Logging auto pilot time?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Logging auto pilot time?
After a bit of flying with a friend yesterday, and watching at Duxford, while waiting to takeoff, The Spitfire, Harvard, and Chipmunk, I was reminded of the beauty of aircraft which are "flown" by the pilot. While reminiscing at the pub last night with a fellow flier, we both agreed, that for many thousands of hours we each had, less than 50 hours total was watching the aircraft in our command while it flew on autopilot, all the rest was hand flown. We were duly satisfied with ourselves.
Then as the discussion grew to so recent crashes, we mused about pilots with many thousands of hours, most of which were watching as the autopilot flew the plane. We wondered: Should pilots be credited with flying experience hours in their log, which were autopilot flown hours?
Then as the discussion grew to so recent crashes, we mused about pilots with many thousands of hours, most of which were watching as the autopilot flew the plane. We wondered: Should pilots be credited with flying experience hours in their log, which were autopilot flown hours?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get beer and chips for the answers, this maybe will be a long thread. Now, come on, you traditionalists, modernists, philosopher, airliner and bush pilots, start the chickenbattle ;-).
On reflection of the latest biannual experiences and the training status of now 12-20 almost-all-A/P-hours former students, I vote for "No", at least all PPL(A) qualifying hours should be flown by hand.
On reflection of the latest biannual experiences and the training status of now 12-20 almost-all-A/P-hours former students, I vote for "No", at least all PPL(A) qualifying hours should be flown by hand.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was one, let me call him 'A Ferry Pilot', that would set his alarm clock to wake him in 4 hours whilst the auto-pilot got on with the flying of the long distance route.
So its... George = P1 Self = P2.
So its... George = P1 Self = P2.
ST,
You have raised an interesting question. I shall be interested in the responses.
Thinking about the 40+ types I have flown, I only remember autopilots in three of them, only one of which I used. That was in a Cirrus, which I flew specifically to see how the electronic systems worked.
A long time ago, I obtained an IR in a non-autopilot-equipped aircraft and I felt at the time that if I ever did any serious IMC trips, an autopilot would be nice.
Having said that, I agree with you that hand-flying any aircraft, but in particular a nice one, for example a Chipmunk, is very satisfying.
You have raised an interesting question. I shall be interested in the responses.
Thinking about the 40+ types I have flown, I only remember autopilots in three of them, only one of which I used. That was in a Cirrus, which I flew specifically to see how the electronic systems worked.
A long time ago, I obtained an IR in a non-autopilot-equipped aircraft and I felt at the time that if I ever did any serious IMC trips, an autopilot would be nice.
Having said that, I agree with you that hand-flying any aircraft, but in particular a nice one, for example a Chipmunk, is very satisfying.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Logged hours as a pure number are IMHO totally irrelevant, it is down to the person looking at the logbook to decide how relevant the hours are for whatever purpose it it being looked at, if someone was to look at mine in relation to a job flying a dH Rapide then there would be about 18,000 hours on big jets that had little or no bearing on it and a couple thousand that were relevant, being on Tailwheel and light twins. If I were after a job with a big Airline the numbers would be the other way round.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are logging the hours as PILOT in command not autopilot in command 
Maybe the autopilot or George should have its own log book and be programmed to keep it
Fact is there are many automated systems or pilot aids which make up a modern aircraft and the Pilot in command is in charge of operating and flying the aircraft which will also include constant monitoring of the systems autopilot included. ready to take over at will if anything is not doing its job properly!
I have flown a number of older Citations and a few have had suspect autopilot behaviour, pitching on altitude capture etc.
workarounds include disconnecting manually levelling and reconnecting to stop the PAX having a boat ride as the aircraft pitched up and down.
So as in life trust nothing including the autopilot. The danger is relying on these systems for lack of piloting skills and more and more accidents are due to lack of piloting skills and reliance on pilot aids to cover up those lack of skills.
so all these systems autopilot included should be there to take the work load off pilots not to substitute for poor pilots flying out of their ability zones
Pace
Maybe the autopilot or George should have its own log book and be programmed to keep it
Fact is there are many automated systems or pilot aids which make up a modern aircraft and the Pilot in command is in charge of operating and flying the aircraft which will also include constant monitoring of the systems autopilot included. ready to take over at will if anything is not doing its job properly!
I have flown a number of older Citations and a few have had suspect autopilot behaviour, pitching on altitude capture etc.
workarounds include disconnecting manually levelling and reconnecting to stop the PAX having a boat ride as the aircraft pitched up and down.
So as in life trust nothing including the autopilot. The danger is relying on these systems for lack of piloting skills and more and more accidents are due to lack of piloting skills and reliance on pilot aids to cover up those lack of skills.
so all these systems autopilot included should be there to take the work load off pilots not to substitute for poor pilots flying out of their ability zones
Pace
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: london
Age: 60
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace, you are dead right there. Whilst my autopilot experiences are humbler than yours, I think one ought to be able to log double time with some autopilots, as you have to keep an eye on the autopilot and its limitations as well as everything else. A KAP140 is the devils own work, and I have had one put me in a spiral as well as set off 180 deg off course in nav mode, to say nothing of having to pay attention to the limitations, not setting too high a vertical speed at altitude for fear of stalling etc.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Many autopilots are like naughty co-pilots. You have to watch the bu&&ers or they'll catch you out when you're least expecting it. But that's what we get paid a bit extra for.
