NTSB update on Asiana 214
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basic, basic flying on approach/landing is - aimpoint, airspeed.
That's really BASIC flying. It didn't happen.
Watching guys eyes on final below 1000'. Longest interval to glance to at airspeed is typically 5 seconds. It can be as quick as every two seconds. At 500' they were was slow and correction took over 40 seconds, and perhaps 50 seconds? What were they looking at?
NASA has done eye tracking studies. They probably have the data on how often crews look at airspeed on final.
That's really BASIC flying. It didn't happen.
Watching guys eyes on final below 1000'. Longest interval to glance to at airspeed is typically 5 seconds. It can be as quick as every two seconds. At 500' they were was slow and correction took over 40 seconds, and perhaps 50 seconds? What were they looking at?
NASA has done eye tracking studies. They probably have the data on how often crews look at airspeed on final.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
misd-agin:
For those who have a modern HUD and know how to use it, they are looking at IAS almost continuously.
The F-18 comes to mind. It came out in the early 1980s with a HUD.
NASA has done eye tracking studies. They probably have the data on how often crews look at airspeed on final.
The F-18 comes to mind. It came out in the early 1980s with a HUD.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ceduna
Age: 71
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FLCH trap, A/T Hold trap
Agree totally with Woody...in my years up in the land of the morning calm, Alteons guys had no clue about the B777 system traps. It is after some reported failures or incidents that they reactively came out pontificating about how great their systems knowledge. I am very wary of the ex 757 guys who are so inept because they know everything because to then the 777 is just a bigger 757!
Now, I think when Woodey talks about FLCH trap he meant other aspects of that mode in addition the A/T being in Hold! Go study your systems guys!
Now, I think when Woodey talks about FLCH trap he meant other aspects of that mode in addition the A/T being in Hold! Go study your systems guys!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: oztraylia
Age: 72
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
armchair critics
I really wonder how many of the armchair critics, who are so strident about the fire crew actions, have ever been in a high stress chaotic situation where they had to save their own life and/or save others?
If they had, and perhaps more than once, they would understand how quickly a situation like that can turn to crap and have a bad ending.
This type of stuff is usually dished up by people with no real experience of anything remotely like the incident they are ranting about.
If they had, and perhaps more than once, they would understand how quickly a situation like that can turn to crap and have a bad ending.
This type of stuff is usually dished up by people with no real experience of anything remotely like the incident they are ranting about.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 5° above the Equator, 75° left of Greenwich
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pilots didn't miss the cues. The cues were obvious all the way down the flight path but were ignored.
Or even more importantly it can happen anytime the sharp end jet jockeys are not in PILOT mode.
Don't know who Woody is but knowing how to fly any airplane would have prevented this incident. Automation is to help you, not fly your aircraft, if you can not.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ceduna
Age: 71
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bubbers is just stating the bloody obvious minus the self aggrandizing anecdotes at Toncontin! Sure had they remember to fly blah blah blah...but they didn't because they were fools or fooled into thinking the automation will take care of the shop. With newer generations of planes and manufacturers taking the road to greater autoomation, new pilots have to cope with automation traps because their SOPs predicated full use of automation.
We will never be going to have new generation of planes behaving like the DC3sc, F-27s or B747 classics that we enjoyed years ago. Present airline SOPs, airport architecture and system, ATC, TRACON, PRNAV, arrivals and departures are full of automatics with their inherent concomitant traps. If pilots are not made aware of such traps and only taught to click off everything automatic, we will only have a short term solution. Fine by me as a pilot, but what about future progress.
I don't want to be an old fart reliving and regurgitating my glory days telling everyone to use quill pens and parchment everytime the wireless keyboard runs out of battery ( of course some are not battery powered ). Sigh...........
We will never be going to have new generation of planes behaving like the DC3sc, F-27s or B747 classics that we enjoyed years ago. Present airline SOPs, airport architecture and system, ATC, TRACON, PRNAV, arrivals and departures are full of automatics with their inherent concomitant traps. If pilots are not made aware of such traps and only taught to click off everything automatic, we will only have a short term solution. Fine by me as a pilot, but what about future progress.
I don't want to be an old fart reliving and regurgitating my glory days telling everyone to use quill pens and parchment everytime the wireless keyboard runs out of battery ( of course some are not battery powered ). Sigh...........
Why has this accident caused so much and vivid discussion on Pprune?
