Pilot handling skills under threat, says Airbus

[opherben]

"Actually, thanks to the FBW system they DIDN'T stall the aircraft."


While I am on the controls flying an airplane, I do not want anything computerised to intervene in any of the 3 control channels (except in case of a structural issue such as the A310 tail shearing at KJFK due to yaw overcontrol. That system wasn't designed properly in the first place.)

I know how to fly at maximum angle at attack and beyond and do not want any engineer to override my decisions and inputs, because I am there at the heart of a developing situation and know better what is the best course of action. Let alone change the way the aircraft responds to control inputs because certain conditions the designer believed right had occured (automatic switching of control laws). That may be good for Mr Spock but not me, a simple but educated human.

[DoNotFeed]

education at it's best

Reading opherben

"I know how to fly at maximum angle at attack and beyond"

keep on taking lessons!

regards

[Clandestino]

He's quite secretive about his current type - you never know, it might be something designed by Sukhoi OKB. That would make his statement perfectly valid.

[FlyingHeavy]

I have to agree long haul flying will reduce your flying skills. I've spent 18 years flying the classic Whale and I averaged less than 3 full landings in a month. Just prior to my annual check I would have to ensure I had flown enough approaches so as not to embarrass myself. Use it or lose it.

[Tee Emm]

I don't think it's an Airbus problem or a Boeing problem

Maybe or maybe not.. One thing is for sure, though. And that is neither manufacturer give serious attention in their respective flight crew training manuals to encouraging crews to keep up manual flying skills. Just about every recommendation on how to operate their aircraft is based upon using automation to the fullest extent. Is it any wonder that the airline operations management are more or less forced to go along with automation policy for the real fear of litigation if something amiss should occur. .

The 737 FCTM, under a chapter on automatic flight, reveals how much Boeing push automatic flight. Among other things it has a statement: "Automatic systems give excellent results in the vast majority of situations. Deviations from expected performance are normally due to an incomplete understanding of their operations by the flight crew".

That is true, of course and no argument there. Then it goes on to say: "When the automatic systems do not perform as expected, the pilot should reduce the level of automation until proper flight path and performance is achieved....reducing the level of automation as far as manual flight may be necessary to ensure proper control of the airplane is maintained..."

This suggests that automatic flight is the only safe way to operate but if the sh..t hits the fan the pilot may be forced to actually hand fly. In other words, hand flying is the last resort and even then we read "..the pilot should attempt to restore to higher levels of automation only after aircraft control is assured..."

Faced with that Boeing philosophy, it is a courageous flight operations manager that disregards the manufacturer's advice and authorises crews via official channels to hand fly as much as reasonable to keep their manipulative skills up to scratch - just in case they have to "reduce the level of automation as far as manual flight if necessary..."

[POL.777]

Roger Coppid. I fully understand why your man in the left seat denied you the pleasure of switching of part of the hydraulics. These things are better left for the SIM. On a day to day flight we are not supposed to do training. What we are being paid for is getting the plane from A to B in a safe and efficient way. Thereby not said that you shouldn't fly manually raw data when the conditions are good.

[DA50driver]

Automation

A new pilot in a fully automated cockpit watches the automation do something unexpected and says, "What is it doing now?" An experienced pilot in the same situation says, "It's doing it again".

[Tee Emm]

[QUOTEThereby not said that you shouldn't fly manually raw data when the conditions are good.][/QUOTE]

Does that mean only CAVOK? Hardly with the effort and certainly little value when you can see outside. Raw data to Cat One ILS minima was the norm until flight directors came into vogue.

[POL.777]

Depends on the day, and the anticipated workload. I regularly fly raw data in IMC, but I don't do it if I am tired/fatigued or if I am flying with a 200 hour cadet next to me.
I do my best to maintain basic flying skills, and I encourage my F/Os to do the same, but at the end of the day the F/O is flying on my license, and I will have to take responsibility for any track deviation or unstable approach. Flight data monitoring and a culture of blame and punishment within the airlines I have flown for, sets a limit for how much "training" you can do on the line. Merely protecting my license, job and income.

[iceman50]

Roger Coppid

You must be a troll and I should not be taking the bait however!

I told my captain the other day I wanted to fly a manual approach with some hydraulics disconnected. This would have meant flying with only half the elevator controls working...it would have been good fun

so I think he should have let me have some fun and try it. I think the Airbus can have things switched off to make it go Law-Directe, we should do that sometimes too,

You do not do that with fare paying passengers on board just for FUN, that is the LAW. That is why we have simulators.

[p51guy]

Occasionally I would hand fly the 757 on wet compass and emergency altimeter, AS and attitude indicator just to get the scan working. Everything else was still fine but didn't look at it for a while. They put that emergency stuff in airplanes hoping you can use it. Training doesn't because they have too many other squares to fill. Starting out in an Aeronca champ 7AC with no battery but needle ball and airspeed made the 757 on standby instruments easy. For you younger guys we had a venturie tube that made enough suction at 70 mph to keep the gyros spun up. Not like the AB laws we only had one level of automation, none. It worked just fine. If all else failed point south, pull the power back and descend with no gyros using compass lead error to stay on heading. It works in all aircraft, big and small. At least in the northern hemisphere.

