How to re-invent the wheel.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How to re-invent the wheel.
I noticed this little gem in a recent Flight International mag (22-28 Jan 2013) in an article, at page 12, by David Learmont, entitled "Future A350 pilots to 'learn by doing':
"Airbus has made a science of studying the skills needed specifically to fly the world's highly automated aircraft, and came up with more than 300 essentials, says Captain David Owens, head of flight crew training policy.
It has boiled these down to three 'golden rules': Fly, Navigate and Communicate.
Wow! I am dumbfounded at the demonstrable level of scientific expertise employed by Airbus! Surely no ordinary mortals could come up with so profound a distilation of research!
I bet they spent millions re-inventing that phrase most of us were taught from day one: "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate" and to think that a student can actually "learn by doing". Double wow!!
Keep up the excellent work Airbus. The training industry values your input.
"Airbus has made a science of studying the skills needed specifically to fly the world's highly automated aircraft, and came up with more than 300 essentials, says Captain David Owens, head of flight crew training policy.
It has boiled these down to three 'golden rules': Fly, Navigate and Communicate.
Wow! I am dumbfounded at the demonstrable level of scientific expertise employed by Airbus! Surely no ordinary mortals could come up with so profound a distilation of research!
I bet they spent millions re-inventing that phrase most of us were taught from day one: "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate" and to think that a student can actually "learn by doing". Double wow!!
Keep up the excellent work Airbus. The training industry values your input.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Learn by doing could = employ pilots who have 'done' before. Oh hang on, no it couldn't mean that word 'experience,' we don't need that anymore...
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, just wow. I am not sure if there is any way you could have taken this more out of context than you have. Congratulations, Sir!
A blog post by the same author, on the same subject, which is about modernising training to better suit highly automated airliners:
Learning to fly the A350XWB at Toulouse - Learmount
A blog post by the same author, on the same subject, which is about modernising training to better suit highly automated airliners:
Learning to fly the A350XWB at Toulouse - Learmount
Last edited by baswell; 3rd Mar 2013 at 23:55.
Grandpa Aerotart
Baswell from your link
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate has been drummed into pilots since they first bolted a radio into an airframe.
The above has been the mantra at Boeing for decades. To suggest, as the quotes suggest, that Airbus has made some earth shattering discovery in pilot training just proves what pilots have been saying about Airbus Industry for YEARS...they just don't get man machine interface.
Boeing interviews scores of airline pilots, from Chief Pilots down to junior FOs when they design a new cockpit. 10-15 years ago an engineer at AI was asked if they talk to pilots - the answer was an incredulous "no we don't talk to pilots".
That's why Boeings are utterly intuitive to fly from minute one and Airbus are not. One is a pilots machine and the other an engineers.
1. 1. Fly, navigate and communicate (in this order and with appropriate task-sharing)
2. 2. Use the appropriate level of automation at all times
3. 3. Understand the flight mode annunciator at all times
4. 4. Take action if things do not go as expected
If you were flying a 707 you'd just have the first one. That sounds simple, but would you honestly opt to go back there?
The message is: feel at home with your aeroplane as a manual flying machine. The automation is good, so use it, but watch it, and if you don't like what you see, trip it out.
It's about time somebody not only said it, but started training people to do it.
The first to benefit will be the first A350 pilots who start training very soon. But gradually Airbus will adopt this training philosophy across all its types.
2. 2. Use the appropriate level of automation at all times
3. 3. Understand the flight mode annunciator at all times
4. 4. Take action if things do not go as expected
If you were flying a 707 you'd just have the first one. That sounds simple, but would you honestly opt to go back there?
The message is: feel at home with your aeroplane as a manual flying machine. The automation is good, so use it, but watch it, and if you don't like what you see, trip it out.
It's about time somebody not only said it, but started training people to do it.
The first to benefit will be the first A350 pilots who start training very soon. But gradually Airbus will adopt this training philosophy across all its types.
