Could this happen: a non-pilot landing a heavy jet ??
 

Hi all,

First, I'd like to apologize if I'm in the wrong forum. I know that some might get annoyed at posts like this, but I gather it's both an interesting speculation and informative for people who have been pondering over the subject. Again, I'm sorry if this strikes as stupid or bandwidth-consuming to those who arrow the skies for living...

Anyways, every now and then there's a discussion over at the flightsimming communitie's biggest sites (Flightsim.com, Avsim.com) about a situation, in which both pilots would become incapacitated and a non-pilot pax (A flightsimmer!) would have to land the plane. One such is currently going on at avsim.com.

I'm going to copy my post from avsim here as my "version" of things that I would do, if I ever encountered such a situation.
I'm a person you would call a "PC-pilot" or "armchair pilot", but a very serious one, aspiring to be a real world airline pilot one day.

I'd like to hear comments about the scenario from everyone, esp. pilots.

-- snip snip --
Hi,
Very interesting...

I have no PPL or above, but have flown Cessnas and Pipers from the right seat quite lot, with no problems.

I had a go in a full-motion, level D MD-11 simulator 6 months ago.

Did a few approaches and takeoffs and landed without a problem.
I admit that it was quite different from what I expected but IMO it wasn't anything so special you all keep talking about. Airplanes are airplanes, regardless of how big they are. The basic functions and laws apply to airliners as well as C172s.

I think that given the right plane (say 767) and some time to analyze the situation, I would have no problem bringing the beast down.

Tell me if I'm missing something, but here's an example, and I'll use the 767 as I'm a PIC767 fanatic :

Both pilots out, plane flying on AP.

- Left seat, check that AP is on and check also what it's doing from the FMC, MCP etc.

- OK, we're on LNAV and VNAV modes cruising along the route seen in FMC, FL380

- contact ATC and declare an emergency (squawk 7700)

- I would be given instructions to change to another frequency and would soon be given instructions by a real 767 pilot.

- 50% chance is that I would be given instructions to reprogram new waypoints to FMC, once the real pilot knew that I was familiar with it.
But I still wouldn't do it "alone" as the pilot would still get me through every step of the reprogramming to minimize all errors.

- 50% chance is that I would be only given instructions to use MCP hdg sel, ALT (V/S) and speed modes, since it's more simple that way.
I really don't know which would it be, FMC or direct MCP modes, but in autopilot definately. _All the way_.

- I would be directed into a CAT III airfield/rwy and be setup for an autoland. Ideally I would only have to use:

* FMC (if not for programming, then at least checks for fuel, app
speeds etc)
* gear lever
* flaps lever
* autobrake switch
* speedbrake lever
* MCP as a whole + Nav1 freq/crs selectors
* Transponder (to code 7700 I believe)

In short:

1. check that plane stable on AP (A/T on, F/D on, _some_ lateral and vertical modes on), and contact ATC and get instructions from ATC and a pilot and do the following with their help:

2. check fuel and position from FMC (also check warning lights on panel)
3. squawk 7700
4. hdg sel in MCP (what I'm told)
5. ALT and V/S in MCP (what I'm told)
6. speed in MCP (again, what I'm told)
7. lower flaps at appropriate speeds
8. tune given CAT III ILS rwy data in Nav1 (freq/crs)
9. select ILS display
10. capture loc, gs / activate APP-mode
11. lower gear at appropriate phase
12. arm autobrake (max) and speedbrake
13. activate L,C,R autopilots above 1500 AGL
14. check final approach speed from FMC, dial it (+additives)
15a enjoy the ride down and check the "become a hero" in after landing checks ;)
15b try to use reverser thrust (might be a little tricky mechanically tho, but odds are that the rwy is so long that brakes are enough to do the trick)

ALL THE TIME MONITOR AIRSPEED AND ALTITUDE


The list above seems premeditated (!) and something that would be very difficult to remember etc., but I just quickly wrote it off the bottom of by head, and really don't think that it would be more difficult than that.