[angelorange]

Flight School WW2 style

This might be up your street P51guy!

How to Fly A P-47

[PJ2]

Originally Posted by Roger Coppid 4th January 2010 19:15

You mentioned "when the conditions are good", but they were. We had Cavok and light winds, so I think he should have let me have some fun and try it. I think the Airbus can have things switched off to make it go Law-Directe, we should do that sometimes too, as you never know when you might need these skills-right?

Well, if this isn't some kid with a computer pulling our pxsser and this is for real, this sounds like another Perpignan-in-the-making to me. Next thing we'll hear about is a crew "trying out Alpha Prot", just for the fun of it.

If you're serious, it's the epitome of personal irresponsibility as a transport pilot to experiment with your airplane while passengers are on board and it is almost the same thing doing it without passengers on board because one threatens the viability of one's employer.

FYI Roger, take a look at the FAA's Safety Alert For Operations, "Safety During Positioning Flights" and, "Review of Flight Data Recorder Data from Non-Revenue Flights"

Pilots unions and pilots themselves want protection from inappropriate use of flight data from their flights. They can't have it both ways.

If you're shutting off hydraulic systems on an A320 "just for the fun of it", to me all protections regarding use of the data are off because you and your fellow crew member are intentionally non-compliant with SOPs and are operating outside the boundaries of most airlines' published safety reporting policies.

[Pugilistic Animus]

when you feel just fine,... to heck with it ,... handfly,...if you feel like crap use automatics,...if you practice hand flying when you feel great,,, you'd be able to get your brain outta your butt quicker if the **** hits the fan [read BelArgUsa for that tale ] AND you feel like crap

did everyone get that?


Danny picked just the right smilies for a pilot
PA

[shortfinals]

Flight's annual safety review contains a discussion of this issue:

" A vital component in an airline pilot's recurrent training has gone missing with the advent of high levels of automation, and at present this training has not been replaced.
The missing component is the on-the-job mental and physical interactivity with the aircraft and its navigation systems that pilots used to get in "round-dial" classic cockpits that lacked integrated navigation displays and highly capable digital flight management systems. All pilots still learn the basic "raw data" capability during their ab initio training, but if they go straight on to highly automated aircraft they may never use it again. That is not a problem until an electrical anomaly leaves them with nothing but standby instruments, or with a reduced panel, at night or in instrument meteorological conditions."

Full story at: Global airline accident review of 2009

[PGA]

Skills will be lost, that became very evident during my last sim when the cpt was flying his raw data ILS, all over the place.

Obviously this was debriefed, however the reply was: "I stick in the a/p at 100ft and disconnect at 200", well the result was there......

It was good fun flying in to foggy Paris this morning from FL90 onwards without ap/a-thr/fd's.

[Pugilistic Animus]

Yeah,...don't get beaten by an old man in a cub

YouTube - Piper Cub Stunt Pilot - Charlie Kulp

edit: I've seen him live

[goldfish85]

A new pilot in a fully automated cockpit watches the automation do something unexpected and says, "What is it doing now?" An experienced pilot in the same situation says, "It's doing it again".

And the check pilot nods wisely and explains: "It does that sometimes."




Goldfish85

[Microburst2002]

Yes.

And sometimes, after years, you can even say
"Hey, I have just found out why this happens sometimes. It is because..."
And then realise how tricky modern computerized airplanes can be.

Then you write a post here about it and some knwoledgeable veteran ruins your theory, so the next time you just say... "Ok it's doing that again. so what. The hell with it, I don't give a damm, anyway"

[PJ2]

PGA;

Skills will be lost, that became very evident during my last sim when the cpt was flying his raw data ILS, all over the place.

Obviously this was debriefed, however the reply was: "I stick in the a/p at 100ft and disconnect at 200", well the result was there......

It was good fun flying in to foggy Paris this morning from FL90 onwards without ap/a-thr/fd's.

I used to hand-fly every approach both on the A320, A330 and A340 even though no one else would or wanted to, until disconnection was restricted by the Ops Manual to "non-traffic, non-busy" environments - essentially, every time an incident occured which involved hand-flying, the restrictions got tighter, but the training syllabus did not change from its priority on automation use. Eventually disconnection became a risk to one's career because it was so strongly discouraged and if one had an incident, the policy provided the avenue for blame.

Automation does contribute to flight safety - no doubt. When fatigue is high, one is being vectored into LaGuardia or Hong Kong, etc and things are very busy for the two or three pilots, (3rd being the Relief Pilot), then engaging is a smart thing to do; when navigation precision is required as for the SIDS especially out of Europe (thinking London, Frankfurt, Paris, mainly), engagement is wise even if one is fresh.

However, the Ops Manuals ought to guide crews regarding appropriate levels of automation engagement right down to fully-manual, no FD hand-flying and the airplane SOPs ought to permit full disengagement when appropriate so that crews are not violating company policy or SOPs. Believe it or not, some associations/unions have to fight hard to ensure these provisionsf within their company.

Personally I wouldnt' fly the Paris arrivals by hand but that's just me - many might and do it well out of familiarity if nothing else.

The key is engagement that suits both the pilot flying, the crew complement and the traffic/ATC/weather/fatigue circumstances and beyond trusting experience and training, it is pretty difficult to make specific rules.