Could this happen: a non-pilot landing a heavy jet ??
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Middle East / UK
Age: 45
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
teropa
Funny how its the PPL/Simmers who have never flown a large jet, that say it could be done!!! 
I am also 23 and have been flying the B757 for 2 years, the Saab340 for a year and a half before that, so I was brought up with flight sim too. It IS different, as good as it may be, it is NOT the same. Often aircraft and/or ILS are downgraded, or simply not available, making CATIIIB approaches impossible. Also you have the weather to contend with. There are limits as to the autoland capability of aircraft, (Not just the B767.) You made the point before I did, that if I sat in an A320 I would not know how all the systems worked. I would however be able to get the beast on the ground, I would still ask for assistance though. Why do you think that a few hours in a sim, not made by the aeroplane manufacturers, qualifies you to fly a B767??? If that was the case why doesn't the airline spend £50 on a copy of FS2002 insted of "wasting" the £30,000 it cost to train me on the B757????? 
Also tell me I get paid over £40k as a pilot on this type when you could do it for a fraction of the cost????
Flight sims are good fun, but that is all they are, FUN! I enjoy playing on FS2002 downloading new aircraft etc etc. Take this point; I can fly a combat mission into Iraq, the former Russian States, Afganistan, on my PC. I would NEVER dream of telling front line fighter pilots that I could do their job!!! I still say you could not do it.
By the way you do NOT need to arm all 3 autopilots for an auto land. It will do it automatically at 1500ft RA!!!! Also if you did do that with the flaps (20/30nm) and put the gear down at 10nm the GPWS would be screaming at you! As pointed out decending in V/S mode offers no speed protection and is dicouraged if not forbidden in my company. You could use FLCH, but then again Flight Sim does not have that, and you wouldn't know what it does. I am confused by your comment
I dont understand what you mean, please expain. Also you will find that most B767s,(all in UK) do not have speed tape. What would you do if you moved the flap lever and this happened........ Aural Alert....EICAS Message "Leading Edge Slat Disagree"????? It happens you know, happened in my company twice last week. What would you do if you didn't get 3 greens? WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF.......................Need I go on???
Eff Oh.
I am also 23 and have been flying the B757 for 2 years, the Saab340 for a year and a half before that, so I was brought up with flight sim too. It IS different, as good as it may be, it is NOT the same. Often aircraft and/or ILS are downgraded, or simply not available, making CATIIIB approaches impossible. Also you have the weather to contend with. There are limits as to the autoland capability of aircraft, (Not just the B767.) You made the point before I did, that if I sat in an A320 I would not know how all the systems worked. I would however be able to get the beast on the ground, I would still ask for assistance though. Why do you think that a few hours in a sim, not made by the aeroplane manufacturers, qualifies you to fly a B767??? If that was the case why doesn't the airline spend £50 on a copy of FS2002 insted of "wasting" the £30,000 it cost to train me on the B757????? Also tell me I get paid over £40k as a pilot on this type when you could do it for a fraction of the cost???? Flight sims are good fun, but that is all they are, FUN! I enjoy playing on FS2002 downloading new aircraft etc etc. Take this point; I can fly a combat mission into Iraq, the former Russian States, Afganistan, on my PC. I would NEVER dream of telling front line fighter pilots that I could do their job!!! I still say you could not do it.
By the way you do NOT need to arm all 3 autopilots for an auto land. It will do it automatically at 1500ft RA!!!! Also if you did do that with the flaps (20/30nm) and put the gear down at 10nm the GPWS would be screaming at you! As pointed out decending in V/S mode offers no speed protection and is dicouraged if not forbidden in my company. You could use FLCH, but then again Flight Sim does not have that, and you wouldn't know what it does. I am confused by your comment
I'd like to add that I would always go for a bit higher estimation for the APP speed, and if it would regardless of that end up too slow, the situation wouldn't go unnoticed as the plane would start to pitch over 5 degrees ANU early in the approach. I'm not blind you know...
Eff Oh.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Gatport Airwick
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmmmm interesting..................
With a load of luck (you´d need to be a 10 times over lottery winner here) it is just possible that you could bring the aircraft down with minimal damage and minimal casualties down the back........
However, throw in some problems like an engine fire, CB´s dotted here there and everywhere and wx down to absolute minimums and I fear that you and the peeps down the back would be nothing but a smouldering hole in the ground.
Eff oh hits it right on the head when he mentions the fact that Professional Pilots have to go through years of training and re-training......... someone who´s spent many a sad lonely night in his/her bedroom staring at a computer screen just aint gonna be able to hack it. Sorry mate, its a nice fantasy and all that but it would be bordering on suicide, educated suicide but suicide all the same.
With a load of luck (you´d need to be a 10 times over lottery winner here) it is just possible that you could bring the aircraft down with minimal damage and minimal casualties down the back........
However, throw in some problems like an engine fire, CB´s dotted here there and everywhere and wx down to absolute minimums and I fear that you and the peeps down the back would be nothing but a smouldering hole in the ground.
Eff oh hits it right on the head when he mentions the fact that Professional Pilots have to go through years of training and re-training......... someone who´s spent many a sad lonely night in his/her bedroom staring at a computer screen just aint gonna be able to hack it. Sorry mate, its a nice fantasy and all that but it would be bordering on suicide, educated suicide but suicide all the same.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Finland
Age: 44
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: teropa
Eff Oh,
I _urge_ you to read the posts I've written in this thread, please, all of them. I have no desire to explain all the things over and over again.