With a plane other than 767 (or other than a Boeing), it would be (for me at least) a different story.

Comments?

cheers,
Tero

-- Cut Cut --

There you have it, comments?

Tero

Whether or not an outsider could do this - you must first ask yourself: How many times has it happened in the past?

Take the last 25 years.
Consider how many commercial flights (twins and above) that there were on average at the beginning, middle and end of that period.
Now do some basic multiplication.

Now find out how many times one pilot has been incapacitated.
Now how many times have TWO been prevented from operating?

Off the top of my head, I would say: To the first - less than .01% and of the latter? Zero.

On the actual flying ... having sat in the jump seat on a number of occasions, I think that the things that will catch you out are the wind - those sudden eddies and changes and that it all happens VERY FAST indeed.

Now the professionals can give their opinion!

An interesting idea, can an armchair pilot land an airliner? There should be no problem.
As long as the new pilot has the calmness to remain in control of his emotions, and the situation, there should not be a problem with him/her controlling a modern airliner to an uneventful landing.
The trick is for him (I'll risk being non-PC by refering to the hero as a male!!) to communicate the predicament, and to keep the AP in. If he can do that, and be talked down, there would be a chance of success.
Having said the above, please remember that I said " a modern Airliner" There are many aircraft being flown about that do not have Autoland capability. If that is the case, then all bets are off. The ability to handfly a B737/DC-9 or bigger aircraft is not something that can be taught on a PC simulator.
From another angle, if I was to talk a non-airline pilot down, I'd rather take a private pilot over a PC pilot, and if the AC is modern, with full automation, I'd rather have a complete novice there, who will not question or second guess me, because his MS FS2000 doesnot have feature "x" that my company's AC has fitted! Sometimes a little knowledge can be dangerous.
Remember, if something like that were to happen while you are on-board, there is a chain of command, and PC pilots are not mentioned anywhere in that. Your most likely involvement would be to operate a radio while an off-duty pilot jumps in to drive, or a cabin attendant makes the MCP selections.
Still, there is nothing wrong with thinking through a possible scenario, it may come in handy one day (or the storyline of a novel) Just remember, if it does happen to you, manage the risk by keeping the AP engaged as long as possible. It will free up your brain power to concentrate on what you are being told/asked by the outside people.
If you get the urge to hand fly, just remember that even experienced airliner pilots normally do 40-90 hours in a full-flight simulator before they fly a new aircraft for the first time. You can only enjoy being a hero if you (and all those behind you) survive.

aisleman,

I'm really sorry, if even after apologizing that post would create such fierce flaming. I truly do not see why that should happen. Are professional pilots a breed that cannot control their emotions and immediately feel threatened if someone suggests he/she could do something without the license that the pilots can? I know that this isn't the case with the majority... Besides, this isn't even the point of the post...


PAXboy,

I appreciate the POV you're bringing to this, but as it is, it's not the issue here whether or not it would happen, rather than could it be done if such was to take place.

skyvan,

Thanks for the informative opinion. Your reply was something that I hoped for :). A "civil" sold reply... lol

Actually, I was also kind of hoping for someone who drives the 767 for living to see if the above sequence would enable the fictional people from the fairly-tale land walk away from the jet...
As I'm just a PC-pilot with ~ 20 landings and a few hundred hours in a real Cessna, it would interest me to see if I was very far from what I _should_ do...

I appreciate the replies, keep em coming!

Tero

aisleman,

_You_ didn't upset me at all !

You just reminded me of something (the attitude of some people) that upsets me, when I get in to too close contact with it ...

regards,
Tero

A really good question!

In the good old days of flight deck visits, I never ceased to be amazed by the knowlege of young kids about just about everything to do with flying a plane - knowledge that had been gleaned almost entirely from MS Flight simulator!

