Modern Training erroding pilot skills
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would the test pilot explain EXACTLY why you can not side slip a Boeing in modest cross winds.
And would the test pilots mate explain EXACTLY why the engine will fail, near to the ground mind, if you so much a think of x-controls.
When I was on the Gemini program we did not take Oxford cadets-real pain in the butt-lots of trap and no ability. This was a view I held all the way through as head of the Staturn program untill I retired recently as head of manual flight skills for NASA/TOP GUN.
And would the test pilots mate explain EXACTLY why the engine will fail, near to the ground mind, if you so much a think of x-controls.
When I was on the Gemini program we did not take Oxford cadets-real pain in the butt-lots of trap and no ability. This was a view I held all the way through as head of the Staturn program untill I retired recently as head of manual flight skills for NASA/TOP GUN.
Psychophysiological entity
This is something that I feel very, very strongly about…but my thoughts have all been said in an impassioned chapter at the end of Davis’ HTBJs--later editions.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 63
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope this won't be taken as 'thread creep'. What about visual apps? Sure you can do 'em autos in or out or FD on/off. Great practice tho and an excellent chance to get rid of the AP and the FD for the most interesting bit of the sector.
Seeing my fellow pilots around Europe leads me to conclude that for many a 'visual' is something to avoid; whether it's laziness, lack of confidence, company procedures or lack of hand flying skill or maybe a combination of these thats to blame I know not.
But.
1. It can save time
2. It can save fuel
3. It helps prevent queues building up.
4. Keeps your hand flying skills sharper
5. Makes you think out your own approach instead of relying on ATC
6. It's fun!
Of course not a go-er everywhere but still possible often and at some airports more than others.
Seeing my fellow pilots around Europe leads me to conclude that for many a 'visual' is something to avoid; whether it's laziness, lack of confidence, company procedures or lack of hand flying skill or maybe a combination of these thats to blame I know not.
But.
1. It can save time
2. It can save fuel
3. It helps prevent queues building up.
4. Keeps your hand flying skills sharper
5. Makes you think out your own approach instead of relying on ATC
6. It's fun!
Of course not a go-er everywhere but still possible often and at some airports more than others.
Paxing All Over The World
Earthmover
How is it possible for a company to take a valuable member of staff (Cpt / FO) and put them through their six monthly check and yet risk them 'failing' because they have turned the Instructor into a Tester?
I was followign this thread with interest as I recall a similar one a couple of years ago and was recalling that one reported problem was with carriers insisting that automatics were used more in oder to save fuel and so forth.
After 27 years in commerce and govt, I thought that I had heard most of it but this new peice of information from Earthmover, really leaves me aghast.
I LOATHE the principle that I now have sit there with my mouth shut. Make cock-up? - Fail, tick the box.
I was followign this thread with interest as I recall a similar one a couple of years ago and was recalling that one reported problem was with carriers insisting that automatics were used more in oder to save fuel and so forth.
After 27 years in commerce and govt, I thought that I had heard most of it but this new peice of information from Earthmover, really leaves me aghast.
the lunatic fringe
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Make cock-up? - Fail, tick the box
Make cock-up. If relatively minor or with an easy solution. Verbal debrief, then do it again. If another cock up fail that bit. First attempt fail. Wait till end, then instructors hat on. Practice that bit until it is proficient. Then put testers hat back on. Do it again, if then not good enough. Second attempt fail. Fail check. If five or more first attempt fails. Fail check.
L337
Slightly OT here but where has all the fear of sideslipping come from? All the Boeings I have flown are pretty docile up to quite a large slip angle. Indeed, the test pilots themselves are usually keen to demonstrate this to anyone interested.
If you land "wing down" in a 40kt crosswind (I find this the easiest method), you are in a sideslip, the same as you are immediately after liftoff in the same conditions. OK, if you whack in full rudder and aileron in a highly streamlined aircraft there might be trouble ahead but contemporary subsonic wings seem to be more about higher aspect ratio/larger span than excessive sweepback.
Modern engine inlets are quite happy working against some quite radical angles of airflow and turbulence - all part of the certification. If it was that bad, crosswind takeoffs woudn't be allowed!
If you land "wing down" in a 40kt crosswind (I find this the easiest method), you are in a sideslip, the same as you are immediately after liftoff in the same conditions. OK, if you whack in full rudder and aileron in a highly streamlined aircraft there might be trouble ahead but contemporary subsonic wings seem to be more about higher aspect ratio/larger span than excessive sweepback.