Let me ONCE more elaborate:
I am NOT telling you that I could do YOUR job, i.e. operate the aircraft in all conditions, normal and abnormal, emergency or not. No. No. No. Please lose this idea already!!
I'm telling you that I would have little trouble in getting a B767 down in one piece, GIVEN the right circumstances. Please read what I wrote before... this is tiresome.
As you might (should) already know, autolands are very often done on runways that are only CATI or CATII approved. Following is a quote of a corporate pilot:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the CAT II or CAT III runways for autolands, here’s a little secret the FAA don’t want you to know about that.
QUOTE
It is a common practice for air carriers to conduct AFCGS approaches and/or autoland operations when the runway visual range (RVR) is at or below RVR 4,000. It is also common for carriers to conduct these operations during CAT I, or better weather conditions to satisfy maintenance, training, or reliability program requirements. To achieve the necessary autoland rate, some percentage of these autolands are conducted at runways that are approved for CAT I operations.
Serving a CAT I Airport/Runway.
The commissioning, periodic flight inspection, and facility maintenance of an ILS facility serving a CAT I airport/runway does not include an analysis of the ILS performance inside the runway threshold or along the runway. However, a number of CAT I instrument approach facilities have sufficient signal characteristics to support AFCGS autoland operations to CAT I minima. Operations specifications paragraph C61b(2) allows the operator to make this assessment.
END QUOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, how do you respond? That it can't be done ? In an emergency? Now give me a BREAK!
Like I said before, I have no urge to discuss your training costs vs. Flight Sim price any further. I'm not addressing the obvious differences between these two "educational methods". It is NOT the subject of the original post, nor that of this.
If you took the time to read what was posted before, you would know that some 757/767 are retrofitted with this automatic arming of all three channels above 1500 RA. Don't make the assumption that what you know is the absolute truth, because I sure as hell am not doing that. Now I'm wiser when it comes to that little detail in AFDS operation. However, I think you should also acknowledge the fact that A) Many 757/767 don't have the automatic arming of L,C,R autopilots and B) even if I was surprised by this feature in-flight, would it prevent the flight from succeeding ?? Quite the contrary...
Regarding the GPWS. Different carriers have different options in the settings of GPWS and callouts in general. These can be modified very easily to suit each one's SOPs and needs. What would the GPWS be calling in the scenario I described. Even if it did, it wouldn't bring us down, now would it ? And further, could you please elaborate as to why it would do that ??? I'm 10 miles out, 3000ft, flaps 30, 160 KIAS, gear down, speedbrake armed, autobrake MAX, flying on AP (LOC, SPD, ALT HLD active, G/S showing white (armed) and waiting for it to come alive), established on LLZ. Why would the GPWS shout at me ? And if it did, what difference would it make.
Please know that I KNOW that the above config is NOT how it should be at that particular stage in normal ops, but I'm just simplifying a bit because that's just what I would do in the real situation; to have everything setup right enough far out, so I could concentrate entirely on monitoring the course of events.
OK, if you think that the V/S would be a bad choice, I would gladly conduct a VNAV descent. I merely offered the V/S there as a simpler way of adjusting the descent, instead of having to interact with the FMC. Remember that this would be a situation in which things should be done in the simplest way, to avoid confusion and disorientation. But you're definitely right about the speed protection. Again just an example. And I was thinking about the fact that if a diversion would be made (instead of just continuing to destination), it would require reprogramming the FMC, and it might be that we would be (and likely were) already above the profile, which would require lots of other stuff to do to get the plane back on the poor man's G/S. V/S mode is as simple as they come, BUT with no speed prot, true enough.
Regarding the FL CH... <sigh> Would you be surprised if I told you that PIC767 has FLCH modelled, AND that I know how to use it...
Take a look at the training manual that I use for the program in question, here's something about the FL CH:
- It engages the plane in an airspeed-dependant climb or descent.
- It engages the autothrottle in a FL CH mode that controls power
automatically to make the aircraft climb or descend as required.
- It automatically selects Speed (SPD) as the vertical mode since pitch is now dependent on the selected airspeed.
- Resets the airspeed window to the current indicated airspeed.
- If a climb is required the TMC is automatically set to a climb mode (CLB,CLB1 or CLB2 depending on TRP settings).
- This mode will fly the airplane to the altitude set in the ALT window. If a climb is required, it gives you climb power and pitch to maintain the selected airspeed. If a descent is required it gives you IDLE thrust and pitch to maintain selected airspeed.
- In a FL CH descent the autothrottle changes to throttle hold mode (THR HLD) which allows the pilot to alter the vertical speed of the descent by adding or removing power. The autothrottle re-engages in the SPD mode during altitude capture.
- FL CH and SPD are annunciated on the EADI.
To answer your question regarding the flaps:
I would put the flaps lever to the previous position where it was working normally and try again. If the flaps/slats still stayed in the same position, i.e. didn't move at all, I would use the alternate system, that moves the flaps/slats electrically into position. After that I would, however, make sure that the primary flaps lever was in the same position that I electrically lowered the flaps to.
Regarding the final app speed (the part you quoted)
You asked me what would I do if I had no weight information.
