COULD you land a passenger jet (if you ONLY hold a PPL)???
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Age: 32
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want to pull any strings, and I greatly respect your opinion and can only hope that one day I too will have that kind of flying experience. However, very experienced pilots got it quite wrong before on these kind of matters.
After 9/11, the following was said:
"To hit something with an airplane is easy only if you have been flying for 20 years."
- Boeing 767 pilot quoted in the Boston Globe
"The men flying the planes must have been "highly skilled pilots" and "extremely knowledgeable and capable aviators," who were "probably military trained,"
- some other experts
link: The 9/11 Hijackers: Amateur Aviators Who Became Super-Pilots on September 11 | 911Blogger.com
The reality is that these hijackers had only basic prop knowledge and were described by their instructors as having had only "average" or even "very poor" piloting skills.
So these guys, took control of an aircraft at cruise altitude (presumably), skillfully navigated to their targets and managed to hit them on their 1st attempt.
That for a start proves that you don't need to have any jet experience to fly a passenger jet manually and get it to where you want to go.
As for the landing, so we've also proved it's doable on a full motion sim when the aircraft is in "stabilized approach". So the only bit missing is the thing in between. The part of the flight that takes the jet from 35000ft to 2000ft and Vapp.
Ok you're right, I don't know what the correct procedures for doing this are. But I would imagine it involves slowing the jet down and descending... neither of which is rocket science I assume. Principle of flight for a 757 and a PA-28 are identical. The challenge as I understand would be in the correct interpretation of how to achieve a certain flight regime (and what inputs to give in order to achieve what you want). I understand that in this respect the difference between a Warrior and a 75 is enormous... e.g. the time it takes to spool up jet Vs prop or how the controls act... I understand that it's all very very very different (and maybe MSFS does teach you to expect something very different...). Anyway, it's a case of how quickly can someone with no experience adapt to a jet. Am I right? Or is there something that I am completely missing here?
I am assuming that the person in control would have a pretty good idea of what airspeeds the aircraft should operate at in certain configs. Could you also explain why it's so difficult to get the airplane into a stabilized approach? (In case you are thinking I am being sarcastic, I am genuinely not and only wish to learn). And please note I am not trying to prove what I said originally is correct. I'm just trying to gather data to understand fully why it is, or is not possible.
Thanks
After 9/11, the following was said:
"To hit something with an airplane is easy only if you have been flying for 20 years."
- Boeing 767 pilot quoted in the Boston Globe
"The men flying the planes must have been "highly skilled pilots" and "extremely knowledgeable and capable aviators," who were "probably military trained,"
- some other experts
link: The 9/11 Hijackers: Amateur Aviators Who Became Super-Pilots on September 11 | 911Blogger.com
The reality is that these hijackers had only basic prop knowledge and were described by their instructors as having had only "average" or even "very poor" piloting skills.
So these guys, took control of an aircraft at cruise altitude (presumably), skillfully navigated to their targets and managed to hit them on their 1st attempt.
That for a start proves that you don't need to have any jet experience to fly a passenger jet manually and get it to where you want to go.
As for the landing, so we've also proved it's doable on a full motion sim when the aircraft is in "stabilized approach". So the only bit missing is the thing in between. The part of the flight that takes the jet from 35000ft to 2000ft and Vapp.
Ok you're right, I don't know what the correct procedures for doing this are. But I would imagine it involves slowing the jet down and descending... neither of which is rocket science I assume. Principle of flight for a 757 and a PA-28 are identical. The challenge as I understand would be in the correct interpretation of how to achieve a certain flight regime (and what inputs to give in order to achieve what you want). I understand that in this respect the difference between a Warrior and a 75 is enormous... e.g. the time it takes to spool up jet Vs prop or how the controls act... I understand that it's all very very very different (and maybe MSFS does teach you to expect something very different...). Anyway, it's a case of how quickly can someone with no experience adapt to a jet. Am I right? Or is there something that I am completely missing here?
I am assuming that the person in control would have a pretty good idea of what airspeeds the aircraft should operate at in certain configs. Could you also explain why it's so difficult to get the airplane into a stabilized approach? (In case you are thinking I am being sarcastic, I am genuinely not and only wish to learn). And please note I am not trying to prove what I said originally is correct. I'm just trying to gather data to understand fully why it is, or is not possible.
Thanks
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lamb and Flag
Age: 69
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, principal of flight between a PA28 and 737 aren't the same. In your Cherokee you'd easily be able to bleed of speed by closing the throttle and letting the aircraft reasonably quickly reducing speed, maybe increasing pitch slightly. Not so much in the 737! Jet engines react very differently from 1 prop on the front of the plane. They are fairly slow as well and the plane can, at times, feel a lot more sluggish in comparison to your SEP.