Modern engine inlets are quite happy working against some quite radical angles of airflow and turbulence - all part of the certification. If it was that bad, crosswind takeoffs woudn't be allowed!
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...where has all the fear of sideslipping come from?
Our MD11 procedure is to put in the correction by 300' agl on final.
I don't particularly care for this (VERY hard to do in the sim - visuals get screwed up) but there you are.
Fullwings: Which airplane can sustain landing in a 40 knot crosswind? Can most line pilots avoid exceeding the max. bank angle?
This must be an exaggeration. Even if limitations state 38 knots on a dry runway was flown by factory test pilots, I've seen no actual "line pilots" (guys/gals with over 30-35 years flying) attempt over about 30 knots; probably doubtful that the runway could be dry. And what if a reverser or autospoiler is on MEL?
This must be an exaggeration. Even if limitations state 38 knots on a dry runway was flown by factory test pilots, I've seen no actual "line pilots" (guys/gals with over 30-35 years flying) attempt over about 30 knots; probably doubtful that the runway could be dry. And what if a reverser or autospoiler is on MEL?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
40 kt across !
On my last sector as an FO the captain let me land the aircraft (738) with 40 kt at 90 degrees to the runway.
The guy's attitude was that next time I was faced with the situation I would have no one to help me if I was getting it wrong.
The most chalanging approach that I have flown was into MAN a few months back , it was a quatering croswind 20 gusting 48kt with a lot of turbulance a number of guys went around and diverted but with the condtitons changing by the second I think that I might have got lucky with the weather and would not seek to question any one who diverted that day.
However I don't think that my skills as a pilot are anything other than average but my hand flying skills are probably a bit sharper than most because I fly a lot of light aircraft and this keeps me in practice, I feel that with the same amount of practice most pilots would be equaly happy to hand fly aircraft to the flight manual limmits if it was wise to do so under the prevailing conditions.
The guy's attitude was that next time I was faced with the situation I would have no one to help me if I was getting it wrong.
The most chalanging approach that I have flown was into MAN a few months back , it was a quatering croswind 20 gusting 48kt with a lot of turbulance a number of guys went around and diverted but with the condtitons changing by the second I think that I might have got lucky with the weather and would not seek to question any one who diverted that day.
However I don't think that my skills as a pilot are anything other than average but my hand flying skills are probably a bit sharper than most because I fly a lot of light aircraft and this keeps me in practice, I feel that with the same amount of practice most pilots would be equaly happy to hand fly aircraft to the flight manual limmits if it was wise to do so under the prevailing conditions.
Last edited by A and C; 24th Aug 2005 at 06:45.
Pardon this question. It is not intended as anything negative.
Pprune is basically a British ("Commonwealth")/European website.
I have a huge amount of respect for what the RAF and RN achieved in WW2 (other nations, on the Continent or elsewhere, also had some amazingly skilled pilots). Most RAF transports and bombers were flown by only one, single pilot! The British aviation industry produced numerous excellent aircraft, even long after the war, and never stopped.
Is it just possible, that British aviation, or othe nations' aviation cultures, subconsciously "rests on their laurels", i.e. having a nation that survived 1940-1945 (or did their utmost to survive...)partly due to aviation's accomplishments, and results in a lack of appreciation for hand-flying skills? Does the lousy weather and reliance on instruments result in too much faith in SOP, or is it parly due to the crowded airspace over there (like the eastern US)?
Pprune is basically a British ("Commonwealth")/European website.
I have a huge amount of respect for what the RAF and RN achieved in WW2 (other nations, on the Continent or elsewhere, also had some amazingly skilled pilots). Most RAF transports and bombers were flown by only one, single pilot! The British aviation industry produced numerous excellent aircraft, even long after the war, and never stopped.
Is it just possible, that British aviation, or othe nations' aviation cultures, subconsciously "rests on their laurels", i.e. having a nation that survived 1940-1945 (or did their utmost to survive...)partly due to aviation's accomplishments, and results in a lack of appreciation for hand-flying skills? Does the lousy weather and reliance on instruments result in too much faith in SOP, or is it parly due to the crowded airspace over there (like the eastern US)?
Last edited by Ignition Override; 24th Aug 2005 at 06:47.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignition
Having flown for both an American part 121 airline and a few brithsh airlines I think that what you have to say about the crowded airspace has a lot to do with the degrading of skills however a lot of the new generation of pilots flight training has been via the JAA integrated course and the student has to pick up a $75,000 tab so the pressure is on to do the course with the minimum required time and so flying for practice is not encouraged or te student simply can't afford to do it.