Answer: I would use an estimation slightly higher than what I would ASSUME be correct. For example, for a 20klbs fuel left + 250klbs ZFW in a 767 I would use roughly 135-140 (+additives) on final APP (flaps30). And IF that speed turned out too slow, I would SEE it since the aircraft would pitch to unusually high nose-up attitude (>5 deg. ANU) early on in the approach. I would simply increase the speed from MCP if that was to happen. What is wrong with this explanation ? I know that it would not lead to an instantaneous crash if it were 5 kt on the low side, and I would see it. I would watch it like a hawk if I didn't know the RIGHT speed for the weight.
Regarding the gear problem:
I would cycle the lever a couple of times, and if I didn't get 3 green I would eventually use the alternate gear switch, which has a 250 KIAS speed limit for extension. Of course if the lamp(s) were out, I would remove the cover and... heheh just kidding. I wouldn't do that. One delta crew in an L-1011 once crashed while doing that ('73 I believe, in Florida).
Btw. Has the flight with the poisoned pilots turned out to be a disaster otherwise as well..? darn. And I was hoping for the bloody plane to work at least.
Anything else? And feel free to educate me. This is fun!! But please read carefully what I say in my posts, because it's no fun repeating the stuff over and over.
cheers,
Tero
Oh btw. I'm Finnish, and if my English seems too crappy for you to understand, I will be more than happy to elaborate further
).
I _urge_ you to read the posts I've written in this thread, please, all of them. I have no desire to explain all the things over and over again.
Let me ONCE more elaborate:
I am NOT telling you that I could do YOUR job, i.e. operate the aircraft in all conditions, normal and abnormal, emergency or not. No. No. No. Please lose this idea already!!
I'm telling you that I would have little trouble in getting a B767 down in one piece, GIVEN the right circumstances. Please read what I wrote before... this is tiresome.
As you might (should) already know, autolands are very often done on runways that are only CATI or CATII approved. Following is a quote of a corporate pilot:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the CAT II or CAT III runways for autolands, here’s a little secret the FAA don’t want you to know about that.
QUOTE
It is a common practice for air carriers to conduct AFCGS approaches and/or autoland operations when the runway visual range (RVR) is at or below RVR 4,000. It is also common for carriers to conduct these operations during CAT I, or better weather conditions to satisfy maintenance, training, or reliability program requirements. To achieve the necessary autoland rate, some percentage of these autolands are conducted at runways that are approved for CAT I operations.
Serving a CAT I Airport/Runway.
The commissioning, periodic flight inspection, and facility maintenance of an ILS facility serving a CAT I airport/runway does not include an analysis of the ILS performance inside the runway threshold or along the runway. However, a number of CAT I instrument approach facilities have sufficient signal characteristics to support AFCGS autoland operations to CAT I minima. Operations specifications paragraph C61b(2) allows the operator to make this assessment.
END QUOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, how do you respond? That it can't be done ? In an emergency? Now give me a BREAK!
Like I said before, I have no urge to discuss your training costs vs. Flight Sim price any further. I'm not addressing the obvious differences between these two "educational methods". It is NOT the subject of the original post, nor that of this.
If you took the time to read what was posted before, you would know that some 757/767 are retrofitted with this automatic arming of all three channels above 1500 RA. Don't make the assumption that what you know is the absolute truth, because I sure as hell am not doing that. Now I'm wiser when it comes to that little detail in AFDS operation. However, I think you should also acknowledge the fact that A) Many 757/767 don't have the automatic arming of L,C,R autopilots and B) even if I was surprised by this feature in-flight, would it prevent the flight from succeeding ?? Quite the contrary...
Regarding the GPWS. Different carriers have different options in the settings of GPWS and callouts in general. These can be modified very easily to suit each one's SOPs and needs. What would the GPWS be calling in the scenario I described. Even if it did, it wouldn't bring us down, now would it ? And further, could you please elaborate as to why it would do that ??? I'm 10 miles out, 3000ft, flaps 30, 160 KIAS, gear down, speedbrake armed, autobrake MAX, flying on AP (LOC, SPD, ALT HLD active, G/S showing white (armed) and waiting for it to come alive), established on LLZ. Why would the GPWS shout at me ? And if it did, what difference would it make.
Please know that I KNOW that the above config is NOT how it should be at that particular stage in normal ops, but I'm just simplifying a bit because that's just what I would do in the real situation; to have everything setup right enough far out, so I could concentrate entirely on monitoring the course of events.
OK, if you think that the V/S would be a bad choice, I would gladly conduct a VNAV descent. I merely offered the V/S there as a simpler way of adjusting the descent, instead of having to interact with the FMC. Remember that this would be a situation in which things should be done in the simplest way, to avoid confusion and disorientation. But you're definitely right about the speed protection. Again just an example. And I was thinking about the fact that if a diversion would be made (instead of just continuing to destination), it would require reprogramming the FMC, and it might be that we would be (and likely were) already above the profile, which would require lots of other stuff to do to get the plane back on the poor man's G/S. V/S mode is as simple as they come, BUT with no speed prot, true enough.
Regarding the FL CH... <sigh> Would you be surprised if I told you that PIC767 has FLCH modelled, AND that I know how to use it...
Take a look at the training manual that I use for the program in question, here's something about the FL CH:
- It engages the plane in an airspeed-dependant climb or descent.
- It engages the autothrottle in a FL CH mode that controls power
automatically to make the aircraft climb or descend as required.
- It automatically selects Speed (SPD) as the vertical mode since pitch is now dependent on the selected airspeed.
- Resets the airspeed window to the current indicated airspeed.
- If a climb is required the TMC is automatically set to a climb mode (CLB,CLB1 or CLB2 depending on TRP settings).