I've often thought that it would be interesting to put these kids into a real flight sim - I wouldn't be at all surprised if they didn't do a better job of it than us! :)

Teropa, no reason at all why a like minded "amateur" should not do the job in extremis, particularly with the help of the automatics and a skilled operator (pilot) on the other end of the radio.

Consider the number of times complete non aviators have been talked down in hand flown light a/c following the incapacitation of their instructor/pilot. The Brian Lecomber incident in the Isle of Wight , and the subsequent (successful) rerun by a non flying journalist springs to mind.

As a keen flight-sim flyer you should be well placed to handle this scenario, even in a big complex transport a/c.

But remember, we commercial pilot are not paid to pull off uneventful take offs and landings, we are paid (generally guite well) to cope with the emergency situation that without our seldom used expertise would certainly kill all on board. Fortunately most of us never need to earn that money, but sometimes, just occasionally, someone does. And that makes it all worthwhile.

So, of course you can hack it when all is working (my mum once flew an acceptable circuit in a Chinook in the sim, and she knows as as much about flying as I know about Japanese), the trick is to keep it all together whan things go wrong.

On a more serious note I'm concerned at teropa's reference to a post by aisleman that does not exist. Sadly this appears to be yet another example of the over zealous use of the veto by the "moderators" on this bulletin board who seem all too willing to excise entire posts without acknowledgement or explanation. The continued use of such Orwellian levels of control does not bode well for the right of free speech here. I know it is "their train set" but the unfettered power of individuals over the voices of the majority usually ends in mess and tears.

Beware...

:( :(

Agaricus

In defence of the moderators (and I've never knowingly met one) I think that their policy is to delete the offending part of the post and if necessary add a warning to the poster that if such comments continue they will be banned or similar.

This seems to be an old topic on which I can recall a few firmly held opinions before.

It is more likely I suspect that aisleman deleted his own posts, which is quite easy to do.

cur

Some while ago I had a good session in a 737 sim at Cranebank, and in the pub debrief we agreed that no, I would not have landed successfully, but that I might have managed a slower crash than some people.

Agaricus.

I really do not know why I am rising to the bait, however your reference to "Orwellian levels of control" is somewhat premature.

The author had the ability to remove their own post, and presumably did !

The only editing you will find from me is when the language is inappropriate or the site rules have been breached to an unacceptable level.

A post is only deleted if the content is so unacceptable that editorial "repair" is not possible. That is is very rare indeed.

I am on holiday and moderating this in my spare time. It will take about five minutes for the jacuzzi to reach the right temperature so you have it.

If you want "free speech" by your own definition then set up your own site. As for ending in "mess and tears", I don't think so .
Anyway the temperature is just right so I am off to soak and relax. Suggest you do likewise.:cool:

Jetdriver et al, yes, you are right, I clean forgot about self deleted posts - silly me.

I seem to have come across rather a lot of censorship on Prune recently and jumped to an umwarranted conclusion. Sorry!

Teropa
 

Well guys, I'm sorry, but I don't agree! I fly the B757-200 and B757-300. (Not B767, but close enough.) I do not think that a non, pilot would be able to successfully land a B767. You refere to the "Speed from the FMC" Well that speed only is correct for the weight you are at. You must work out the landing weight and input it to the FMC before it will give you the speed. Do you know how to do this?? Also you mention lowering the gear and flaps at "an appropriate stage", when would that be?? If you didn't you could stall the aircraft, and big aeroplanes don't recover too well from that! Could you recognise if the aircraft was high or low on the profile?? You do not need to arm all 3 autopilots above 1500ft for an autoland. It does this automatically at 1500ft. You would not know the systems well enough to complete this task. Also you seem to have forgotten the fact that at some stage it will dawn on you that you have 230odd peoples lives in YOUR HANDS and a $70million jet under your control. Could you hack it??
Next a suggestion that anyone can do it will be made. "Who needs training, I have FS2002!!!"
I like flight sim 2000/2002 and they are very realistic. But they are NO MATCH for the real thing!! So in short, no, you couldn't land it!
Eff Oh.