The guy's then have to pay for the type airliner traninng and likewise that is done to the minimum standard with the minimum amount of time in the sim.
The JAA thinks that by insisting on approved courses and closely comtroled traininng that has someone into an airliner flight deck with only 250 hours real flying and one sim course that they are upholding flying standards when quite the opposite is true and to my deep dismay things are going to get worse with all the sim based training that the JAA propose.
In the old days the airlines paid for the lucky few (the very best people that they could get) to do the approved course and with 250 hours these people could probably fly the aircraft but the rest if us had to go the non-approved route and do 700 hours in light aircraft before a CPL was issued (we could instruct or glider tug on a PPL) this provided the airlines with pilots how had a lot of hand flying practice and had been "in comand" of an aircraft without too much outside supervision.
This situation did not put money in the hands of the big training companys so they put the pressure on the JAA to come up with the CPL/ATPL as we now have it.
The guy's then have to pay for the type airliner traninng and likewise that is done to the minimum standard with the minimum amount of time in the sim.
The JAA thinks that by insisting on approved courses and closely comtroled traininng that has someone into an airliner flight deck with only 250 hours real flying and one sim course that they are upholding flying standards when quite the opposite is true and to my deep dismay things are going to get worse with all the sim based training that the JAA propose.
In the old days the airlines paid for the lucky few (the very best people that they could get) to do the approved course and with 250 hours these people could probably fly the aircraft but the rest if us had to go the non-approved route and do 700 hours in light aircraft before a CPL was issued (we could instruct or glider tug on a PPL) this provided the airlines with pilots how had a lot of hand flying practice and had been "in comand" of an aircraft without too much outside supervision.
This situation did not put money in the hands of the big training companys so they put the pressure on the JAA to come up with the CPL/ATPL as we now have it.
Fullwings: Which airplane can sustain landing in a 40 knot crosswind?
Can most line pilots avoid exceeding the max. bank angle?
Some use "wing down" to remove a proportion of the drift angle and do the rest very close to the runway or even let the landing gear absorb the offset.
This must be an exaggeration. Even if limitations state 38 knots on a dry runway was flown by factory test pilots, I've seen no actual "line pilots" (guys/gals with over 30-35 years flying) attempt over about 30 knots; probably doubtful that the runway could be dry. And what if a reverser or autospoiler is on MEL?
If you have MEL items then you take careful note of any restrictions that apply to them, crosswinds being an obvious example. I'm not sure either of those defects above would affect x-wind limits on my type (not having an MEL to hand) but anything that affected control authority (hydraulics, etc.) certainly would.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airplanes of the future are not going to require "basic flying skills"...unfortunately.....bean counters rule.....the possibility that a future airliner mighe be lost due to the "pilots" not knowing how to actually fly it, and it maybe totally unflyable anyway..will be an "acceptable risk"....get the picture????
Join Date: May 2000
Location: SV Marie Celeste
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While the MEL allows dispatch with both aoutopilots u/s it is necesary to keep your handflying skills current. You can be asked at any time (and I have a few times) to handfly two or more sectors, sometimes into cat C airfileds, sometimes in challenging weather conditions often tired after a long day. Is this the time to start relearning old skills?
This also applies to circling approaches, TCAS RA'S, Winshear and GPWS scape maneuvers, failure of the automatics to operate normally without even going into elaborate hydraulic or electric failures.
Handflying skills are still required in an airline environment, at least for now.
This also applies to circling approaches, TCAS RA'S, Winshear and GPWS scape maneuvers, failure of the automatics to operate normally without even going into elaborate hydraulic or electric failures.
Handflying skills are still required in an airline environment, at least for now.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What skills in an Airbus fly by wire...GPWS escape...stick back???? windshear...stick back???? as it should be....airline flying is slowly being lowered to the lowest common denominator.....the human factor....they will never get rid of that because then there will be no one to blame....
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London England UK
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Below is an abstract from a major UK training organisation's website:
It is simply no longer the ability to fly the aircraft that matters. Much of your flying will actually be carried out through the autopilot and the flight management system.
Today you are expected to be the manger of a complex set of circumstances and equipment; to adapt to the ever changing real world around you. To operate commercially as well as exceed the expectations of the customers which pay your salary.