Because the probable cause is so damning. The probable cause, being over reliance on automation because of lack of basic flying skills, is an insult to thousands of professional aviators all around the globe. The NTSB will have to come up with a final report which highlights this and at the same time remains "politically correct" at all times.
Re the FLCH trap and THR HOLD mode that's in the 777. Surely Boeing can assume that the pilots that fly their airplanes, can actually fly airplanes! Come on. What has happened? We have to wake up pronto. The NTSB will have to come up with some landmark report about this.
The Before Asiana Era has just ended.
Welcome to the After Asiana Era.
Because the probable cause is so damning. The probable cause, being over reliance on automation because of lack of basic flying skills, is an insult to thousands of professional aviators all around the globe. The NTSB will have to come up with a final report which highlights this and at the same time remains "politically correct" at all times.
Re the FLCH trap and THR HOLD mode that's in the 777. Surely Boeing can assume that the pilots that fly their airplanes, can actually fly airplanes! Come on. What has happened? We have to wake up pronto. The NTSB will have to come up with some landmark report about this.
The Before Asiana Era has just ended.
Welcome to the After Asiana Era.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hilo
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tipsy...bravo! Finally we have an experienced oldie who lived the past, shine in the present and appreciate progress for the future. Much as we all love consummate hand flying skills, the future of aviation is going to be dictated by even more automatics.
Oldie skygods leading a boycott of automatics? Wow, without daily practice and yet fly like a bird whenever some auto glich appear due to management of automatics? Good story at the pub for sure but a tad unreal!
In another life, I flew like a bird too island hopping in my old 737 - 200s, 4 to 5 legs a day into places I knew like the back of my hand. I was pretty confident, cocksure at times as I handfly everyday with no company SOP restrictions. Traffic was easily manageable by ATC, we had all the time and space.
In my present life, I probably make a landing every 2 weeks. All PRNAV SIDs and STARS, a draconian FOQA/AIMS program and a multitudes of other SOPs requiring maximum use of automation for efficiency, economy and airspace constraints. Well, what a litany of excuses you may say...well these are facts of life in modern airline flying. I certainly enjoyed my past hand flying and certainly enjoy the handflying during my sim training and checks but I equally look forward to the challenges of flying the automatics and learning of all the traps!
Oldie skygods leading a boycott of automatics? Wow, without daily practice and yet fly like a bird whenever some auto glich appear due to management of automatics? Good story at the pub for sure but a tad unreal!
In another life, I flew like a bird too island hopping in my old 737 - 200s, 4 to 5 legs a day into places I knew like the back of my hand. I was pretty confident, cocksure at times as I handfly everyday with no company SOP restrictions. Traffic was easily manageable by ATC, we had all the time and space.
In my present life, I probably make a landing every 2 weeks. All PRNAV SIDs and STARS, a draconian FOQA/AIMS program and a multitudes of other SOPs requiring maximum use of automation for efficiency, economy and airspace constraints. Well, what a litany of excuses you may say...well these are facts of life in modern airline flying. I certainly enjoyed my past hand flying and certainly enjoy the handflying during my sim training and checks but I equally look forward to the challenges of flying the automatics and learning of all the traps!
There seems to be the same misunderstanding that only the pilots are to blame for this incident developing as in other threads.
Yes, pilots should be able to fly a visual, non precision or precision approaches. However the recent cargo crash by US pilots at a US field and numerous other accidents and incidents on approach suggest that there are other factors too.
At SFO there are two tightly spaced parallel runways. Switching off the ILS / LOC to either of them is not sensible. This combined with the policy of late runway changes, pairing aircraft on approach and ATC routinely inducing high energy situations increases pilot workload and therefore reduces spare mental capacity and situational awareness.
If the accident aircraft had been on a lazy ten mile final ILS this accident probably wouldn't have happened. The investigating authority has very little influence on the training standards of the airlines that fly to SFO, but a lot of influence on how the ATC and airfield is organised. With a little thought the operating environment could be a lot safer.
I am a regular (every eight weeks or so) visitor to SFO. More often than I'd like I find myself (in a 747) with speedbrakes fully deployed, taking flap near limiting speeds, sometimes gear down way early, using the MCP or hand flying to intercept the visual profile (or if I'm lucky the ILS/LOC) from above with another a/c very close on the parallel approach. How much spare capacity do I and my crew have to deal with an unexpected TCAS RA, an engine failure etc. Contrast that to how much spare capacity I and my crew would have on a lazy ILS with staggered approaches so no other a/c are near.