Those in the know accept that there are big differences between aircraft types and roles, some have the "benefit" of long periods on autopilot and some don't. As a mere helicopter pilot I have a relatively low number of hours compared to airline pilots of my age/experience, which used to bother me somewhat, but now it doesn't at all. To put it in perspective, some twenty years ago I was asked to fly a long haul airline pilot in my spare front seat. After we had done what was then a typical hour and three quarter sortie, with nineteen short sectors to small HLSs, he commented that I had flown the equivalent of about six months of takeoffs and landings in his job. He said my workload seemed almost unbelieveable. It wasn't, it was just different to what he was used to.
I was later repaid the privilege (jump seat for most of LHR-HKG) by an old RAF colleague who now flew B747s instead of F-4s. I was bored after a couple of hours in the cruise and we still had nine hours to go! I commented and my friend told me he found the job terribly mundane compared to his military flying. I realised at that point that airline flying really wasn't for me and although I had recently gained a commercial licence for fixed wing, I decided I wouldn't be needing it much. In fact, I've never used it after almost twenty five years and no longer bother to keep it current.
Those in the know accept that there are big differences between aircraft types and roles, some have the "benefit" of long periods on autopilot and some don't. As a mere helicopter pilot I have a relatively low number of hours compared to airline pilots of my age/experience, which used to bother me somewhat, but now it doesn't at all. To put it in perspective, some twenty years ago I was asked to fly a long haul airline pilot in my spare front seat. After we had done what was then a typical hour and three quarter sortie, with nineteen short sectors to small HLSs, he commented that I had flown the equivalent of about six months of takeoffs and landings in his job. He said my workload seemed almost unbelieveable. It wasn't, it was just different to what he was used to.
I was later repaid the privilege (jump seat for most of LHR-HKG) by an old RAF colleague who now flew B747s instead of F-4s. I was bored after a couple of hours in the cruise and we still had nine hours to go! I commented and my friend told me he found the job terribly mundane compared to his military flying. I realised at that point that airline flying really wasn't for me and although I had recently gained a commercial licence for fixed wing, I decided I wouldn't be needing it much. In fact, I've never used it after almost twenty five years and no longer bother to keep it current.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
ST- If that LHR-HKG was into Kai Tak then the hand flown IGS onto 13 would have got your attention.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not setting too high a vertical speed at altitude for fear of stalling etc.
Never use VS for climbing especially high altitude! either use IAS mode if you have it or manually trim the climb with the autopilot trim wheel or the main trim wheel
manually trimming at least it focuses your attention when you are trying to coax more climb.
VS can be a killer and a number of accidents have occurred with a distracted pilot in VS and the stall that occurs
Use vertical speed for descent only
Not really directed at you as I don't think you meant that but a point worth noting
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 28th Feb 2015 at 18:45.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
VS can be a killer and a number of accidents have occurred with a distracted pilot in VS and the stall that occurs
VS CAN BE a killer ONLY when the "pilot" doesn't monitor the airspeed and adjust pitch with the selected VS rate to maintain speed appropriately. Other modes CAN get you in trouble too!
In some airplane/autopilot combinations (Westwind, Hawker and Lear in my experience) VS is the only vertical mode other than pitch hold that doesn't have a tendency to "hunt" all over the sky and feel like a rowboat riding the waves at times. This includes some of the digital/glass types too. Don't let the so-called "airspeed protection" of FLCH, FLC, IAS or mach hold modes tempt you to look away for too long! The more complex the mode, the more variables there are to catch you out.
They installed the ASI there on the panel for a reason. Whatever vertical mode chosen, airspeed is a RESULT and must be monitored at all times. I realize some pilots may be indoctrinated to, or have personal experiences which make them more comfortable in other modes, but VS mode bears no more responsibility for pilots failing to monitor their performance continuously than any other F/D mode. I don't believe it's wise to trust ANY F/D mode enough to justify inattention. With vertical and A/T modes like Vflch minding the store, modern history seems to have shown that pilots are even more likely to mentally "check out" of the control loop when relying on "protection" modes. VS or any other mode is only as "safe" as the pilot's oversight of it's performance.
I haven't seen this aspect of airplane operation argued about for quite some time now so thanks for the opportunity!
westhawk
In some airplane/autopilot combinations (Westwind, Hawker and Lear in my experience) VS is the only vertical mode other than pitch hold that doesn't have a tendency to "hunt" all over the sky and feel like a rowboat riding the waves at times. This includes some of the digital/glass types too. Don't let the so-called "airspeed protection" of FLCH, FLC, IAS or mach hold modes tempt you to look away for too long! The more complex the mode, the more variables there are to catch you out.
