Hand Flying vs Automatics ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 60
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand Flying vs Automatics ?
I note that there has been a lot of discussion recently about hand flying vs automatic, especially reference the TK accident.
Found the following youtube video while linking from this site related to another post.
Would the professional proponents of either side of the argument like to offer an opinion on the pro's and con's of this approach and what he/she may have been up to at the time.
The computer with a voice doesn't seem to like it very much ............
Found the following youtube video while linking from this site related to another post.
Would the professional proponents of either side of the argument like to offer an opinion on the pro's and con's of this approach and what he/she may have been up to at the time.
The computer with a voice doesn't seem to like it very much ............
That particular landing is in Corfu if I am not mistaken. (LGKR) The landing looks pretty cool.....However IMHO that guy was taking unnecessary risks. Not stabilized at 500'. pull up pull up etc.
All valid reasons to go-around. He is busting all the safety barriers by flying like that.
All valid reasons to go-around. He is busting all the safety barriers by flying like that.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well - there are good and bad hand flown approaches as there are good and bad Auto-pilot approaches.
Most of the professional pilots here who recommend the occasional hand flown approach would certainly NOT recommend doing this !
Most of the professional pilots here who recommend the occasional hand flown approach would certainly NOT recommend doing this !
oww come on!
there is more than enough information in that clip!
-more than 30 degrees of bank was applied, (bank angle bank angle)
-the sink rate was exessive (pull up pull up)
-When the wings are finally more or less level, it takes only 15 seconds to touchdown
-during those 15 seconds, sinkrate warnings go off so the sinkrate is at least 1200fpm.
-15 seconds at 1200fpm is 1200/4=300 feet when he rolls his wings level. And that after a tight turn at more than 30 degrees of bank!
-there is a large trim input on short short final, you can hear the trimwheel whizzing like crazy
OK that is the info in this little movie. What a show-off pilot he must be!
there is more than enough information in that clip!
-more than 30 degrees of bank was applied, (bank angle bank angle)
-the sink rate was exessive (pull up pull up)
-When the wings are finally more or less level, it takes only 15 seconds to touchdown
-during those 15 seconds, sinkrate warnings go off so the sinkrate is at least 1200fpm.
-15 seconds at 1200fpm is 1200/4=300 feet when he rolls his wings level. And that after a tight turn at more than 30 degrees of bank!
-there is a large trim input on short short final, you can hear the trimwheel whizzing like crazy
OK that is the info in this little movie. What a show-off pilot he must be!
The Auto callout/ EGWPS were perhaps being a pissy, a severe clear VFR approach no need for IFR parameters... I know sack him
---- he was just 'jiggering' it a little on the base turn, but he remained within the distance and obviously made the corrections and his bank angle was not actually dangerous,.. so like SNS3Guppy said!!!
---- he was just 'jiggering' it a little on the base turn, but he remained within the distance and obviously made the corrections and his bank angle was not actually dangerous,.. so like SNS3Guppy said!!!
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't 'look' out of order to me. It does sound 'out of order'! It sounds to me like the 'extras' have been added- the sound doesn't seem right and the background sound appears to change when the alerts are going off. I think it is probably fake- with 'enhanced sound effects', posted here for outrage!
You will not convince me that those sound effects happened then! The advent of the digital imaging age meant you could no longer believe any photograph. The 'youtube' age means you can't trust any video now! Don't swallow everything you see blindly!
You will not convince me that those sound effects happened then! The advent of the digital imaging age meant you could no longer believe any photograph. The 'youtube' age means you can't trust any video now! Don't swallow everything you see blindly!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 60
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rainboe,
Judging by the youtube title it certainly wasn't posted there in outrage, more like in awe !
I also didn't post it here in outrage, more for an opinion, happy to hand fly that type of approach in my Crusader, just wondered if it was advocated for the professionals flying heavier tin. Also have in the back of the mind a question about whether this might be a "customer friendly" manoeuvre if the aircraft was full of pax, or might it have been empty on a positioning flight ?
Your feedback on the sound is appreciated, but I can't see a clear motive for adding it, but OK, assume it was, how do you professionals feel about the visuals either with or without pax, especially given recent discussions on the subject.
Regarding the earlier comment that this was Corfu, we had an Air Slovakia 737 parked outside our hangar the summer before last with fist sized holes in the tail end of the fuselage from over flaring a hot arrival in Corfu, which the crew chose to ignore and flew the aircraft, full of pax, back to Stefanik rather than admit that they screwed up, writing up the accident as happening on arrival at Stefanik. Unfortunately for them there were too many witnesses in Corfu to get away with it.