Eff Oh
 

If imagination really is more important than knowledge, why contradict yourself with so much text.

:D Sorry couldn't resist :D

I'm not even good with Flightsim, but if there was nobody else with what seemed like more experience - would I try? Would anybody for that matter ? And could they get it righter than the other alternative !!! If you don't try you'll never know, but given that the alternative otherwise becomes a certainty ......

Those are the real background questions. And the answers lie in the way people panic, or don't until afterwards, if there is an afterwards. Having 270 lives behind me of having 2000 when driving a train, or the 50'000 that we have in every batch in the chemical factory with our computer computer controlled and driven production - that I feel, for many only spurs them on to do better.

PAX have a blind faith that the crew want to go home at the end of the day - otherwise we would never get into something, that we all know logically is to heavy to go anywhere upwards. Every flight is a double miracle - first the take off and then the landing.;)

Gofer.
 

That quote, "Imagination is more important than knowledge", was made by Albert Einstien, not me. Wish I could claim it, coz it's a good one!! :)

Re: Teropa
 

Eff Oh,

I will try to fill in the blanks here. I think you don't give me enough credit here...

Now, correct me if I'm wrong:

Before the pilots left their origin (i.e. preparing the FMC prior to taxi out) they typed into FMC the ZFW for the flight in question. This data is a constant for the flight in question (if the pax and cargo didn't jump out the window lol). The 767 has sensors that "sniff" the amount of fuel in the tanks. Also, if one disagrees with the calculated fuel (found in PERF INIT), one can manually enter the assumed right value.
Now, with this information, the FMC is able to make up the Gross Weight, which simply equals the ZFW + fuel. This weight changes as the flight progresses as the CALC fuel diminshes ... At least in the Honeywell FMC that I'm very familiar with, the Approach page does contain the Approach speeds that are calculated from those very figures. So, to answer your question: I wouldn't have to calculate anything. Please tell me what's amiss here ...


Secondly, if I faced the situation that I had no speed information available through the FMC, I would check what our current calculated GW is and estimate an app speed probably a little above the "right one". Would you say that for a 767 with, say, 20klbs of fuel left with a ZFW of ~ 250 klbs a Flap 30 speed of 135-140 would be so far OFF that it would actually CRASH the plane upon touchdown. I would think that some kind of rough estimation would be enough, IF in the rare case there was something wrong and an app-speed couldn't be read from the CDU. 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...

Secondly, what is there to explain about the flaps? The 767 (and 757) even has Vfe speeds for every setting beside the flap indicator gauge. Also, in the Pegasus-type EADI the red flap- speed zones are clearly visible in the speed tape.

Well, I'll write some detailed information to be more specific.

I'd make sure that I was ~ 5000ft 20-30 miles out, just to be on the safe side. Then I would gradually slow down and would lower the flaps on schedule. The schedule is this, and I would slow down to below Vfe speed before lowering the corr. setting:

flaps 1, 250 IAS
flaps 5, 230 IAS
flaps 15, 210 IAS
flaps 20, 210 IAS
flaps 25, 180 IAS
flaps 30, 170 IAS

I would lower the gear once the G/S came alive, and I assume that I would do this (to be on the safe side) already 10 miles out.
As for the max speed for gear extension in the 763, it's 270 IAS (primary system, same speed for retraction) and if I had to resort to alternative system, it's 250 IAS. So I _really_ don't think I would mess that up.

As for the profile; are you referring to VNAV or ILS profile? Probably to the G/S as I wouldn't be using VNAV for descent. Too much error possibilities, I would just do it with V/S mode and SPD mode in MCP. And YES, I know how to read the ILS indicators in EADI and EHSI :). After reading my first post, do you really have to ask??