Now, if you were to sit on that 737 Captain's seat and knock off all the automatics at 2000ft you'll spend the remaining 6 miles of flight disastrously overcorrecting. You won't be used to the sluggish response of the 737 and you'll add too much power, then take off too much, then pitch up and down excessively and roll around too much. You will be too used to the flight dynamics of the PA28 that you won't be able to get used to the new aircraft in less than 3 minutes with all that pressure on you.
And your mate who has had an experience flight in a 747 ... do you think the simulator he flew didn't have the flight characteristics changed for the beginner user, as opposed to the characteristics used for training airline pilots in it?
Now, if you were to sit on that 737 Captain's seat and knock off all the automatics at 2000ft you'll spend the remaining 6 miles of flight disastrously overcorrecting. You won't be used to the sluggish response of the 737 and you'll add too much power, then take off too much, then pitch up and down excessively and roll around too much. You will be too used to the flight dynamics of the PA28 that you won't be able to get used to the new aircraft in less than 3 minutes with all that pressure on you.
And your mate who has had an experience flight in a 747 ... do you think the simulator he flew didn't have the flight characteristics changed for the beginner user, as opposed to the characteristics used for training airline pilots in it?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, long time msfs player, who knows how many thousand hours sitting behind the captain operating as a flight mech. I know autopilots and can work my way through an FMS. I had my first opportunity in a real simulator, motion off a few years back. The controlls in slow flight were heavier than I expected. My first attempt at landing manual ILS approach I had to do a go-around, the 2nd time I was sucessfull with a firm landing. Rudder pedals were the largest problem during rollout but I had little time to prepare. I am certain I could perform a CATIIIB autoland in clear weather if in the scenario described withought any help. But I have solid knowledge of autopilots and FMS as maintaining them is my job. It was funny though how even in a sim my heart was racing, may have been all to real given how many times I was an observer and experienced landings get real complicated due to W/S etc.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Age: 32
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, principal of flight between a PA28 and 737 aren't the same. In your Cherokee you'd easily be able to bleed of speed by closing the throttle and letting the aircraft reasonably quickly reducing speed, maybe increasing pitch slightly. Not so much in the 737! Jet engines react very differently from 1 prop on the front of the plane. They are fairly slow as well and the plane can, at times, feel a lot more sluggish in comparison to your SEP.
Now, if you were to sit on that 737 Captain's seat and knock off all the automatics at 2000ft you'll spend the remaining 6 miles of flight disastrously overcorrecting. You won't be used to the sluggish response of the 737 and you'll add too much power, then take off too much, then pitch up and down excessively and roll around too much. You will be too used to the flight dynamics of the PA28 that you won't be able to get used to the new aircraft in less than 3 minutes with all that pressure on you.
And your mate who has had an experience flight in a 747 ... do you think the simulator he flew didn't have the flight characteristics changed for the beginner user, as opposed to the characteristics used for training airline pilots in it?
Now, if you were to sit on that 737 Captain's seat and knock off all the automatics at 2000ft you'll spend the remaining 6 miles of flight disastrously overcorrecting. You won't be used to the sluggish response of the 737 and you'll add too much power, then take off too much, then pitch up and down excessively and roll around too much. You will be too used to the flight dynamics of the PA28 that you won't be able to get used to the new aircraft in less than 3 minutes with all that pressure on you.
And your mate who has had an experience flight in a 747 ... do you think the simulator he flew didn't have the flight characteristics changed for the beginner user, as opposed to the characteristics used for training airline pilots in it?
You are also now making the simple assumption of a person with no jet hours being unable to adjust and adapt to the controls in time. And I think that's the bit which we are actually arguing about here. I am by no means saying anyone can do this but so far there has been no evidence to suggest that someone who learns quickly can't adapt in time. Case and point 9/11 hijackers. So going by what you said there is no way they could've so accurately navigated at low level to their targets and hit them with such precision...???
I am not trying to be boastful but I was doing aerobatics in a glider after having 30mins flying experience, and after having around 1 hour gliding experience, on my 1st ever powered aircraft flight (C150), I landed 3 times doing circuits having never been thought how to land properly - that was my 1st ever prop a/c flight. I don't think many can say they managed to land 3 times in their 1st 30 minutes of flying. At least I think that proves I can adapt quickly. And I am not for a second going to suggest landing a 737 is anywhere near as easy as a C150 and I don't think I could ever do it consistently without proper training but I am still struggling to see why it's such an impossibility. Seems like it just entirely depends on how quickly someone can adjust to the controls and if he/she understands what regimes the aircraft should be operating at during the stages of flight. So knowledge of the aircraft you are flying is essential... and that's where flightsims can help out. All IMO. Obviously we will likely never find out the answer to this rather interesting question.
