Airlines that don't allow to fly raw data
 

Since a few years ago, more airlines started to join this new trend. Some airlines, that in the past were permissive with manual flight, now are absolutely against.

At present, I'm flying for an airline where the pilots have total freedom to fly how they want.

But sometimes I ask myself how is this in the biggest European airlines, like Norwegian, easyJet, Lufthansa, etc.

I can tell you that in Spain, excepting long haul flights, it's not very uncommon to practice raw data sometimes.

Firstly, define "raw data". That term means different things to different people.

I have to agree with Amadis here, what is "raw data" for you? Simply FD off? Or just flying the needles in the most basic display mode on the ND without the help of a map display? Which might not be possible in RNAV approaches/departures, but is certainly possible without a flight director (well, at least in Boeings with IAN).

I mean, at least, flying an ILS approach without flight directors. Also, when possible, flying non RNAV SIDs with VOR and ADF.

You're kidding about the ADF, right?

That is what my company says in their OM/A:

In general that means that we can fly as much without flight director as we want to, taking into consideration weather, our colleague, traffic density and so on. Some of us do nearly every take off with the No Flight Director Takeoff procedure (pro-nor-srp-01-30) and every approach without a flight director as well. Unlike on the 737NG an RNAV approach without flight director is not really possible on the A320 (i would be happy to be proven wrong there).

Most do the occasional approach without flight director and enjoy the rare visuals we can fly, some never fly the aircraft for more than the first 100ft and the last 200 to 300ft and never without flight director and autothrust. Those usually have the biggest jitters when the next simulator is due. I would say that at least 80% do not use autothrust on manually flown approaches, even when using a flight director. Manual and "raw data" flying is actively encouraged by trainers and flight management alike.

All that in a small network airline/ACMI provider in the middle of europe.

Just as I was leaving a large Irish airline, they were in the process of banning switching off Flight Directors unless required by SOPs on a Non-Precision or Visual approach.

This was in response to a number of incidents from a small group of pilots in one particular base. Unfortunately these were all seriously unstable approaches leading from switching everything off above 10k in marginal weather. As I haven't worked there for a while, I don't know how things are these days.

This was in response to a number of incidents from a small group of pilots in one particular base. Unfortunately these were all seriously unstable approaches leading from switching everything off above 10k in marginal weather.

You are suggesting the skill base of >3000 pilots has been dictated & dliuted by the numbness of a few. Sad times. The rate cause was the numbness in choosing to do so in marginal weather; if true. It does sound too simple, but I can believe an increase in unstable approaches might be motivation for the Flt Ops straight-jacket policy. It used to be more training not less. But that was then and this is now.

Unfortnately this airline's response to pretty much anything was a new SOP.

The problem was mainly a bunch of ex fast jet jocks in one base but approaches were being thrown away at 1000' at 250kts clean, or continued to land without landing flap. I don't agrrr with the solution but can sympathise with a chief pilot losing what little hair he retains looking at those sorts of FOQA traces.

Similar provision in our OM-A as detailed above. Some choose to take advantage of the opportunity, others never do.

Personally, I fly raw data with the autothrust off on the vast majority of approaches.

Better than the crew who flew it on autopilot on a VMC day into a Terrain-Terrain Pull Up trying to fix a hot-and-high visual with the use of autopilot.

Anyway.. I know the guy who did it. He's a little special. However, he's probably a better stick & rudder guy than the majority of Ryanair pilots on the line today. On the day he lost the plot, we all do sometimes. They threw it away at the right time. The flight ops management has their clear view on the use of automation, this was the opportune moment for them to make a final settlement on its use.

EDIT: Jwscud, the above is true if we're talking about the same base. I don't recognize any ex fast jet jocks doing high-energy approaches, but rather one guy who had to misfortune of triggering the OFDM one too many times with this particular arrival that has since been named after him ;)

I'm happy to be corrected as the stories were all second hand told down The Bridge House...

Either way, I think the policy was a rather foolish sledgehammer to crack a nut and please don't misunderstand me - I'm a firm advocate of Raw Data and "proper" visuals when possible. I recall going out of base to Athens doing 6 sector Greek island days where if you flew the SOP way you'd spend half your life in the hood waiting for a procedural approach on a CAVOK day, or go wall-eyed building an FMS magenta line for your "visual"

.....doing 6 sector Greek island days where if you flew the SOP way you'd spend half your life in the hood waiting for a procedural approach on a CAVOK day, or go wall-eyed building an FMS magenta line for your "visual"


and the solution was?

Is there not a base in CFU?
>20 years ago it was sometimes necessary to fly a visual circuit, at night, to CFU RW17 B767. You also had to stay outside Albanian airspace. Challenging? Yes, especially with the sloping terrain down to the threshold. You had to believe the PAPI and your own assessment of 3degrees and not look to closely at the ground flashing by underneath; otherwise you were 1/2 way down the runway and it wasn't too long. Same wth other Greek islands; night circuits. It did not cause a problem if you had had good training, had maintained the standards expected and concentrated with being in the right place with the correct configuration.
Are night circlings allowed anywhere? If not are you expected to divert on a perfectly acceptable night? What's this FMS building for visuals? I'd always thought that was a Mk.1 eyeball manoeuvre, by definition. i.e. you look out the window. How does an FMC help unless you look inside? An FMS profile might be useful guidance to help you arrive at the start of the visual profile, but after that.