It is simply no longer the ability to fly the aircraft that matters. Much of your flying will actually be carried out through the autopilot and the flight management system.
Today you are expected to be the manger of a complex set of circumstances and equipment; to adapt to the ever changing real world around you. To operate commercially as well as exceed the expectations of the customers which pay your salary.
You folks raised some very good points.
As Captain, I'm just a little more conservative on crosswinds over 15 knots on wet runways than as FO years ago (.
) . One go-around (this was spelled "ego around"! ...maybe this is THE only main point!) was due to sudden rain and just a crosswind as such: it was not very gusty and the runway fairly long-but nobody had braking action reports. The FO with me had been a KC-135 or AWACS Instructor Pilot, and I could have easily landed but the sudden increase in surface wind combined with lower visibility, when on a three mile final, inspired a message in my head. This subtle voice told me to not be the first to land (even if the other pilot felt that it was wimpy of me). Let's not forget about how slippery wet rubber can be in warm weather (might prefer thin patches of dry snow).
On dry asphalt, the max crosswinds I could probably handle ok, but the planes are certificated by factory test pilots with lots of practice, or at least that has always been my impression. My main problem has been to sometimes clarify, by calling tower, that there is not a sudden quartering tailwind on a short, wet runway. Automatic wind-reporting equipment has been known to malfunction (i.e., at SAT), stating the wrong wind direction, but if due to a rain shower, it can be best to stay at 2,000-3,000' etc and wait for the winds to slow down, at least the tailwind component (or get vectored out to an ILS in the opposite direction).
By the way, having never trained on the A-319/320, comments made about its inertia and handling in crosswinds always sounds interesting and puzzling. How much near maximum limits do regular LINE pilots operate on the A-320 etc?
As Captain, I'm just a little more conservative on crosswinds over 15 knots on wet runways than as FO years ago (.
) . One go-around (this was spelled "ego around"! ...maybe this is THE only main point!) was due to sudden rain and just a crosswind as such: it was not very gusty and the runway fairly long-but nobody had braking action reports. The FO with me had been a KC-135 or AWACS Instructor Pilot, and I could have easily landed but the sudden increase in surface wind combined with lower visibility, when on a three mile final, inspired a message in my head. This subtle voice told me to not be the first to land (even if the other pilot felt that it was wimpy of me). Let's not forget about how slippery wet rubber can be in warm weather (might prefer thin patches of dry snow). On dry asphalt, the max crosswinds I could probably handle ok, but the planes are certificated by factory test pilots with lots of practice, or at least that has always been my impression. My main problem has been to sometimes clarify, by calling tower, that there is not a sudden quartering tailwind on a short, wet runway. Automatic wind-reporting equipment has been known to malfunction (i.e., at SAT), stating the wrong wind direction, but if due to a rain shower, it can be best to stay at 2,000-3,000' etc and wait for the winds to slow down, at least the tailwind component (or get vectored out to an ILS in the opposite direction).
By the way, having never trained on the A-319/320, comments made about its inertia and handling in crosswinds always sounds interesting and puzzling. How much near maximum limits do regular LINE pilots operate on the A-320 etc?
Last edited by Ignition Override; 27th Aug 2005 at 05:09.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Handflying skills are still required in an airline environment
airline flying is slowly being lowered to the lowest common denominator
Back in '96-'97 UAL had a human resources department that preferred to hire low-time "nobodies" rather than the literally thousands of highly experienced and qualified pilots available then, as they felt that the young uns could be molded to fit the company profile better.
Unfortunately the game is still played that way in much of Europe and the rest of the world.
Regarding CpilotUKs post and quote from the training organisation.
Can anyone explain how an airline pilot can meaningfully exceed the expectations of the customers -ie the SLF-a position I do feel qualified to comment upon.
My expectations are that the people up front are competent and professionally trained and that they give me a safe comfortable ride. As I like aircraft a few informative words about the route and flight are always nice too-but how does any of this exceed customers expectations.
Does anyone seriously get on a plane with low expectations of the flight crews competence ?
Would I be comfortable witha voice from the flight deck saying - "Well folks LHR has 60kt crosswinds and everyone else has diverted but here at KrazeeAir we are going to get you down anyway-we aim to exceed your expecations"
These sorts of phrases and statements are dreamt up at weekend or evening Management Seminars -the objective being to come up with something that sounds or looks good litle thought being given to its relevance or practicality.