Don't rely on pilots being skilled to stop them having accidents. It's all about providing the safest possible environment. Do that and you'll have fewer accidents.
remember the age old saying, "a superior pilot uses their superior judgement to avoid using their superior skill"
Yes, pilots should be able to fly a visual, non precision or precision approaches. However the recent cargo crash by US pilots at a US field and numerous other accidents and incidents on approach suggest that there are other factors too.
At SFO there are two tightly spaced parallel runways. Switching off the ILS / LOC to either of them is not sensible. This combined with the policy of late runway changes, pairing aircraft on approach and ATC routinely inducing high energy situations increases pilot workload and therefore reduces spare mental capacity and situational awareness.
If the accident aircraft had been on a lazy ten mile final ILS this accident probably wouldn't have happened. The investigating authority has very little influence on the training standards of the airlines that fly to SFO, but a lot of influence on how the ATC and airfield is organised. With a little thought the operating environment could be a lot safer.
I am a regular (every eight weeks or so) visitor to SFO. More often than I'd like I find myself (in a 747) with speedbrakes fully deployed, taking flap near limiting speeds, sometimes gear down way early, using the MCP or hand flying to intercept the visual profile (or if I'm lucky the ILS/LOC) from above with another a/c very close on the parallel approach. How much spare capacity do I and my crew have to deal with an unexpected TCAS RA, an engine failure etc. Contrast that to how much spare capacity I and my crew would have on a lazy ILS with staggered approaches so no other a/c are near.
Don't rely on pilots being skilled to stop them having accidents. It's all about providing the safest possible environment. Do that and you'll have fewer accidents.
remember the age old saying, "a superior pilot uses their superior judgement to avoid using their superior skill"
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Uluru
Age: 78
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am geriatric couch potato now and I marvel at exploits of bubbers at TGU. I may or may nothave flown so well...I just don't remember as I started at 16 and after 48 years of pedalling airborne contraptions I called it a day after 5 years on the T7. No I had not heard of the FLCH trap but I always override the ATS as if I am flying manual thrust levers. My f/os at times looked alarmed as they heard the autothrottle servos fighting my manual input ( rarely ), or as I increase thrust anticipating ALT capture or SPD mode activation when in HOLD mode.
To cut it short, I always follow through the thrust levers and override them as I so judge. Of course the company maintenance guy with anal retention on the jumpseat may not to be to happy hearing the ATS servos grinding as I override the automatic retarding of the thrust levers.
I have no wish to recount my manual flying exploits....not many instances as I always preempted any untoward incidences, so I never allowed any chances for any heroism to develop...like a vague memory of rejecting a takeoff at 50 kts when I noticed in the corner of my eye a fuel truck blundering near an active runway. It did careen onto the runway after I vacated through a faraway perpendicular taxiway according to my f/o. Had I waited until it had ventured onto the runway, and rejected I would probably be at above 110 kts requiring superior skills who I might not have had.
Looking back, maybe I was stupid never getting a 3 minutes of fame. In good old Oz, I used to fly lazily on the venerable 727 down the DME steps and tight circled for the runway. No Foqa, no drama just pure joyful flying with the many " after thumping " checks. On the 777, I could probably do that ( but not very well I guess due to " lack of handling " ) but I am sure my f/o would be very overloaded trying to manipulate the MCP settings as per SOPs.
I do not envy modern airline pilots who have all sort of restrictions working against them especially the freedom to choose the level of automation they desire. I certainly see and appreciate Tipsy's and Molokai's contention. A geriatric should look to the future too! Past glories ( real or imagined ) notwithstanding.
: Nap time!
To cut it short, I always follow through the thrust levers and override them as I so judge. Of course the company maintenance guy with anal retention on the jumpseat may not to be to happy hearing the ATS servos grinding as I override the automatic retarding of the thrust levers.
I have no wish to recount my manual flying exploits....not many instances as I always preempted any untoward incidences, so I never allowed any chances for any heroism to develop...like a vague memory of rejecting a takeoff at 50 kts when I noticed in the corner of my eye a fuel truck blundering near an active runway. It did careen onto the runway after I vacated through a faraway perpendicular taxiway according to my f/o. Had I waited until it had ventured onto the runway, and rejected I would probably be at above 110 kts requiring superior skills who I might not have had.
