's the world coming to, when I agree with something posted by Bloggs??
Tootle pip!!

Don't worry Leddie, I'm sure it won't last long! :D :} :)

well... they crashed. So they made better AF.

and here we are... :hmm::ugh:

An interesting article in Flight International recently, commented on airbus making changes to the FD logic to cater for slow speed flight with Auto thrust off. Airbus does not recommend flying in mixed modes e.g. Auto thrust off and FDs on. The article said, in wake of numerous Alpha floor protections activating resulting from crews not monitoring speed and with the A/T off, they are thinking of changing the logic of the FDs to remove them as speed decays below a certain point, because at present they indicate higher pitch to maintain Altitude, and certain crews are merely following the FD's blindly.

'Rexy' that's interesting that Airbus are considering such a move when there is already a warning in place when the speed gets too low by way of 'Speed Speed' being screamed out, that ought to be enuf to wake up the driver/s.

Automation has it's place I mean we now live in a very automated world in pretty much everything we do, some in place as we are the laziest species on the planet these days & the other in place under the umbrella of 'safety'.
We started out with SE Bi-Planes as the main flying machines (yes I now there where multi's as well), we then progressed to Mono-planes with multiple power-plants all for safety. Modern materials, Multi crew, redundancy systems, heating, cooling, pressurization, navigation all for safety/comfort & the last area where safety is now paramount & going full steam ahead is auto-flight systems & this is where we are today.
I think understanding the Auto Flt system is more important these days due the complexity of it all.
Personally I don't enjoy manual flight anymore oh I used to but it's just a job to me now although it's not rocket science I see little point in making it harder for ones self than it need be. The cyclic Sim stuff shows area's of weakness, in flt is not the place. As has been mentioned most Co's would rather you use the highest level of automation commensurate with the stage of flight.



Wmk2

Wally -As you know SPEED SPEED SPEED only triggers at 2000ft or below plus u need to be configured.

There have been a number of incidents e.g. an a320 (Air france) recently was above profile and the PF moved the thrust levers to idle, disconnecting the A/T (He stated it was to help him get down - Useless since in open descent the thrust is already at idle), then when he levelled off (clean) the speed decayed and then he raised the attitude IAW with the FD's until ALPHA Floor activated and sent them to TOGA.

Yes am aware that it's a low Alt event but that's where it's most important anyway & what I was making ref to, when within a couple of thou to the end of yr life if steps are not taken to arrest the decaying energy of the machine.
The event as you mention above (A320 AF) purelty boils down to lack of understanding with regards to the A/T system.

Wmk2

Bit simplistic there, Maggot.

Disregarding things like GPWS, VNAV, Profiles for approaches, good approach charts, how many early-day prangs were caused purely by pilots stuffing up, for example, speed control or during Go Arounds or Takeoffs?

There are plenty or recent-day examples where pilots have pranged the aeroplane because they can't hand-fly; it is currently the biggest killer of people in aeroplanes.

There are plenty of things that have improved aviation safety over the years; I contend using the autopilot all the time isn't one of them. It's use is now obviously causing accidents because when those auto-dependent pilots are forced, for whatever reason, to handfly, they can't do it.

You can run, but you can't hide...

yes, very simplistic and probably over dramatic too. I think I replied from a phone, too hard to make too much sense :bored:

but my point is that AF was developed to help pilots and we have (a while ago?) reached a point where it hinders.

Obviously lots of things have improved since chucking some kid in a spitfire with nada time, but thats not the topic.

I would argue that the reason that pilots of the Asiana / Airfrance / Lion Air breed have crap hand flying skils is because they never had any to start with. Pilots with a few thousand hours of which 99.9% of them are on airliners using the autopilot means that they have no base to work from. I would also say that in the airliner with paying passengers is not the place to 'learn' these skills, maybe we need to rethink the training path taken by some of these pilots today.

Have you guys looked in these modern DA42 type trainers, the glass cockpit is more advanced that any airliner I have flown. Couple that with the very rigid airline SOP type training and then hundreds of hours in the a320 or 737 simulator to qualify and we are 'producing' generations of 'competent' airline pilots with next to no hand flying skills.

One of my check captains said to me recently that he doesn't feel the need to 'practice' lots of hand flying as he thinks it is a skill that once learned only required minimal practice to keep proficient. I have to say that I kind of agree. I went flying the other day in a C172 for the first time in 15 years, my first circuit was a bit rough and by the time I had done 3 they were pretty good, so 30 - 40 minutes of hands on time was all that was required after 15 years of not having flown an aircraft with a yoke or trim wheel.

Folks,
Gawd help us if that is not a windup. I can always pick who has kept their scan up by regularly hand flying, versus the A/P watchers, it really shows at license renewal time.

From a number of accidents, it is clear to me that a good old fashioned proper scan is becoming a thing of the past --- with a percentage of the current generation.

It staggers me that anybody can let a airspeed on approach get 20-30 knots below bug without noticing ---- less than 5 knots below bug should be the cue for instant action.

As to being a "bit rough" but sorted after 3 circuits, I hope you get a few practice runs before your next engine failure on takeoff ---- a rare but real event that can't be handled by A/P.

Tootle pip!!