Perhaps someone should start a parallel thread on dangers posed by falling management standards-that might be nearer the mark. Case study One-British Airways-"I have a good idea boss -lets outsource the catering"
PB
Can anyone explain how an airline pilot can meaningfully exceed the expectations of the customers -ie the SLF-a position I do feel qualified to comment upon.
My expectations are that the people up front are competent and professionally trained and that they give me a safe comfortable ride. As I like aircraft a few informative words about the route and flight are always nice too-but how does any of this exceed customers expectations.
Does anyone seriously get on a plane with low expectations of the flight crews competence ?
Would I be comfortable witha voice from the flight deck saying - "Well folks LHR has 60kt crosswinds and everyone else has diverted but here at KrazeeAir we are going to get you down anyway-we aim to exceed your expecations"
These sorts of phrases and statements are dreamt up at weekend or evening Management Seminars -the objective being to come up with something that sounds or looks good litle thought being given to its relevance or practicality.
Perhaps someone should start a parallel thread on dangers posed by falling management standards-that might be nearer the mark. Case study One-British Airways-"I have a good idea boss -lets outsource the catering"
PB
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the feeling that if you took the gamut of techniques from 'hand-flying all the time' to 'only taking the autopilot off at 80 feet to land' the mean has migrated in the direction of the latter over the years.
I spent most of my career flying light aircraft single-pilot, many of which simply had no autopilot. I guess I carried over an attitude that an autopilot is something in the 'nice to have' category rather than an integral design feature when I moved to flying Transport Category aircraft so that some people would get upset that I really wasn't all that interested in using it for everything all the time, including flying a basically visual pattern, say. I prefer to stay heads-up rather than going head-down to program the automatics if I am close-in with the field in sight; this makes perfect sense to me but seems to be heresy to some guys.
Too, I have noticed some of the younger guys baffled by some aspects of basic hand-flying such as a smooth touchdown on a cross-wind landing, when I was unable to give them absolutely quantifiable data to use.
You know, 'Use the sight picture to put the airplane where you want it and then try to "feel" what it is doing.' That makes sense but it's not quantifiable in the way that programming an FMS is. So I think some guys really like the quantifiable stuff and let the hand-flying stuff go as 'old-fashioned', perhaps?
I usually just excuse outbursts of hand-flying as 'getting ready for my sim check.' The truth is, though, I still enjoy hand-flying the aircraft. That is not to say that I do not know how to manage all the automatic stuff too. Oh, and in my spare time practice good CRM. (You know, if I really, really wanted to work with other people I would have been a pyschoanalyst or perhaps a counsellor to troubled youths. I went into flying to work with machines, and I end up working with people! Go figure...)
Shouldn't one be able to do ALL of this very well, preferences aside? That is what we are paid for, after all.
It sure does make it easier in the sim when you already can hand-fly the thing without too much strain, since the next thing that seems to happen is an autopilot failure of some sort once some situation arises.
I spent most of my career flying light aircraft single-pilot, many of which simply had no autopilot. I guess I carried over an attitude that an autopilot is something in the 'nice to have' category rather than an integral design feature when I moved to flying Transport Category aircraft so that some people would get upset that I really wasn't all that interested in using it for everything all the time, including flying a basically visual pattern, say. I prefer to stay heads-up rather than going head-down to program the automatics if I am close-in with the field in sight; this makes perfect sense to me but seems to be heresy to some guys.
Too, I have noticed some of the younger guys baffled by some aspects of basic hand-flying such as a smooth touchdown on a cross-wind landing, when I was unable to give them absolutely quantifiable data to use.
You know, 'Use the sight picture to put the airplane where you want it and then try to "feel" what it is doing.' That makes sense but it's not quantifiable in the way that programming an FMS is. So I think some guys really like the quantifiable stuff and let the hand-flying stuff go as 'old-fashioned', perhaps?
I usually just excuse outbursts of hand-flying as 'getting ready for my sim check.' The truth is, though, I still enjoy hand-flying the aircraft. That is not to say that I do not know how to manage all the automatic stuff too. Oh, and in my spare time practice good CRM. (You know, if I really, really wanted to work with other people I would have been a pyschoanalyst or perhaps a counsellor to troubled youths. I went into flying to work with machines, and I end up working with people! Go figure...)
Shouldn't one be able to do ALL of this very well, preferences aside? That is what we are paid for, after all.
It sure does make it easier in the sim when you already can hand-fly the thing without too much strain, since the next thing that seems to happen is an autopilot failure of some sort once some situation arises.