Looking back, maybe I was stupid never getting a 3 minutes of fame. In good old Oz, I used to fly lazily on the venerable 727 down the DME steps and tight circled for the runway. No Foqa, no drama just pure joyful flying with the many " after thumping " checks. On the 777, I could probably do that ( but not very well I guess due to " lack of handling " ) but I am sure my f/o would be very overloaded trying to manipulate the MCP settings as per SOPs.
I do not envy modern airline pilots who have all sort of restrictions working against them especially the freedom to choose the level of automation they desire. I certainly see and appreciate Tipsy's and Molokai's contention. A geriatric should look to the future too! Past glories ( real or imagined ) notwithstanding.
: Nap time!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: South Korea
Age: 62
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont want to counter any of the wise words spoken by the very knowledgeable and experienced people posting above but I have another angle from which this issue can be viewed. I have not piloted a fly by wire jet but I have spent many years automating heavy and complex industrial equipment that can also kill people when it fails to work properly.
In my opinion, with good automation many of these problems should not occur. Good automation does not have traps, it is simple, the auto pilot mimics manual control pretty closely. Good automation actually assists the operator/pilot to operate manually rather than hinder it. People tend to over complicate automation. An old fossil I used to work with used to say it is very easy to make automation complicated & difficult to use and very hard to make it simple & easy to use. In my experience any piece of automation can be made simple and user friendly, it just takes experienced people more time to produce and lots of consultation with the end user/pilot. Experienced people tend to make thing simpler.
Another point I have come to realise with automation is it is very easy to get away with producing messy SW. With the more mechanical professions things have to look nice, other wise it will be noticed by everybody. Electrical professions can be a bit rougher, if cabling is not supported evenly no one except for other electrical people or people with access to electrical enclosures notices. SW onthe other hand is hidden away on flash memory and if you have a few unnecessary loops or illogical implementations no one notices apart from other SW engineers.
In my opinion, with good automation many of these problems should not occur. Good automation does not have traps, it is simple, the auto pilot mimics manual control pretty closely. Good automation actually assists the operator/pilot to operate manually rather than hinder it. People tend to over complicate automation. An old fossil I used to work with used to say it is very easy to make automation complicated & difficult to use and very hard to make it simple & easy to use. In my experience any piece of automation can be made simple and user friendly, it just takes experienced people more time to produce and lots of consultation with the end user/pilot. Experienced people tend to make thing simpler.
Another point I have come to realise with automation is it is very easy to get away with producing messy SW. With the more mechanical professions things have to look nice, other wise it will be noticed by everybody. Electrical professions can be a bit rougher, if cabling is not supported evenly no one except for other electrical people or people with access to electrical enclosures notices. SW onthe other hand is hidden away on flash memory and if you have a few unnecessary loops or illogical implementations no one notices apart from other SW engineers.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool guys:
The automation in a Boeing 777 is not just good, it is outstanding. It is simple to use if the pilot has good training, and really understands the fundamentals of flying a jet transport airplane.
In my opinion, with good automation many of these problems should not occur. Good automation does not have traps, it is simple, the auto pilot mimics manual control pretty closely. Good automation actually assists the operator/pilot to operate manually rather than hinder it. People tend to over complicate automation. An old fossil I used to work with used to say it is very easy to make automation complicated & difficult to use and very hard to make it simple & easy to use.
The automation in a Boeing 777 is not just good, it is outstanding. It is simple to use if the pilot has good training, and really understands the fundamentals of flying a jet transport airplane.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no FLCH trap. The trap is using that mode when it is not supposed to be used - close to the the ground. In my current company it is absolutely forbidden to use it to intercept flight path from above during approach phase.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 72
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion, with good automation many of these problems should not occur.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool Guys:
No! You can't be referring to "GLITCHES", can you?
Another point I have come to realise with automation is it is very easy to get away with producing messy SW.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: My Stringy Brane
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another point I have come to realise with automation is it is very easy to get away with producing messy SW.
Please refrain from conflating the likes of website or factory machinery software with flight control software. They are galaxies apart.
Popped in to see if there's anything new. Still seeing the there I was in SFO stories none of which is relevant to the accident. That you had the boards and gear out and was descending like a bonanza full of doctors isn't relevent to the Asiana crash.
West Coast
That comment just goes to show your total lack of understanding of aviation safety, particularly the 'swiss cheese' or 'error chain' models of accident prevention.
That comment just goes to show your total lack of understanding of aviation safety, particularly the 'swiss cheese' or 'error chain' models of accident prevention.