The above has been the mantra at Boeing for decades. To suggest, as the quotes suggest, that Airbus has made some earth shattering discovery in pilot training just proves what pilots have been saying about Airbus Industry for YEARS...they just don't get man machine interface.
Boeing interviews scores of airline pilots, from Chief Pilots down to junior FOs when they design a new cockpit. 10-15 years ago an engineer at AI was asked if they talk to pilots - the answer was an incredulous "no we don't talk to pilots".
That's why Boeings are utterly intuitive to fly from minute one and Airbus are not. One is a pilots machine and the other an engineers.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 4th Mar 2013 at 05:45.
Many hours on a bus chuck?
the Don
the Don
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ehrm, you really think the entire Airbus training program is just those four points?
For a company that "just don't get man machine interface", they make some aircraft with an excellent safety record and a community of pilots that loves to fly them!
Typical: take something out of context and use it to bash the brand you have some irrational aversion against, because it does things different.
For a company that "just don't get man machine interface", they make some aircraft with an excellent safety record and a community of pilots that loves to fly them!
Typical: take something out of context and use it to bash the brand you have some irrational aversion against, because it does things different.
I thought I smelt the bottom breath with your words, that would explain why. I have a few thousands of hours each on de Havilland, Lockheed, Boeing and Bus. They all seem to work ok.
The Don
The Don
ANCPER,
I can play that game too. But am wondering why we have to. 2500hrs 777, 8000ish 330/340, 800ish 380, 6500ish on others. They all seem to work a treat. ECAM is pretty good, and better than the 777 EICAS. Dunno how it works on the mini bus. Autopilot flying the TCAS and brake to vacate on the 380 are nice. All of them had have some great points.
Wats that saying about tradesmen and tools?
the Don.
I can play that game too. But am wondering why we have to. 2500hrs 777, 8000ish 330/340, 800ish 380, 6500ish on others. They all seem to work a treat. ECAM is pretty good, and better than the 777 EICAS. Dunno how it works on the mini bus. Autopilot flying the TCAS and brake to vacate on the 380 are nice. All of them had have some great points.
Wats that saying about tradesmen and tools?
the Don.
You mean the things ECAM sorts out haughtney? Honestly, people with no idea talking about things they know nothing about. There are ****e things with 330/340 but that ain't one of them.
Why is it that Boeing pilots are always Airbus experts?
The Don
Why is it that Boeing pilots are always Airbus experts?
The Don
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
You mean the things ECAM sorts out haughtney? Honestly, people with no idea talking about things they know nothing about. There are ****e things with 330/340 but that ain't one of them.
Why is it that Boeing pilots are always Airbus experts?
The Don
Why is it that Boeing pilots are always Airbus experts?
The Don
and this is PPrune, so I'm as qualified as the next flight sim fan.
Last edited by haughtney1; 4th Mar 2013 at 14:57.
See Haughtney we can agree some things then . Also explains why your fingers smell funny. Too much time in the UK mate, soap will work!
The Don
. Also explains why your fingers smell funny. Too much time in the UK mate, soap will work!The Don
Last edited by donpizmeov; 4th Mar 2013 at 15:03. Reason: cant feckin spell.
Grandpa Aerotart
On AF447 one pilot had his side stick ALL THE WAY AFT holding the aircraft in a stall from FL370 until impact, or at least until it was too late to avoid impact, and the other pilot not 1 meter away had no idea. Neither did the captain when he regained the flight deck until said pilot TOLD HIM and the captain realised they were stalled!
That's some pretty awesome man machine interface right there
You have to push a button to get side stick authority...and then you can lose it again in a heart beat.
Thrust levers don't move.
I stand by my comment. It's an engineers aircraft.
The 777 is every bit as automated and fly by wire is an Airbus but it remains intuitive. Control columns move, thrust levers move. AF 447 could NEVER HAPPEN in a Boeing.
Two comments from mates who have been A320/330, A330/340 captains, respectively, for over a decade each.
