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!!