- This mode will fly the airplane to the altitude set in the ALT window. If a climb is required, it gives you climb power and pitch to maintain the selected airspeed. If a descent is required it gives you IDLE thrust and pitch to maintain selected airspeed.
- In a FL CH descent the autothrottle changes to throttle hold mode (THR HLD) which allows the pilot to alter the vertical speed of the descent by adding or removing power. The autothrottle re-engages in the SPD mode during altitude capture.
- FL CH and SPD are annunciated on the EADI.
To answer your question regarding the flaps:
I would put the flaps lever to the previous position where it was working normally and try again. If the flaps/slats still stayed in the same position, i.e. didn't move at all, I would use the alternate system, that moves the flaps/slats electrically into position. After that I would, however, make sure that the primary flaps lever was in the same position that I electrically lowered the flaps to.
Regarding the final app speed (the part you quoted)
You asked me what would I do if I had no weight information.
Answer: I would use an estimation slightly higher than what I would ASSUME be correct. For example, for a 20klbs fuel left + 250klbs ZFW in a 767 I would use roughly 135-140 (+additives) on final APP (flaps30). And IF that speed turned out too slow, I would SEE it since the aircraft would pitch to unusually high nose-up attitude (>5 deg. ANU) early on in the approach. I would simply increase the speed from MCP if that was to happen. What is wrong with this explanation ? I know that it would not lead to an instantaneous crash if it were 5 kt on the low side, and I would see it. I would watch it like a hawk if I didn't know the RIGHT speed for the weight.
Regarding the gear problem:
I would cycle the lever a couple of times, and if I didn't get 3 green I would eventually use the alternate gear switch, which has a 250 KIAS speed limit for extension. Of course if the lamp(s) were out, I would remove the cover and... heheh just kidding. I wouldn't do that. One delta crew in an L-1011 once crashed while doing that ('73 I believe, in Florida).
Btw. Has the flight with the poisoned pilots turned out to be a disaster otherwise as well..? darn. And I was hoping for the bloody plane to work at least
.Anything else? And feel free to educate me. This is fun!! But please read carefully what I say in my posts, because it's no fun repeating the stuff over and over.
cheers,
Tero
Oh btw. I'm Finnish, and if my English seems too crappy for you to understand, I will be more than happy to elaborate further
).
Last edited by teropa; 20th Aug 2002 at 10:52.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly both the 757 and 767-2/3 aircraft.
Just to play devils advocate, teropa would stand a much better chance of pulling it off than say a person with no idea of aircraft period.
All s/he is saying is that if everything goes well s/he could program the automatics to land the aircraft. Yes of course s/he could.
What we pilots all know, is that you have to intervene on every flight to correct a situation that if left will escalate to such a degree that it could cause an accident/ incident. We all know that there are limits to what the automatics can do and what the pitfalls are.
A computer game will only give you what the manufactures tell you it’s designed to do, not what actually happens. The reversion to Vnav spd during initial descent on 757 aircraft is a classic example. The fact that the aircraft has a tendency to arrive at the FAF hot’n’high is another prime example of the shortcomings of the automatics.
As an aside all 33+ a/c in the company that pays me, has speed tape enabled and we use vertical speed mode for decent while being vectored to the ILS. This allows us to MANUALLY achieve a constant descent profile with low drag to reduce noise and fuel burn.
The odds that everything goes teropa’s way are frankly not good. When we started to recruit low time S/O’s we found that their system knowledge was almost peerless, BUT below 1000’ agl things that a more experienced pilot would see and correct at an early stage were left and resulted in “incidents”. Only a lot more training and experience solved the problem.
Teropa, the flap load relief will retract the flaps at 162kts on the 767-200 and 757-200. Keep the speed back to Vref 30+5kts and the auto throttle will allegedly compensate for gusts. You can safely use the approach page to get your Vref speed because you will be a bit lighter than advertised for the approach. We use as a rule of thumb, 1 kt/1000kg for the 757 and 1 kt/1500kg for the 767’s
Enjoy your flying.
Just to play devils advocate, teropa would stand a much better chance of pulling it off than say a person with no idea of aircraft period.
All s/he is saying is that if everything goes well s/he could program the automatics to land the aircraft. Yes of course s/he could.
What we pilots all know, is that you have to intervene on every flight to correct a situation that if left will escalate to such a degree that it could cause an accident/ incident. We all know that there are limits to what the automatics can do and what the pitfalls are.
A computer game will only give you what the manufactures tell you it’s designed to do, not what actually happens. The reversion to Vnav spd during initial descent on 757 aircraft is a classic example. The fact that the aircraft has a tendency to arrive at the FAF hot’n’high is another prime example of the shortcomings of the automatics.
As an aside all 33+ a/c in the company that pays me, has speed tape enabled and we use vertical speed mode for decent while being vectored to the ILS. This allows us to MANUALLY achieve a constant descent profile with low drag to reduce noise and fuel burn.
The odds that everything goes teropa’s way are frankly not good. When we started to recruit low time S/O’s we found that their system knowledge was almost peerless, BUT below 1000’ agl things that a more experienced pilot would see and correct at an early stage were left and resulted in “incidents”. Only a lot more training and experience solved the problem.
Teropa, the flap load relief will retract the flaps at 162kts on the 767-200 and 757-200. Keep the speed back to Vref 30+5kts and the auto throttle will allegedly compensate for gusts. You can safely use the approach page to get your Vref speed because you will be a bit lighter than advertised for the approach. We use as a rule of thumb, 1 kt/1000kg for the 757 and 1 kt/1500kg for the 767’s
Enjoy your flying.