Thanks
Rmac
Judging by the youtube title it certainly wasn't posted there in outrage, more like in awe !
I also didn't post it here in outrage, more for an opinion, happy to hand fly that type of approach in my Crusader, just wondered if it was advocated for the professionals flying heavier tin. Also have in the back of the mind a question about whether this might be a "customer friendly" manoeuvre if the aircraft was full of pax, or might it have been empty on a positioning flight ?
Your feedback on the sound is appreciated, but I can't see a clear motive for adding it, but OK, assume it was, how do you professionals feel about the visuals either with or without pax, especially given recent discussions on the subject.
Regarding the earlier comment that this was Corfu, we had an Air Slovakia 737 parked outside our hangar the summer before last with fist sized holes in the tail end of the fuselage from over flaring a hot arrival in Corfu, which the crew chose to ignore and flew the aircraft, full of pax, back to Stefanik rather than admit that they screwed up, writing up the accident as happening on arrival at Stefanik. Unfortunately for them there were too many witnesses in Corfu to get away with it.
Thanks
Rmac
Rainboe,
I agree the sounds "seem" to be added.
Regarding the approach the time from wings level to touchdown is 15 secs which suggests from they had approx 30 degrees bank on at roughly 200ft, an unstable approach in most companies nowadays.
I agree the sounds "seem" to be added.
Regarding the approach the time from wings level to touchdown is 15 secs which suggests from they had approx 30 degrees bank on at roughly 200ft, an unstable approach in most companies nowadays.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This looks to me like Corfu. You still cannot see the runway at about 700' and a tight turn onto final at low altitude is required. I have watched that video several times. I have to say .......it looks normal to me. The runway aspect (when it is visible) does not change, despite alleged 'sink rate warnings'. Don't rely on the top of the window frame to assess bank angle- it slopes back sharply. I'm sorry, I think it was a normal bank angle, normal roll out onto final, normal flare and landing. I can tell when it's out of order- I'ver been flying 737s for 10 years. That looks right.
I ask you- listen when the alleged warnings are going off- the background air noise decreases to less than half when the warnings have been added, then comes on strong again.
You've been 'you tubed' by some mindless idiot with movie editing software and a sound file of cockpit warnings. It's nonsense. Flight recorders record this stuff- do you really think pilots allowed to fly in European airspace would ignore warnings like that? Why do you think they are apparently so unconcerned? Because they can't hear the warnings- they are not there- added later!
I ask you- listen when the alleged warnings are going off- the background air noise decreases to less than half when the warnings have been added, then comes on strong again.
You've been 'you tubed' by some mindless idiot with movie editing software and a sound file of cockpit warnings. It's nonsense. Flight recorders record this stuff- do you really think pilots allowed to fly in European airspace would ignore warnings like that? Why do you think they are apparently so unconcerned? Because they can't hear the warnings- they are not there- added later!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cambridge
Age: 35
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion, there was nothing wrong with that approach whatsoever, sounds real, fake or whatever.
No risks were taken (unless you live in Tellytubby land), and so what if there was more than 30 degrees of bank? That's what was required to get the aeroplane in, and it was all done safely.
Was anybody hurt or killed? Was the aeroplane damaged? No.
Blimey, some people really are reliant on the autopilot aren't they...
This is why it's best to recruit pilots who can actually fly the aeroplane, and spend less time working out when they could describe a time they effectively... etc
Just my opinion, for what it's worth.
No risks were taken (unless you live in Tellytubby land), and so what if there was more than 30 degrees of bank? That's what was required to get the aeroplane in, and it was all done safely.
Was anybody hurt or killed? Was the aeroplane damaged? No.
Blimey, some people really are reliant on the autopilot aren't they...
This is why it's best to recruit pilots who can actually fly the aeroplane, and spend less time working out when they could describe a time they effectively... etc
Just my opinion, for what it's worth.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cambridge
Age: 35
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rmac,
I appreciate that, and understand my words are somewhat contrary to those more experienced than myself.
I've never had a real scare at work, that is, flying the bigger aeroplanes.
I've had a couple in general aviation, but ultimately, I see what you're getting at, and I am very much a member of the club that understands the inherant dangers in aviation if disrespected.
My view on the above video is that it is, as far as aeroplanes go, fairly docile. I would consider it dangerous if the nose was pointing high above the horizon during that turn with a noticable sideslip, now that would start ringing alarm bells. But it appeared (from what I could see on the video) well coordinated.