They installed the ASI there on the panel for a reason. Whatever vertical mode chosen, airspeed is a RESULT and must be monitored at all times. I realize some pilots may be indoctrinated to, or have personal experiences which make them more comfortable in other modes, but VS mode bears no more responsibility for pilots failing to monitor their performance continuously than any other F/D mode. I don't believe it's wise to trust ANY F/D mode enough to justify inattention. With vertical and A/T modes like Vflch minding the store, modern history seems to have shown that pilots are even more likely to mentally "check out" of the control loop when relying on "protection" modes. VS or any other mode is only as "safe" as the pilot's oversight of it's performance.
I haven't seen this aspect of airplane operation argued about for quite some time now so thanks for the opportunity!
westhawk
Why TF would anyone write software that decided that the best thing to do with an impossible command was to stall the aircraft??
They don't. At least not with respect to VS mode. Get kinda slow? You bet, if nobody is minding the store. As for older analogue systems that don't use "software" it's possible. Provided nobody is minding the store...
westhawk
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VS CAN BE a killer ONLY when the "pilot" doesn't monitor the airspeed and adjust pitch with the selected VS rate to maintain speed appropriately.
Logged hours as a pure number are IMHO totally irrelevant, it is down to the person looking at the logbook to decide how relevant the hours are for whatever purpose it it being looked at
Aside from testing the autopilot in the 182 amphibian last summer, as a part of acceptance test flying, I have been a hands and feet pilot only for the last 25 years. Unfortunately, I can imagine how George watcher pilots can forget to, and worse, how to, fly a plane.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WestHawk
The Single Pilot incident in a CJ with an emergency landing at Leeds and a structurally damaged aircraft which thankfully landed safely was caused by pilot distraction and the aircraft being in VS mode at high altitude.
The Aircraft stalled and lost a lot of altitude before being recovered
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...CR%2001-15.pdf
WestHawk I realise this incident was over 40K in thin air where the margin between IAS and stall is small a point where the pilot should have had full concentration on the panel not wind charts! Never the less there have been similar incidents in piston aircraft lower down.
I never understood why with Doncaster near by with a major Cessna service centre and a huge runway he went back into Leeds with its notorious winds turbulence low cloud etc
Had he had a speed defined mode selected this would not have happened?
whatever it points to the fact that never take an autopilot for granted or a mode selected for granted its a pilot assist not a pilot replace and ignore it at your peril )))
There have been a spate of accidents with advanced technology of pilot assists including autopilots where pilots have relied on these systems to fly in conditions where their abilities do not match the equipment and technology available in the aircraft.
Pace
The Single Pilot incident in a CJ with an emergency landing at Leeds and a structurally damaged aircraft which thankfully landed safely was caused by pilot distraction and the aircraft being in VS mode at high altitude.
The Aircraft stalled and lost a lot of altitude before being recovered
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...CR%2001-15.pdf
WestHawk I realise this incident was over 40K in thin air where the margin between IAS and stall is small a point where the pilot should have had full concentration on the panel not wind charts! Never the less there have been similar incidents in piston aircraft lower down.
I never understood why with Doncaster near by with a major Cessna service centre and a huge runway he went back into Leeds with its notorious winds turbulence low cloud etc
Had he had a speed defined mode selected this would not have happened?
whatever it points to the fact that never take an autopilot for granted or a mode selected for granted its a pilot assist not a pilot replace and ignore it at your peril )))
There have been a spate of accidents with advanced technology of pilot assists including autopilots where pilots have relied on these systems to fly in conditions where their abilities do not match the equipment and technology available in the aircraft.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 1st Mar 2015 at 09:02.
Why TF would anyone write software that decided that the best thing to do with an impossible command was to stall the aircraft?? - I'm sure I'd have been sacked if I'd ever done anything like that.
Climbing in VS with an autopilot with no reversion mode is a potential threat especially at higher levels when the performance is running out of steam.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pilot had previously noticed his aircraft “hunting” in pitch in FLC mode and had therefore decided to operate in VS mode during the climb. Whilst the use of VS mode in the climb is not prohibited by the AFM, it exposed the aircraft to the risk of entering a low-energy state during the climb. Without greater systems knowledge the pilot was unaware of the additional risks involved in the use of VS mode. Therefore he was unable to make an informed decision regarding this autoflight mode.
The autopilot will, in this mode, prioritise maintaining vertical speed over airspeed and pilot vigilance and intervention is required to avoid a low-speed condition. As the aircraft was operating at the edge of its climb performance envelope there was insufficient thrust to follow the selected climb profile. Over a period of 50 seconds up to the departure from controlled flight, the airspeed steadily decayed, by 10 kt.
The autopilot will, in this mode, prioritise maintaining vertical speed over airspeed and pilot vigilance and intervention is required to avoid a low-speed condition. As the aircraft was operating at the edge of its climb performance envelope there was insufficient thrust to follow the selected climb profile. Over a period of 50 seconds up to the departure from controlled flight, the airspeed steadily decayed, by 10 kt.
IAS mode will protect the aircraft. Down side is that the aircraft will hunt the speed again causing a pitching which is not great for the PAX so again MENTALLY manually fly which will at least mentally make you aware that you are controlling the climb rate rather than going to sleep thinking George has it in hand with VS use the trim or autopilot trim )))
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 1st Mar 2015 at 15:21.