Last edited by max_cont; 20th Aug 2002 at 12:54.
This is a silly question which has fascinated PPL's, and now Flt Simers, for many years.
Actually the question should be, What are the chances of an armchair pilot landing a big jet? There must be a measurable risk of even an experienced captain getting it wrong. Read the accident records.
However, I have found myself fanticising further by trying to imagine myself on a pilotless B737 with Teropa, debating as to which of us was more likely to land successfully. Him with his huge knowledge of the aircraft systems, or me with a PPL and a 100% record of landing (hand flying) a "real" 777 simulator at Cranebrook.
I can't answer that but find either prospect terrifying. The chances of a successful outcome would not be one I would place much money on but there is probably a better chance for the passengers than if we did nothing.
To ask Teropa an earlier question in another way. If you had learned to tight rope walk with the rope about 10cm above the ground. Do you think you would be just as competent if the rope was raised to 100 metres?
Actually the question should be, What are the chances of an armchair pilot landing a big jet? There must be a measurable risk of even an experienced captain getting it wrong. Read the accident records.
However, I have found myself fanticising further by trying to imagine myself on a pilotless B737 with Teropa, debating as to which of us was more likely to land successfully. Him with his huge knowledge of the aircraft systems, or me with a PPL and a 100% record of landing (hand flying) a "real" 777 simulator at Cranebrook.
I can't answer that but find either prospect terrifying. The chances of a successful outcome would not be one I would place much money on but there is probably a better chance for the passengers than if we did nothing.
To ask Teropa an earlier question in another way. If you had learned to tight rope walk with the rope about 10cm above the ground. Do you think you would be just as competent if the rope was raised to 100 metres?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Finland
Age: 44
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pulse1,
Heheh, that methaphor you use to bring up the difference between simulators and real aircraft that are 12km above the gnd is a good one. Illustrates pretty well the HUGE difference between two seemingly similar situations.
Answer: I know I would be afraid up there, but would still try to do it. I also have a couple of nice landings in a MD11 level-D sim, 100% hands on "flying". But regardless, it's only a sim...
I think we'd definately give it a good try, you and I !!
Btw. I did a high bungee jump 1 month ago. I had _no_ fear up there, it was a phenomenally fantastic experience... but then again... it was "only" 60m high and I had a rope in my leg. What do I know? I'm just a PC-pilot And I bet every airline pilot would do the same, without any fear. (harmless sarcasm added again for laughs)
cheers,
Tero
Heheh, that methaphor you use to bring up the difference between simulators and real aircraft that are 12km above the gnd is a good one
. Illustrates pretty well the HUGE difference between two seemingly similar situations. Answer: I know I would be afraid up there, but would still try to do it. I also have a couple of nice landings in a MD11 level-D sim, 100% hands on "flying". But regardless, it's only a sim...
I think we'd definately give it a good try, you and I !!
Btw. I did a high bungee jump 1 month ago. I had _no_ fear up there, it was a phenomenally fantastic experience... but then again... it was "only" 60m high and I had a rope in my leg. What do I know? I'm just a PC-pilot
And I bet every airline pilot would do the same, without any fear. (harmless sarcasm added again for laughs)cheers,
Tero
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Middle East / UK
Age: 45
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point about airfield systems downgraded was, what if the ILS was off line, and you had to fly a VOR? I have autolanded off of Cat I approaches many times too. I was't aware that it was a "secret".
I admit your systems knowledge for a non engineer/pilot is impressive. However I still stand by what I say. I have had my lot on this, fed up with it, and can't be bothered to waist my time posting on this any more.
I believe the GPWS warning would be "Too low gear." ie Flaps in the landing config and no gear. From your post "Flaps at 20-30nm gear at 10nm" There would be an immense ammount of noise, easy to lose concentration.
One other thing springs to mind, they wouldn't let you anywhere near the flight deck in this post September 11th environment. The flight deck door would be locked, and bolted! As for the Flap, gear thing, consult the QRH, it will be found to the right/left side of you depending whic seat you are in. That will give you some good info.
Happy landings! (And may they all be simulated unless you have a licence.)
Eff Oh.
I admit your systems knowledge for a non engineer/pilot is impressive. However I still stand by what I say. I have had my lot on this, fed up with it, and can't be bothered to waist my time posting on this any more.
I believe the GPWS warning would be "Too low gear." ie Flaps in the landing config and no gear. From your post "Flaps at 20-30nm gear at 10nm" There would be an immense ammount of noise, easy to lose concentration.
One other thing springs to mind, they wouldn't let you anywhere near the flight deck in this post September 11th environment.
The flight deck door would be locked, and bolted! As for the Flap, gear thing, consult the QRH, it will be found to the right/left side of you depending whic seat you are in. That will give you some good info. Happy landings! (And may they all be simulated unless you have a licence.)
Eff Oh.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sussex
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
teropa,
I've been Flying Instructing on light aircraft for over two years now. About once a month a 'know it all arm chair anorack' turns up to fly a Trial Lesson. To be quite frank, you lot are the worst to instruct. You think you know how to fly already, so when you meander a Cessna all over the sky refusing to listen, the net result after stuffing the aircraft into the runway for 500 circuits is a 100 hour PPL. (The min. hours for the PPL is 45 hours).