Hey, long time msfs player, who knows how many thousand hours sitting behind the captain operating as a flight mech. I know autopilots and can work my way through an FMS. I had my first opportunity in a real simulator, motion off a few years back. The controlls in slow flight were heavier than I expected. My first attempt at landing manual ILS approach I had to do a go-around, the 2nd time I was sucessfull with a firm landing. Rudder pedals were the largest problem during rollout but I had little time to prepare. I am certain I could perform a CATIIIB autoland in clear weather if in the scenario described withought any help. But I have solid knowledge of autopilots and FMS as maintaining them is my job. It was funny though how even in a sim my heart was racing, may have been all to real given how many times I was an observer and experienced landings get real complicated due to W/S etc.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cape Town
Age: 70
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it would depend on the specific individual.
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...ml#post2719405
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&h...&v=5iKFYaXDivs
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...ml#post2719405
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&h...&v=5iKFYaXDivs
Bearcat, there are enough people on here with vastly more experience than you telling you what would happen.
You seem to have a VERY high opinion of your own abilities. What you do seem to lack is humility! Such an attitude would NOT make a good airline pilot. Realise your own limitations.
Regarding people landing 747 full-flight sims - the instructor probably had "Crash - Inhibit" turned on - and wind set to zero!
Also you seem to have completely ignored the response to the problem of slowing a big jet down. A 737 has significantly less induced drag than a PA-28 - it does not have that big drag-inducing whirly thing on the front! Trying to descend from cruise AND slow down at the same time can be VERY difficult. Even Air Traffic Controllers don't seem to realise how hard it is when firing out combined "Descend... and reduce speed to..." clearances!
You seem to have a VERY high opinion of your own abilities. What you do seem to lack is humility! Such an attitude would NOT make a good airline pilot. Realise your own limitations.
Regarding people landing 747 full-flight sims - the instructor probably had "Crash - Inhibit" turned on - and wind set to zero!
Also you seem to have completely ignored the response to the problem of slowing a big jet down. A 737 has significantly less induced drag than a PA-28 - it does not have that big drag-inducing whirly thing on the front! Trying to descend from cruise AND slow down at the same time can be VERY difficult. Even Air Traffic Controllers don't seem to realise how hard it is when firing out combined "Descend... and reduce speed to..." clearances!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bearcat: I'm not sure why you are still arguing about this. As said above, a number of professional pilots with vastly more flying experience than you are telling you that you can't do it. Why don't you take their word for it? They know best!
Can you not understand that you need to be trained successfully to fly and land a Boeing/Airbus aircraft and that your PPL / Microsoft Flight Simulator knowledge - although interesting/fun/worthwhile in its own way - is of very limited use here because it is not the same thing.
I now understand why professional pilots get very nervous about / annoyed with PPL-holders who are chomping at the bit to 'have a go' and save the day in an emergency situation.
Can you not understand that you need to be trained successfully to fly and land a Boeing/Airbus aircraft and that your PPL / Microsoft Flight Simulator knowledge - although interesting/fun/worthwhile in its own way - is of very limited use here because it is not the same thing.
I now understand why professional pilots get very nervous about / annoyed with PPL-holders who are chomping at the bit to 'have a go' and save the day in an emergency situation.
Registered User **
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Botswana & Greece
Age: 68
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He will not drop it will he 
Thanks for pointing out the article on the Lightening 'test' flight Skwinty. Never seen that before - very interesting.
I had heard about it of course.
Thanks for pointing out the article on the Lightening 'test' flight Skwinty. Never seen that before - very interesting.
I had heard about it of course.
Last edited by Exascot; 19th Oct 2011 at 09:19. Reason: Add last line
The parallels with 9/11 hijackers are a red herring. They only needed to be aware of E of C, S&L 1 and 2 and Descending 1 of the PPL syllabus, and a few details about FMC and autopilot operation. What they did, sadly, was probably at least couple of orders of magnitude easier than getting themselves fully configured, on speed, on a 10 mile final to a runway of their choice. They had also done an enormous amount of homework on the specific aircraft type(s)they knew they were going to be flying. Not at all the same as your scenario where a Flt simmer with PPL time is asked to walk onto the flight deck of any airliner at a moments notice and pull off a survivable landing. 