1/. Airbus' de skill pilots
2/. When everything is working the 340 is fine. When things start to break I wish I was in a Boeing.
Or a highly experienced Airbus C&Ter mate of mine - fill him full of red wine and ask him what he REALLY thinks about Airbus - it's fricking hilarious
As for Airbus having some sort of (AF447 motivated I bet) come to Jesus moment about pilot skills and training?
Not before time
That's some pretty awesome man machine interface right there
You have to push a button to get side stick authority...and then you can lose it again in a heart beat.
Thrust levers don't move.
I stand by my comment. It's an engineers aircraft.
The 777 is every bit as automated and fly by wire is an Airbus but it remains intuitive. Control columns move, thrust levers move. AF 447 could NEVER HAPPEN in a Boeing.
Two comments from mates who have been A320/330, A330/340 captains, respectively, for over a decade each.
1/. Airbus' de skill pilots
2/. When everything is working the 340 is fine. When things start to break I wish I was in a Boeing.
Or a highly experienced Airbus C&Ter mate of mine - fill him full of red wine and ask him what he REALLY thinks about Airbus - it's fricking hilarious
As for Airbus having some sort of (AF447 motivated I bet) come to Jesus moment about pilot skills and training?
Not before time
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 4th Mar 2013 at 21:03.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Control columns move, thrust levers move. AF 447 could NEVER HAPPEN in a 777.
Maybe AF447 wouldn't have happened the way it did, but there are plenty of other niche scenarios where Airbus would fair better.
You win some, you lose some and at the end of the day, there is no statistically significant difference in accident rates.
Just because YOU are afraid of it, doesn't mean they are actually less safe...
(On the contrary, the 737-300/400 was introduced around the same time of the A320 and Boeing didn't catch up with safety record until the much more automated 738/9.)
It's somewhat amusing to read threads like this. It's a bit like the Ford V Holden rivalry that used to flourish at the Bathurst 500 races.
At the end of the day flying an aircraft of any denomination is just a skill, no more no less. Side stick controllers have been around well before Airbus was invented, Tiger Moth comes to kind (although not 'sidestick') but still a stick working in the same sense. I think the traditional control column stems from some original control methods that had a steering wheel attached legacy of the automobile. Both types do the task.
Mankind has tried to remove the inherent nature of man being unable to control a plane in unusual situation but in doing so has in fact made a rod for his own back in some ways.
The basics of flight has not changed since those guys stood on Kill Devil Hills all those years ago,(with a 'stick' controller I might add) what's changed has been man himself in his way of thinking that they can produce a better mouse trap, but at times not for the better it seems!:-)
Humans have been crashing planes since day one & will continue to do so, it's a fact of life no matter how many safety features are designed into a plane.
Simple answer to reduce the above, know yr machine under adverse conditions not when the suns out & it's all working swimminlgy:-)
Wmk2
At the end of the day flying an aircraft of any denomination is just a skill, no more no less. Side stick controllers have been around well before Airbus was invented, Tiger Moth comes to kind (although not 'sidestick') but still a stick working in the same sense. I think the traditional control column stems from some original control methods that had a steering wheel attached legacy of the automobile. Both types do the task.
Mankind has tried to remove the inherent nature of man being unable to control a plane in unusual situation but in doing so has in fact made a rod for his own back in some ways.
The basics of flight has not changed since those guys stood on Kill Devil Hills all those years ago,(with a 'stick' controller I might add) what's changed has been man himself in his way of thinking that they can produce a better mouse trap, but at times not for the better it seems!:-)
Humans have been crashing planes since day one & will continue to do so, it's a fact of life no matter how many safety features are designed into a plane.
Simple answer to reduce the above, know yr machine under adverse conditions not when the suns out & it's all working swimminlgy:-)
Wmk2
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what's changed has been man himself in his way of thinking that they can produce a better mouse trap, but at times not for the better it seems!:-)
The mouse traps keep getting better and better!