As far as I know, standard B767/757 (excluding the B764) AFDS does NOT activate all channels above 1500 AGL automatically. The 777 and next gen 767-400 AFDS does this, but for the rest of the clan, I would have to press the other two APs on to get LAND3. Of course, if one channel was "busted" :) I could also land it with LAND2 which is similar to LAND3, only difference being less redundancy. I'm not arguing with you on your company's 757 AFDS. If it has the automatic activation of all three channels above 1500 AGL, so be it. I didn't know that the older gen 757/767 had this feature.

To comment on the "would I have the balls to do it". I can only say that yes I would. I think I would do ANYTHING to get me and others safely on the ground. Airline pilots are not gods. I agree that you have a big responsibility, a REALLY big responsibility over the PAX, yourself and the aircraft itself. But you are still humans. So are we wannabees and also the rest of us humans.

I have been in engine failure situations three times in a single engine aircraft with my dad (once at night in the middle of nowhere). Each time we held the act together and managed to get the crippled bird back to terra firma in one solid piece. In short, I would TRY to do my best, and if I failed... that would be too bad. As simple as that. I'd like to add that I'm not a stupid teenager with too much time in my hands. I'm 23 and one year to go till I get my M.Sc in electronics. Just so you don't think that I'm an 8-year-old flying with my dad in cessnas once a year and reading too much pilot-magazines ;) lol...

Feel free to bombard me some more, I'm delighted that someone took this perspective to this :=).

cheers,
Tero

Good systems knowledge never landed an aircraft successfully.......


NO to answer your question, and this has all been done before if you try a search.

PP

Pilot Pete,

Could you PLEASE tell me: how is it different, if SOMEONE who knows the systems and how to operate them, pushes the buttons and turns the wheels and switches to accomplish an AUTOLAND to nearest airport, FROM one who has ATPL and turns the same switches and buttons in almost the same sequence.

I don't get it. Please be more specific. HOW is it different ???? Does the aircraft mystically "see" that the person pushing the buttons in the front does NOT have ATPL in the back pocket. Does the aircraft mystically do everything wrong and start malfunctioning in every possible phase and system, IF there is someone doing the magic, with MERE systems knowledge in back of his/her head ?

cheers,
Tero

teropa - it strikes me that every time a professional pilot says it can't be done you don't like it. From the tone of your replies I can only presume that you've already made your mind up.

Your technical knowledge is impressive for someone who isn't even type-rated but it is far from complete. Many older 757's and 767's have had retrofits to many of their sysyems, not least the aotomatic arming of the autoplilots.

You state that you would use "vertical speed" mode. In my opinion this would be the least desirable because it offers NO speed protection.

I could create a massive list of questions that you probably haven't considered but I don't want to use up all of Danny's bandwidth.

Anyway, if you're actually interested in my two cents worth - and I speak from considerable experience (several thousand hours on 767's and a similar number on 757's) - then yes I suppose it may be achievable but in all probability highly unlikely.

Pat Pong,

I knew that someone would soon make the remark about me being defensive on the issue. I'll explain a little further...

I'm not fishing for an unanimous agreement that "yes all the knowledgeable sim pilots could do it, sure...".

Neither am I arguing with people here :). I'm arguing the arguments as to why it could not be done. Do you see my point ?

I DON'T claim that I could ever know the same amount about a plane than, for example, someone who's type-rated. Not in a million years (at least I hope so, heh). Nor do I claim that I could handfly one such jet (say 767) for more than some manouvering, clean and up far away from ground. I know that professionals are professional, and it's the same with (almost) everything in the world.

AND like Agaricus Bisporus put it: "But remember, we commercial pilot are not paid to pull off uneventful take offs and landings, we are paid (generally guite well) to cope with the emergency situation that without our seldom used expertise would certainly kill all on board. Fortunately most of us never need to earn that money, but sometimes, just occasionally, someone does. And that makes it all worthwhile. " <<<< THAT I wholeheartedly agree!

But the "need" for such a claim that I (or someone knowledgeable enough) could pull this thing off arises from a couple of things, which I will list here. Also this has nothing to do with pretending to be someone I'm not. It's mere speculation and I think it's interesting enough to "eat up the precious bandwidth" (sarcasm added :=)).