FWIW like I suspect like many here I've got just a bit of time on a couple of Boeing's types, I should certainly be able to land those types and hopefully could probably produce a survivable
"on runway" landing in most of Boeing's other products if I unexpectedly ended up in the hot seat on a bad day. OTOH I've spent enough time jumpseating on Airbuses to know they are more than somewhat different to Boeings and I know I wouldn't find handling one of those easy. However if you still think computer Flight Sim time and a PPL would enable you to handle any airliner well enough to make it probable that you and the passengers would survive then I bow to your greater confidence and think we'll have to agree to disagree about the probable outcome....
End point from me: Training airline pilots is very expensive. If you could be released to the line with MSFS time and a PPL it would be happening. It isn't
, there's a reason why the professionals spend expensive hours upon hours on type specific training in the classroom, and hours upon hours in the simulator of their type before being let loose on the real world.
FWIW like I suspect like many here I've got just a bit of time on a couple of Boeing's types, I should certainly be able to land those types and hopefully could probably produce a survivable
"on runway" landing in most of Boeing's other products if I unexpectedly ended up in the hot seat on a bad day. OTOH I've spent enough time jumpseating on Airbuses to know they are more than somewhat different to Boeings and I know I wouldn't find handling one of those easy. However if you still think computer Flight Sim time and a PPL would enable you to handle any airliner well enough to make it probable that you and the passengers would survive then I bow to your greater confidence and think we'll have to agree to disagree about the probable outcome.... End point from me: Training airline pilots is very expensive. If you could be released to the line with MSFS time and a PPL it would be happening. It isn't
, there's a reason why the professionals spend expensive hours upon hours on type specific training in the classroom, and hours upon hours in the simulator of their type before being let loose on the real world.
I now understand why professional pilots get very nervous about / annoyed with PPL-holders who are chomping at the bit to 'have a go' and save the day in an emergency situation.
Last edited by wiggy; 19th Oct 2011 at 10:08.
A loooooong time ago (35 years) my Dad got me some time in an L1011 full motion sim at Redifon (at Gatwick I think). Armed with about 5 hours in gliders (with him or instructors, being taught, but never landed one). 2 or 3 hours in tugs.
First landing was heavy, but successful. No damage done.
So because I was seventeen and a bit pleased with myself they made the second approach more interesting (engine(s) failure. Reminded me that there were 300 hundred people behind me.
From memory, that one was about 20 feet too low. Fatal.
So, it's definitely possible, but 50/50 is not what you'd call good odds.
First landing was heavy, but successful. No damage done.
So because I was seventeen and a bit pleased with myself they made the second approach more interesting (engine(s) failure. Reminded me that there were 300 hundred people behind me.
From memory, that one was about 20 feet too low. Fatal.
So, it's definitely possible, but 50/50 is not what you'd call good odds.
boguing
For the sake of this debate and out of interest at what point did you start handling the "aircraft" : ' cruise/descent/ on the glideslope fully configured??
First landing was heavy, but successful. No damage done
He will not drop it will he
35 years on and I still get sweaty hands thinking about it!
My recollection is that I'd decided, before I got there, to do approaches and landings from far enough out for me to configure 'from scratch', so what would that be, 10,000agl? Must have been something of that order, because I only had two attempts, and it wasn't over in less than half an hour. The reason was exactly the same as this thread's subject - could I do it for real?
I was on the left with a Training Captain telling me where and when for flap, brake, gear, throttles etc. I think that we must assume that they didn't give me any wind or other weather effects.
My recollection is that I'd decided, before I got there, to do approaches and landings from far enough out for me to configure 'from scratch', so what would that be, 10,000agl? Must have been something of that order, because I only had two attempts, and it wasn't over in less than half an hour. The reason was exactly the same as this thread's subject - could I do it for real?
I was on the left with a Training Captain telling me where and when for flap, brake, gear, throttles etc. I think that we must assume that they didn't give me any wind or other weather effects.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I watch new FO's(including ex flying instructor types) struggle to land the aircraft, and theyve got a CPL/ATPL and a valid type rating! Staying mentally just one step ahead of the aeroplane is a big enough challenge for them!
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Milton Keynes
Age: 51
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before I had a PPL (but with many years MS Flight Sim experience) I`d have said I could do it.