You seem to have forgotten about the factors that you don't experience sat in front of your PC. (I.E.
ngine Failure, Radio Failure, Electrical/Systems Failure, Deteriorating WX below Minimums, R/T & ATC compliance etc.... I am just refering to Light GA Aircraft. The same considerations arise on Heavy Jets carrying hundreds of PAX, but obviously at a greater scale.
I have a CPL/IR and 1500 hours including 100 multi engine flying hours. I would not have the audacity to tell anyone I could land a Heavy Jet unless I had undertaken a Type Rating.
I've been Flying Instructing on light aircraft for over two years now. About once a month a 'know it all arm chair anorack' turns up to fly a Trial Lesson. To be quite frank, you lot are the worst to instruct. You think you know how to fly already, so when you meander a Cessna all over the sky refusing to listen, the net result after stuffing the aircraft into the runway for 500 circuits is a 100 hour PPL. (The min. hours for the PPL is 45 hours).
You seem to have forgotten about the factors that you don't experience sat in front of your PC. (I.E.
ngine Failure, Radio Failure, Electrical/Systems Failure, Deteriorating WX below Minimums, R/T & ATC compliance etc.... I am just refering to Light GA Aircraft. The same considerations arise on Heavy Jets carrying hundreds of PAX, but obviously at a greater scale.I have a CPL/IR and 1500 hours including 100 multi engine flying hours. I would not have the audacity to tell anyone I could land a Heavy Jet unless I had undertaken a Type Rating.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ef oh - if you make a post from the point of a 757 driver then you should really put a bit more thought into it. The GPWS is nothing to do with the situation (ie. flaps in landing config, no gear down), its just a Landing Config Warning, and goes a little something like this -
master WARNING light illuminates
CONFIG warning light illuminates
aural warning siren activates
the GEAR NOT DOWN EICAS warning alert message is displayed
its in Vol 2 15.20.10 of your companies ops manual.
master WARNING light illuminates
CONFIG warning light illuminates
aural warning siren activates
the GEAR NOT DOWN EICAS warning alert message is displayed
its in Vol 2 15.20.10 of your companies ops manual.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Finland
Age: 44
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RussLightYear,
I have flown real Cessnas and Pipers from the right seat at least the minimum of 45 hours (to get PPL). I also have at least 20-30 landings in them. In addition I have "non-handling" time in the light GA aircraft ~ 500 hours. I have never counted to be exact. I also "piloted" a MD11 levelD sim without a prob. Not all of us "iknowitalls" are stupid and incompetent. I don't have a problem with real life aviation, nor do I claim to be a pilot as I don't have the darn paper (YET!).
I have no trouble understanding the things you mention, not at all. I guess you really get a lot of that "I knowitall" type. You should be happy.. they bring bread to your table.
There's one thing that I don't understand here: Why such an attitude? Why such a pride? It's as if I'm "robbing" some of your hero-status away by making these "speculations" that are JUST what they are: speculations. Let me tell you something: professional pilots (do you consider yourself one ?) fly to make a living, and I'd like to hope that the majority of them are enthusiastic about their work. I sure would be! I also know that PAX are counting on them to do their work, that's all. The days of boasting with a pilot's license are over, and I really don't understand why you all drift off topic here all the time, just to elevate yourselves above layman. If nothing else, then just to call flightsimmers stupid and a "below average" group of aviation enthusiasts. Makes me angry, plain and simple.
Read the posts that I have made, read the posts others have written and contribute if you like, but don't elevate yourself to a level which supposedly is out of reach of many of us enthusiastic simmers already. I for one intend to act on my future plans, and for the time being I'm just getting what I have.
For you I'd like to say that lose that attitude, I bet you also have had the kind of students who get bored during the ten last mandatory hours. I _know_ that you are never "finished" with the learning, but have you EVER asked those people if they have simming background ? Believe me, there IS another side to this story also!
The posts made here at PPrune often make me wonder if there are a lot of arrogant pilots around, flying the bigger iron and such. It would be disturbing to team up with such individuals, even in a light GA aircraft. I guess you pilots see flightsimmers as a some kind of "rotten apple", which I don't understand at all, but there really should be some self-inspection among you (who think that way) as well.
I'd like to add one more thing here. That ^^^ wasn't all directed to you RussLightYear. It's meant for those who just ignore everything that the non-professional aviators have learnt or will learn. Also, some of the replies in this thread are very educating and VERY adult. Something to learn from and entertaining to read. I sincerely thank those who have contributed something on-topic here... it's valuable and appreciated!
cheers,
Tero
I have flown real Cessnas and Pipers from the right seat at least the minimum of 45 hours (to get PPL). I also have at least 20-30 landings in them. In addition I have "non-handling" time in the light GA aircraft ~ 500 hours. I have never counted to be exact. I also "piloted" a MD11 levelD sim without a prob. Not all of us "iknowitalls" are stupid and incompetent. I don't have a problem with real life aviation, nor do I claim to be a pilot as I don't have the darn paper (YET!).
I have no trouble understanding the things you mention, not at all. I guess you really get a lot of that "I knowitall" type. You should be happy.. they bring bread to your table.
There's one thing that I don't understand here: Why such an attitude? Why such a pride? It's as if I'm "robbing" some of your hero-status away by making these "speculations" that are JUST what they are: speculations. Let me tell you something: professional pilots (do you consider yourself one ?) fly to make a living, and I'd like to hope that the majority of them are enthusiastic about their work. I sure would be! I also know that PAX are counting on them to do their work, that's all. The days of boasting with a pilot's license are over, and I really don't understand why you all drift off topic here all the time, just to elevate yourselves above layman. If nothing else, then just to call flightsimmers stupid and a "below average" group of aviation enthusiasts. Makes me angry, plain and simple.
