What was your worst nightmare in the Sim?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: mars (Celebrating 20 years on PPRUNE)
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
What was your worst nightmare in the Sim?
I am a TRI/TRE and have spent many sessions using old and new scenarios for TQ's and IR checks.
What I would like to ask all is what is your recollection of the nastiest and/or most difficult situation you have been presented with for either a revalidation or an initial command check. The old repetoir is geting a bit repetitive and I am seeking ideas for some scenarios that people have experienced on checks. I am referring to 'people management issues' as opposed to mechanical or SOP related dramas. Anything that is worthy of mention from anyone who has experienced the ultimate command check and walked away and asked themselves, " how bizzare was that?"
All suggestions considered!
TIA
What I would like to ask all is what is your recollection of the nastiest and/or most difficult situation you have been presented with for either a revalidation or an initial command check. The old repetoir is geting a bit repetitive and I am seeking ideas for some scenarios that people have experienced on checks. I am referring to 'people management issues' as opposed to mechanical or SOP related dramas. Anything that is worthy of mention from anyone who has experienced the ultimate command check and walked away and asked themselves, " how bizzare was that?"
All suggestions considered!
TIA
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Depends on the day
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got to agree with Fly3, do you really want to be known as the idiot checkie who comes up with ridiculous scenarios? The guys who seem to be most respected are the ones who conduct thorough but fair checks.
the lunatic fringe
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"an initial command check"
In the sim ofc.
Airborne from LHR to MAN.... wheels up then, silence from ATC. Nothing. Nada. not a word all flight.
Lots to think about, very quickly.
In the sim ofc.
Airborne from LHR to MAN.... wheels up then, silence from ATC. Nothing. Nada. not a word all flight.
Lots to think about, very quickly.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My worst simulator nightmare is to do a check ride with an examiner who is prone to introducing bizarre and ridiculous scenarios.
As a pilot under check, I've suffered under (thankfully only a few) such goons. As an Instructor / Examiner, and particularly with a trainee approaching final Command check-out, I've found no trouble in increasing the complexity and difficulty level a little, and, with a level of difficulty a little beyond what could be reasonably expected in the real world handled satisfactorily, given them the "thumbs up".
With the trainee having met a fair and reasonable standard at a slightly increased level of difficulty, I'm happy to call it a day. Some trainees have asked for a little more practice with the thermostat wound up, and I've carefully agreed to their request, being ever cautious not to approach the point where an already proven good standard with the trainee's confidence in good order, can now be totally shattered if the level of difficulty is taken ridiculously far.
I could recount the worst (ridiculous) multiple failure scenario thrown at me by one of the "goons", but I won't, someone might use it against the innocent.
Regards,
Old Smokey
As a pilot under check, I've suffered under (thankfully only a few) such goons. As an Instructor / Examiner, and particularly with a trainee approaching final Command check-out, I've found no trouble in increasing the complexity and difficulty level a little, and, with a level of difficulty a little beyond what could be reasonably expected in the real world handled satisfactorily, given them the "thumbs up".
With the trainee having met a fair and reasonable standard at a slightly increased level of difficulty, I'm happy to call it a day. Some trainees have asked for a little more practice with the thermostat wound up, and I've carefully agreed to their request, being ever cautious not to approach the point where an already proven good standard with the trainee's confidence in good order, can now be totally shattered if the level of difficulty is taken ridiculously far.
I could recount the worst (ridiculous) multiple failure scenario thrown at me by one of the "goons", but I won't, someone might use it against the innocent.
Regards,
Old Smokey
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Beds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First line sector of command assesment training from Manchester to Heathrow in a B737. Twenty nine minute sector. Just before descent a duct overheat light came on. The QRH said 'Retard the throttle and observe the light go out . . . Trouble was the light stayed on! So, Pan Pan Pan and a single engined approach (with one engine in idle) to RW 27R at Heathrow. The rest of the day spent sorting out the paperwork followed by an 'early' stack.
**** happens and the detail could not have been scripted better for an early introduction to the hassle of command.
**** happens and the detail could not have been scripted better for an early introduction to the hassle of command.
My worst simulator nightmare is to do a check ride with an examiner who is prone to introducing bizarre and ridiculous scenarios.