Now I've got the PPL and I'd probably say with the benefit of some experience that I`ve got no chance of nailing a decent landing, the speeds involved and the workload would just be far too high alone, not to mention getting everything set up for the landing in the first place
Now I've got the PPL and I'd probably say with the benefit of some experience that I`ve got no chance of nailing a decent landing, the speeds involved and the workload would just be far too high alone, not to mention getting everything set up for the landing in the first place
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Age: 32
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
End point from me: Training airline pilots is very expensive. If you could be released to the line with MSFS time and a PPL it would be happening. It isn't
, there's a reason why the professionals spend expensive hours upon hours on type specific training in the classroom, and hours upon hours in the simulator of their type before being let loose on the real world.
, there's a reason why the professionals spend expensive hours upon hours on type specific training in the classroom, and hours upon hours in the simulator of their type before being let loose on the real world.
I am not going to argue any further. There's enough information here to suggest that it is possible to manually land a jet without having any previous jet hours. I don't think it can be done by anyone (and maybe I would fail miserably too) but apart from the issue of "how quickly can you adapt to flying a jet" (i.e getting it configured in time etc) there is nothing else to suggest it's impossible.
Also you seem to have completely ignored the response to the problem of slowing a big jet down. A 737 has significantly less induced drag than a PA-28 - it does not have that big drag-inducing whirly thing on the front! Trying to descend from cruise AND slow down at the same time can be VERY difficult. Even Air Traffic Controllers don't seem to realise how hard it is when firing out combined "Descend... and reduce speed to..." clearances!
----------------
There's has now been 3 people here who said they have landed full motion sims with no previous jet experience (2 manual and 1 on autoland), and that's excluding my friend who made a good landing on an A320 and landed a bit short on the 744. And boguing said he configured the aircraft from scratch. Even if it was a rough landing I think it kind of proves that it's at least plausible and will depend entirely on the knowledge of the individual and how quickly he/she can adapt to a jet.
He certainly doesn't appear to want to. I suspect his mate, with whom he is having an argument, may well be reading this thread. If so the OP is probably desperate for at least one professional to agree with him, that way he can attempt to claim a draw.
You seem to have a VERY high opinion of your own abilities. What you do seem to lack is humility! Such an attitude would NOT make a good airline pilot. Realise your own limitations.
The scenario I provided along with every bit of sensible information to suggest the possibility of a successful outcome has either been entirely misinterpreted or ignored.
I COMPLETELY admit that I do NOT know everything there is to know. The descent profile like Groundloop pointed out... I'm sure I might not appreciate how difficult it is to achieve, along with other things I'm sure.
If any of you have access to a full motion sim that could be set up with a 737NG at 35,000ft, I would love to try it. That is really the only way to find out the answer to this rather stupid question.
One last point I would like to make: does anyone remember the Canadian 767 that became a glider? They made the same scenario for 10 crews on a flight sim and they all failed. My point is... not everyone is capable of that kind of flying regardless of experience. Was it luck? maybe so... so in my scenario even if the chances are 1 in 1000, it still means that maybe someone can pull it off.
I appreciate all your input and don't think I have ignored any of the comments from you guys that actually fly for a living. I respect them greatly and will try to learn what I can. Maybe one day I too will arrive at the conclusion that it would be an impossibility but so far there's enough evidence to support that it might just be possible... maybe unlikely, but realistically possible.
One last point I would like to make: does anyone remember the Canadian 767 that became a glider? They made the same scenario for 10 crews on a flight sim and they all failed. My point is... not everyone is capable of that kind of flying regardless of experience. Was it luck? maybe so
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lamb and Flag
Age: 69
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you are referring to is the way the aircraft reacts to control inputs. And if you read my last post you will realize that I very clearly understand these enormous differences. I understand speeds are much higher, controls are sluggish, engines take a while to respond to a new power settings, ground effect and flare will be different etc... I understand that. What makes you think that my brain will assume the controls will be the same on a 737 as a PA-28 when I'm in it...?
Registered User **
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Botswana & Greece
Age: 68
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bearcat: I quote you
But you did 
For goodness sake we are professionally airline pilots. Many of us have been kind enough to answer your questions and arguments in detail (I was not one of them).
Perhaps you should consider taking up knitting instead of using this forum to to pass your time.
Sorry guys but I have had enough of this armchair airline pilot.
Standby for the next sh1t he comes out with.
I am not going to argue any further.
For goodness sake we are professionally airline pilots. Many of us have been kind enough to answer your questions and arguments in detail (I was not one of them).
Perhaps you should consider taking up knitting instead of using this forum to to pass your time.
Sorry guys but I have had enough of this armchair airline pilot.
Standby for the next sh1t he comes out with.