Read the posts that I have made, read the posts others have written and contribute if you like, but don't elevate yourself to a level which supposedly is out of reach of many of us enthusiastic simmers already. I for one intend to act on my future plans, and for the time being I'm just getting what I have.
For you I'd like to say that lose that attitude, I bet you also have had the kind of students who get bored during the ten last mandatory hours. I _know_ that you are never "finished" with the learning, but have you EVER asked those people if they have simming background ? Believe me, there IS another side to this story also!
The posts made here at PPrune often make me wonder if there are a lot of arrogant pilots around, flying the bigger iron and such. It would be disturbing to team up with such individuals, even in a light GA aircraft. I guess you pilots see flightsimmers as a some kind of "rotten apple", which I don't understand at all, but there really should be some self-inspection among you (who think that way) as well.
I'd like to add one more thing here. That ^^^ wasn't all directed to you RussLightYear. It's meant for those who just ignore everything that the non-professional aviators have learnt or will learn. Also, some of the replies in this thread are very educating and VERY adult. Something to learn from and entertaining to read. I sincerely thank those who have contributed something on-topic here... it's valuable and appreciated!
cheers,
Tero
Last edited by teropa; 20th Aug 2002 at 14:21.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Middle East / UK
Age: 45
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tight Slot.
You are quite correct indeed! I stand corrected. Still in aftermath of two long night flights, thinking off the top of my head. (That'll treach me!!) 
Eff Oh.
Eff Oh.
Boeing SLF
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Denmark
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that the real problem for us 'simmers' would be the feel of the controls.
While a autoland might be possible, I feel quite certain that I would end up in an increased amount of self-induced oscilations if I ever tried a manual landing after just PC practice.
The 6-7 cm movement of a PC joystick can hardly compare to a flight yoke with feed-back and much more travel.
Equally, just how much do you kick the rudder pedal to compensate for cross wind etc ?
How exactly do you disengage the autothrottle - which would be a very nice thing to do when you flare (or touch down) ?
Autoland ? - maybe, manual: - probably a crash, but fairly close to the airport
The while a MCP can be emulated (and even bought) for a PC, the feel of the controls can never come across.
Some dead serious simmers have reported landing 777's in the Heathrow simulator (BA ?), but they are probably far between.
Regards
Michael
While a autoland might be possible, I feel quite certain that I would end up in an increased amount of self-induced oscilations if I ever tried a manual landing after just PC practice.
The 6-7 cm movement of a PC joystick can hardly compare to a flight yoke with feed-back and much more travel.
Equally, just how much do you kick the rudder pedal to compensate for cross wind etc ?
How exactly do you disengage the autothrottle - which would be a very nice thing to do when you flare (or touch down) ?
Autoland ? - maybe, manual: - probably a crash, but fairly close to the airport
The while a MCP can be emulated (and even bought) for a PC, the feel of the controls can never come across.
Some dead serious simmers have reported landing 777's in the Heathrow simulator (BA ?), but they are probably far between.
Regards
Michael
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Finland
Age: 44
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear All,
If you're interested to see what kind of software some of us crazy simmers use, check out this. This is the review of the PIC767 I've been talking about. This is an old review for the previous simulator version, but it hasn't changed a lot for the newer one. Bug fixes, some additions etc.
Anyways, if you're interested, take a look here:
http://www.avsim.com/pages/0301/767pic/pic.html
cheers,
Tero
ps. I just took a bundle of magnificient screenshots from a short hop EFHK-EFTU to illustrate the panel operation and autoland etc. in the simulator, for those who find themselves interested. But I can't post the shots here, so I'm afraid that the (rather lousily pictured) review will have to do for the illustration. If you wish to see more, I'll be happy to email some pictures for you. Just drop me a line in PM or email.
If you're interested to see what kind of software some of us crazy simmers use, check out this. This is the review of the PIC767 I've been talking about. This is an old review for the previous simulator version, but it hasn't changed a lot for the newer one. Bug fixes, some additions etc.
Anyways, if you're interested, take a look here:
http://www.avsim.com/pages/0301/767pic/pic.html
cheers,
Tero
ps. I just took a bundle of magnificient screenshots from a short hop EFHK-EFTU to illustrate the panel operation and autoland etc. in the simulator, for those who find themselves interested. But I can't post the shots here, so I'm afraid that the (rather lousily pictured) review will have to do for the illustration. If you wish to see more, I'll be happy to email some pictures for you. Just drop me a line in PM or email.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: preston
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pilot incapatitation
anyone seen airplane cour se you have , did you know that it actually happened in the early fifties? thats the reason pilots have different food and dont eat at the same time, or they eat at different times in the raf. not sure if in the real incident if it was a ppl or an airline pilot travelling as slf who landed it, anyone out there know?
Paxing All Over The World
As I said at the outset of this thread, the chances of both pilots being out of service is minimal.
IF that were to happen, would the airline call upon the Purser or other willing member of staff to push the buttons as directed - or would they gladly accept the offer of a PAX?
Cabin crew are a known entity and under the direction of their employer. PAX volunteers are not. It is better for the airline to have a member of their company crash the machine than to allow an untrained person to crash it.
I realise that the question is not if such a circumstance could arise but could the PC person handle it but let us be clear - the situation will not arise.