As we grow older we remember with affection those simulator instructors who taught with quiet humour and left you with your dignity intact. We remember with contempt those that enjoyed a reputation as a career buster and the unbridled power that came with their appointment. They exist in every airline.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am seeking ideas for some scenarios that people have experienced on checks. I am referring to 'people management issues' as opposed to mechanical or SOP related dramas
I suggest you should leave "people management issues" to those expert in the field such as psychologists. Few pilots object to straight forward mechanical problems thrown at them in the simulator as long as double jeopardy (multiple un-related failures) are not permitted.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that modern flight simulators are high fidelity extraordinary expensive machines, then training accent should be on in-flight handling in order to give crews every opportunity a couple of times a year to hone their manipulative skills. Social decision making or people management issues are best left to classroom discussion so that valuable simulator time is not wasted flogging around on autopilot while playing actors and actresses in the cockpit discussing how to deal with a mythical drunk in the cabin who has had a heart attack.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Citizen of the World
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My best instructors/examiners always were thorough but fair. You didn't get away lightly but you always knew that you would be treated fairly like any professional should.
One of them once said to me that every sim check should be a learning experience (including for the examiner). The one thing that he didn't want the students to learn was that the TRE was a pr*ck.
Any idiot can find ridiculous scenarios to throw at any pilot and we all have a breaking point. What does that prove? Only that the TRE is such a pr*ck. I don't want those kind anywhere near good professional pilots doing their best in a very trying environment.
Smokey and Centaurus have it absolutely right. It's nice to know that there are still lots of good professionals around. Keep it up guys!
One of them once said to me that every sim check should be a learning experience (including for the examiner). The one thing that he didn't want the students to learn was that the TRE was a pr*ck.
Any idiot can find ridiculous scenarios to throw at any pilot and we all have a breaking point. What does that prove? Only that the TRE is such a pr*ck. I don't want those kind anywhere near good professional pilots doing their best in a very trying environment.
Smokey and Centaurus have it absolutely right. It's nice to know that there are still lots of good professionals around. Keep it up guys!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: LGW
Age: 39
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an almost complete outsider with an opinion, surely realism would be the key point to focus on rather than a weird and wonderful interesting situation.
Sticking my neck out, and based on my experience on the ground, I would say the people management issues are fairly straight cut (and therefore perhaps not quite so challenging?) If the safety of the aircraft and passenges does not appear to be compromised, say a drunk pax who is perhaps a bit loud but otherwise behaving themselves, then they can be met by police on arrival at the scheduled arrival point. If safety is compromised or you think it may become that way, divert.
I'm guess I'm trying to say that no matter what the actual problem is, when related to the persons on board you will know whether its in the best interest to carry on or divert.
I'm not trying to simplify the guys' and gals' decisions, just trying to give an insight from a ground persons point of view that often sorts out the 'police/paramedics/animal control on arrival' bit. (The animal control one was thought to be a small dog in the hold. It was subsequently found to be a large spider. Unfortunately, after the hold was fumigated, the body of said spider was not found.)
How about a stark naked pax that refuses to come out of the toilet.... that would be based on fact too by the way....
Sticking my neck out, and based on my experience on the ground, I would say the people management issues are fairly straight cut (and therefore perhaps not quite so challenging?) If the safety of the aircraft and passenges does not appear to be compromised, say a drunk pax who is perhaps a bit loud but otherwise behaving themselves, then they can be met by police on arrival at the scheduled arrival point. If safety is compromised or you think it may become that way, divert.
I'm guess I'm trying to say that no matter what the actual problem is, when related to the persons on board you will know whether its in the best interest to carry on or divert.
I'm not trying to simplify the guys' and gals' decisions, just trying to give an insight from a ground persons point of view that often sorts out the 'police/paramedics/animal control on arrival' bit. (The animal control one was thought to be a small dog in the hold. It was subsequently found to be a large spider. Unfortunately, after the hold was fumigated, the body of said spider was not found.)
How about a stark naked pax that refuses to come out of the toilet.... that would be based on fact too by the way....
The best Sim. sessions for me have been where I have walked out afterwards thinking I have learnt something new today, or I have cleared up something that I had forgotten.
The worst sim. sessions have been those where the sim. instructor has felt that they have had to run through their full repetoire of failures in an attempt to try and show how clever they are. I also used to dislike the instructors who felt they had to load you up until you broke and only then could they re-build you.
Sometimes the most informative/thought provoking sessions have been the ones where the RTO was carried out at a benign speed, not V1-5Kts at MTOW. Where the pressurisation problem was controllable, and didn't need the O2 masks on followed by the high dive. Where the engine could and should be re-started after a flame out! What do you do now it's re-lit? Continue knowing it failed once, or return in case it fails again? Plenty of scope for CRM there!
The simulator is a training aid not a trapping tool.