As an aviator, I am sure you will appreciate the following comment - in flying, going by numbers is great, but there is also that 'seat of the pants' feeling, and I have a little rule... if it feels as though you are flying along rails, and the numbers agree, then it's safe. Contrary to that, the numbers can be perfect, and yet if things feel 'sloppy', that is a good first indication that something is wrong. For example, flying through a microburst, the instruments may take a second or so to register, but you can immediate feel that something is not quite right, and you react accordingly. Of course this only applies when VMC, and I'd certainly classify that video as reckless if performed under IMC.
I think that is what makes a good pilot. I suppose you could also rewrite that as, feeling at one with the aeroplane?
And watching that video, I didn't get that feeling.
I appreciate that, and understand my words are somewhat contrary to those more experienced than myself.
I've never had a real scare at work, that is, flying the bigger aeroplanes.
I've had a couple in general aviation, but ultimately, I see what you're getting at, and I am very much a member of the club that understands the inherant dangers in aviation if disrespected.
My view on the above video is that it is, as far as aeroplanes go, fairly docile. I would consider it dangerous if the nose was pointing high above the horizon during that turn with a noticable sideslip, now that would start ringing alarm bells. But it appeared (from what I could see on the video) well coordinated.
As an aviator, I am sure you will appreciate the following comment - in flying, going by numbers is great, but there is also that 'seat of the pants' feeling, and I have a little rule... if it feels as though you are flying along rails, and the numbers agree, then it's safe. Contrary to that, the numbers can be perfect, and yet if things feel 'sloppy', that is a good first indication that something is wrong. For example, flying through a microburst, the instruments may take a second or so to register, but you can immediate feel that something is not quite right, and you react accordingly. Of course this only applies when VMC, and I'd certainly classify that video as reckless if performed under IMC.
I think that is what makes a good pilot. I suppose you could also rewrite that as, feeling at one with the aeroplane?
And watching that video, I didn't get that feeling.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the same as Rainboe.
Also, to my eyes, the approach appeared to be very much in control during the duration of that short clip.
Also, to my eyes, the approach appeared to be very much in control during the duration of that short clip.
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To answer the question, learn to fly your jet manually under all conditions, then and only then should you learn to let the airplane fly you...
Metrosexual
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't 'look' out of order to me. It does sound 'out of order'! It sounds to me like the 'extras' have been added- the sound doesn't seem right and the background sound appears to change when the alerts are going off. I think it is probably fake- with 'enhanced sound effects', posted here for outrage!
As to the approach.... severe clear VMC - each to his own, I suppose. If you get away with that many bank angle and EGPWS alerts that late in the circuit often enough, I suppose the risk is diminished.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I don't think it is real. I think the sound effects have been added later and the program reduced the total sound when the effects went on which explains why the ambient noise went down and up each time. Despite pull ups, i saw absolutely no pitch changes that would result in such an approach. bank does not look excessive bearing in mind the window you are looking out of. There is no apparent reponse in the cockpit to the alleged calls, and the runway picture looks normal at all times. It's fake fake fake. These idiots are doing this sort of stuff all the time.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 39
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a non-flyer I will not comment on the approach itself.
With reference to what Rainboe is saying about the change in background volume with the alerts being sounded, some digital camera microphones seem only to pick up the clearest sound. So when the voice alert is occuring which I assume is quite loud, the microphone will pick this up clearly at the 'expense' of reducing the slipstream noise.
As the voice alerts stop, the microphone becomes more sensitive to the ambient noise levels and the clarity of the slipstream noise becomes more apparent. (Jet A Knight I didn't see your post before but this is what I mean)
In Rainboe's defence however, I have found a clip, again on youtube, that is a perfectly normal approach with some added sound effects to mislead the audience... so it does happen...
YouTube - Landing with upset airplane
With reference to what Rainboe is saying about the change in background volume with the alerts being sounded, some digital camera microphones seem only to pick up the clearest sound. So when the voice alert is occuring which I assume is quite loud, the microphone will pick this up clearly at the 'expense' of reducing the slipstream noise.
As the voice alerts stop, the microphone becomes more sensitive to the ambient noise levels and the clarity of the slipstream noise becomes more apparent. (Jet A Knight I didn't see your post before but this is what I mean)
In Rainboe's defence however, I have found a clip, again on youtube, that is a perfectly normal approach with some added sound effects to mislead the audience... so it does happen...
YouTube - Landing with upset airplane
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: France
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your feedback on the sound is appreciated, but I can't see a clear motive for adding it
1. To make it more exciting (this is YouTube!)
2. To replace a non-existent or unusable audio recording.
In video production it is normal practice to embellish sounds -- all the footsteps and lock clicks you hear in movies are added leter.