This topic pops up every once in a while in flightsimming community and I believe the reasons to this are:

- the sophistication of systems and modelling in today's "nintendos". It's quite remarkable...really. The core of the simulation is outstanding and many have built whole cockpits around it. (www.projectmagenta.com)

- the amount of information us (serious) armchair pilots have gathered along the years. It's not just playing, hasn't been for years.

- on a personal note: the fact that I handflew a level-D MD11 simulator succesfully for couple of approaches and takeoffs etc. with no problem. It wasn't tough in "all systems OK" -situation. Of course, in the case of emergency the story would be different.. it wouldn't exist :).

- on a personal note: the fact that some PPL owners claim that FS flight modelling even in the smaller planes (whose flight dynamics have been compiled by real experts) is crappy, WHICH I couldn't DISAGREE more. I think that, for example, Ron Freimuth's flight dynamics for, say, 172 is right on the money. So this brings up the controversy in larger airliners as well: there are ATPLs who say that "it's very close to the real thing" and those who say that "nintendos have nothing to do with flying". Again, it seems to be a matter of an opinion.

and finally:

- the reasons to why many just "fly" with computers are various: health, money, family-issues etc. Many would like to think that they have actually learnt something from the SIMULATION of the very thing they would like to do MOST, but can't due to the issues they have. It's got something to do with confidence and the rewarding feeling of "I could probably do that" or at least "I could probably learn that" (!)

My personal opinion regarding the matter is already said. But I repeat it: Given the right circumstances (i.e. fully functional aircraft, OK weather and the simpilot being already familiar with the said aircraft's systems) I think that MOST _serious_ (emphasis on the word _serious_) flightsimmers could pull it off if they kept their cool.

I would also like to REMIND those of you, who now say: "I could ask you a thousand questions that you wouldn't know how to answer" , that _so could I_ (!). Remember that I'm not taking an exam here, especially not the theory-part of type-rating for every possible jet ! No one knows everything about everything, for crying out loud. Point being that there are heaps of knowledge and also little pieces of information regarding different types of aircraft, that it would be crazy to say that if a SIMMER doesn't know it all, he/she's not worthy ! Wouldn't you agree ? Are you aware of every possible modification that has been made for every single jet you see parked next to you in the morning when you toss your flight bag behind your seat in the flight deck. I bet you don't.

I thoroughly enjoy this discussion, but I understand if the Chief Pilot doesn't want it to continue anymore. Although I don't see a specific reason to why it couldn't. I respect everyone's opinion and it's only fun to try to justify one's own POVs and such :)

cheers,
Tero

I think it could be done as long as all systems are all functioning and weather is favourable.

Not only in a 767 though..Wilco did a good job on it,and its very immersive,but so are the PSS 747-400 and 777-200,and scroggs said on the wannabes forum that their A320 was also very accurate.

So,me,who has been in command of a 777 Level D sim, and got the PSS one aswell,I did an autoland and programmed the FMC no sweat. Slight differences but nothing you cannot figure out with logic.

I have been in the jumpseat of an A300-600R a couple of times though and seeing how fast the ground is coming towards you on final,I would definately be anxious to hear the rumble of the gear on the runway,and soon!!

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????? :rolleyes: 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.

40k??? You're on the beers mate! :D ;)

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.

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 :=).

Eff Oh, I've flown a bundle of CAT I approaches followed by autolands and been able to walk away every single time..

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. ;)

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?

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

Tero,

People with no fear frighten me to death!!:eek:

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.

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. :Engine 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.

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.

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

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!!) :D
Eff Oh.

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

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.

PC Pilots
 

I think all advanced PC Pilots would have not problems in landing the A/C they know.
The most difficult part would be to find the right stand on the ground.

Thank you.

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?

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.

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 :p. Let's just hope that in the interest of safety for those on board, this will never happend. ;)