The worst sim. sessions have been those where the sim. instructor has felt that they have had to run through their full repetoire of failures in an attempt to try and show how clever they are. I also used to dislike the instructors who felt they had to load you up until you broke and only then could they re-build you.
Sometimes the most informative/thought provoking sessions have been the ones where the RTO was carried out at a benign speed, not V1-5Kts at MTOW. Where the pressurisation problem was controllable, and didn't need the O2 masks on followed by the high dive. Where the engine could and should be re-started after a flame out! What do you do now it's re-lit? Continue knowing it failed once, or return in case it fails again? Plenty of scope for CRM there!
The simulator is a training aid not a trapping tool.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worst scenario?
Ah well, it springs to mind instantly.
Giving a check in an L10 sim long ago, the new (to the company) pilot says...Well, in Germany, when we go around, we push (the throttle...way up) then we pull, (the pole....way back) and he does so, whereupon the sim jacks extend fully with the cab at a 45 degree angle, and it stops.
Dead stop...no more motion.
Then the power goes off.
We exit down the rope, just as the Halon goes off.
This ain't nice, and I don't recommend it to anybody.
Now, as for reasonable flows during the exercises, keep it completely reasonable and proper, and positively don't introduce too may 'failures' all at once.
Unreasonable excess failures, quite frankly, prove nothing, and does NOT induce a learning environment.
Ah well, it springs to mind instantly.
Giving a check in an L10 sim long ago, the new (to the company) pilot says...Well, in Germany, when we go around, we push (the throttle...way up) then we pull, (the pole....way back) and he does so, whereupon the sim jacks extend fully with the cab at a 45 degree angle, and it stops.
Dead stop...no more motion.
Then the power goes off.
We exit down the rope, just as the Halon goes off.
This ain't nice, and I don't recommend it to anybody.
Now, as for reasonable flows during the exercises, keep it completely reasonable and proper, and positively don't introduce too may 'failures' all at once.
Unreasonable excess failures, quite frankly, prove nothing, and does NOT induce a learning environment.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Thailand
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you are my nightmare.
iffy loft D
My 'nightmare' scenario would be doing a sim ride with you.
Since when is a ride in the sim meant to be a nightmare?
If you think the scenarios are inadequate/boring/silly bring it up with your traning manager and see what he says about the present system's inadequacies.
If you want to frighten pilots on checks/upgrades, show them a Hammer Horror movie or get a different job.
My 'nightmare' scenario would be doing a sim ride with you.
Since when is a ride in the sim meant to be a nightmare?
If you think the scenarios are inadequate/boring/silly bring it up with your traning manager and see what he says about the present system's inadequacies.
If you want to frighten pilots on checks/upgrades, show them a Hammer Horror movie or get a different job.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most embarrassing scene to observe as an instructor? Asking a highly experienced captain to switch off his flight director, autopilot and autothrottle and demonstrate his manipulative "skills" at flying a raw data one engine inoperative ILS and go-around. Two go-arounds later due to well outside instrument rating tolerances he requested the use of the autopilot which was given in the end. Later he was asked to pin-point his approximate position in terms of radio aid fixing only and he was unable to do so without much muttering, cursing and saying "Is this really necessary when I have a MAP mode available?"
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sunny italy
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
raw data(no FD,autothrottle,flight path descent)flying should be done on a regular basis ,not only 2 time a year in the simu.I practise it as much as possible when flying in non congested area.+doing visual approach when possible(in this case LH B767).Then you will keep your flying skill high.I puch also my F/O to do it,but apparently most of the capt don't like that way of flying...
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: worldwide
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fo knows i like raw data ,manual flight,no A/t...so asks me nicely if he can do so on our short 35 minutes flight..t/o till landing...shhhh cruise was at 29000 ft for 3 minutes..but he loved it and i was glad he did
If u dont like flying...join Airbus;-)
OHH and to amswer another thread ..on this flight i didnt have time to take a power nap
If u dont like flying...join Airbus;-)
OHH and to amswer another thread ..on this flight i didnt have time to take a power nap
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 49
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me people become check airmen for one of two reasons:
1. They truly care about their coworkers and truly want to make sure everybody operates in the safest and most efficient manner.
2. They get off on any and all versions of power, real or imagined.
Fortunately, most checkies at my airline are very much the former, but there are a few (a few sim instructors as well) who fit the latter profile way too well.
1. They truly care about their coworkers and truly want to make sure everybody operates in the safest and most efficient manner.
2. They get off on any and all versions of power, real or imagined.
Fortunately, most checkies at my airline are very much the former, but there are a few (a few sim instructors as well) who fit the latter profile way too well.