I have to say, from the point of view of a pax that has been flying regularly for 36 years - I would not want you anywhere near the flight deck.
IF that were to happen, would the airline call upon the Purser or other willing member of staff to push the buttons as directed - or would they gladly accept the offer of a PAX?
Cabin crew are a known entity and under the direction of their employer. PAX volunteers are not. It is better for the airline to have a member of their company crash the machine than to allow an untrained person to crash it.
I realise that the question is not if such a circumstance could arise but could the PC person handle it but let us be clear - the situation will not arise.
I have to say, from the point of view of a pax that has been flying regularly for 36 years - I would not want you anywhere near the flight deck.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Norway
Age: 48
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now this is what I call an interesting thread.
The original thread asks if a simmer or whatever they are called could land a big jet ?
I fly a 30 ton turboprop. When sitting in front of my computer I have serious problems landing that fu..ing simulator, and to be honest, I believe that comparison will be true if reversed also.
Now I'm not saying it's impossible for a simmer to land a big jet. I for one would of course have given it a try if the situation required me to do so. But would never take it on as a challenge to find out. Now you may have alot of hours in GA and perhaps an hour or two where you've flown a big simulator. But having spent more than a 150 hours in a simulator I can tell you that a simulator behaves rather similar to the airplane in ideal weather conditions. As soon as you try to simulate things out of the ordinary it sucks in comparison with a real one. The calm enviroment of a simulator and the comfort of knowing that if you **** up, you just press the reset button, is in itself a stress relieving factor which you definately would not have if the situation in question arises.
Again, I'm not saying you would fail, but I would not put my money on your performance if it should happend. Another thing I would point out. You guys talk of the autopilot as a solution to this problem ?? I would say the opposite. If you were to take a one hour crash course (considering fuel and endurance) via the radio without the oportunity of hands on training and failing, I would say the autoland, FMC, and FMP, and autothrottle would be more of a confusion than a helpful tool. It is helpful if you fully understand the operation of these systems, but would just be a total mess under stress without any experience of it. I sometimes get rather confused myself of all those systems and sometimes the systems themself get so confused they just reboot. Now what the he.. do you do ?
Personally I disconect all autoflight systems and continue manually. But without a single hour in the aircraft in question I would not go for that either unless absolutely neccessary, and even then I would not put any money on my performance either.
The inclination some of you may have when saying "real pilots try to elevate themselves above others" is a total misunderstanding of the point here. By saying "i think you would fail" and afterwards explaining why is not equal to "elevating above" someone else. But then again what do you mean by elevating. I would elevate myself above the average simmers with regard to my ability to fly an aircraft. Of course, I do this for a living, and have been for some years. If you were to say that is elevating above you then I would say you're trying to elevate yourself up to a level of flying ability you do not posess. Sorry but there is a reason for why I do what I do, as I'm sure there is one for you doing what you do. And I for one would not even consider trying to elevate my self to your ability level in what you do.
Conclution ?: I think you would fail, but hell, if the situation arose then I would rather have a simmer behind the wheel than secretary
. Let's just hope that in the interest of safety for those on board, this will never happend.
The original thread asks if a simmer or whatever they are called could land a big jet ?
I fly a 30 ton turboprop. When sitting in front of my computer I have serious problems landing that fu..ing simulator, and to be honest, I believe that comparison will be true if reversed also.
Now I'm not saying it's impossible for a simmer to land a big jet. I for one would of course have given it a try if the situation required me to do so. But would never take it on as a challenge to find out. Now you may have alot of hours in GA and perhaps an hour or two where you've flown a big simulator. But having spent more than a 150 hours in a simulator I can tell you that a simulator behaves rather similar to the airplane in ideal weather conditions. As soon as you try to simulate things out of the ordinary it sucks in comparison with a real one. The calm enviroment of a simulator and the comfort of knowing that if you **** up, you just press the reset button, is in itself a stress relieving factor which you definately would not have if the situation in question arises.
Again, I'm not saying you would fail, but I would not put my money on your performance if it should happend. Another thing I would point out. You guys talk of the autopilot as a solution to this problem ?? I would say the opposite. If you were to take a one hour crash course (considering fuel and endurance) via the radio without the oportunity of hands on training and failing, I would say the autoland, FMC, and FMP, and autothrottle would be more of a confusion than a helpful tool. It is helpful if you fully understand the operation of these systems, but would just be a total mess under stress without any experience of it. I sometimes get rather confused myself of all those systems and sometimes the systems themself get so confused they just reboot. Now what the he.. do you do ?
Personally I disconect all autoflight systems and continue manually. But without a single hour in the aircraft in question I would not go for that either unless absolutely neccessary, and even then I would not put any money on my performance either.
The inclination some of you may have when saying "real pilots try to elevate themselves above others" is a total misunderstanding of the point here. By saying "i think you would fail" and afterwards explaining why is not equal to "elevating above" someone else. But then again what do you mean by elevating. I would elevate myself above the average simmers with regard to my ability to fly an aircraft. Of course, I do this for a living, and have been for some years. If you were to say that is elevating above you then I would say you're trying to elevate yourself up to a level of flying ability you do not posess. Sorry but there is a reason for why I do what I do, as I'm sure there is one for you doing what you do. And I for one would not even consider trying to elevate my self to your ability level in what you do.
Conclution ?: I think you would fail, but hell, if the situation arose then I would rather have a simmer behind the wheel than secretary
. Let's just hope that in the interest of safety for those on board, this will never happend.