How to prepare fo Eng failures in SIM

[Olendirk]

Guys,

how do you prepare for engine failures in simulator. any mind mapping or training at home? any suggestions? techniques?

sincerely

od

[dusk2dawn]

Mental Visualization:
- Study the Training Manual and SOP.
- Sit down - close your eyes if neccesary.
- Picture the events happening.
- DO the arms and legs movements required - touch the buttons.
- SAY the call-outs loud and clear.
Do it again and again and again and again........

[dusk2dawn]

Take a look at this page: http://www.bpa.org.uk/skydive/pages/...mentalprep.htm

[Old Smokey]

This might sound like a smart ass response, but it's NOT!

I prepare for engine failures in the Simulator in EXACTLY the same way that I prepare for engine failures in the real aircraft. I fully EXPECT that an engine will fail before V1, and have a clear mental plan of the actions required for a Rejected Takeoff. After the V1 call, I then fully EXPECT an engine failure between V1 and the critical Altitude, and have a clear mental plan of the actions required for a continued Takeoff.

When the failures don't occur, I then fully expect that they will on the next flight, and today was a bonus.

The Simulator is intended to simulate the real aircraft. It certainly emulates this procedurally, although often-times the fidelity leaves something to be desired. If you don't already have contingency planning, and a mental plan, for engine failures in day to day flying in the real aircraft, may I suggest that you set about developing one? This contingency and mental planning is then easy to carry over from the aircraft to the simulator.

Regards,

Old Smokey

[Dan Winterland]

Not a smart ass response at all. I agree implicitly. It's a shame that modern cost based training programmes lead someone to ask a question such as this. The simulator is where the learning should be done for the real aircraft, but so many training organisations seem to have lost sight of this fact. All too frequently, I see pilots practice raw data hand flying in the aircraft (and reducing the safety margin) because they have a sim coming up.

[Sean Dell]

All too frequently, I see pilots practice raw data hand flying in the aircraft (and reducing the safety margin)

Dan - whilst I agree that the A/P probably does a better job than the pilot - I find this comment (if I have taken it the right way), very disturbing. What is wrong with raw data flying on the line? Pick your moment to do it ie. decent weather, familiar airport, ask your mate if they are ok with you doing it etc. We need to practice our flying skills - and with commercial pressure for sim use, it is not always poss to do too much raw data flying in the sim!

I, frankly, would be worried if my collegues were not practising raw data flying on the line.

Cheers
Sean

[Tee Emm]

too frequently, I see pilots practice raw data hand flying in the aircraft (and reducing the safety margin) because they have a sim coming up.

What utter rubbish. Used in an appropriate ATC or environmental situation, raw data hand flying is perfectly safe. Unless of course the pilot lacks the ability - in which case he should not be either in command or second in command of a jet transport aircraft with passengers.

[flash2002]

All too frequently, I see pilots practice raw data hand flying in the aircraft (and reducing the safety margin) because they have a sim coming up.

Lets put it the other way around. If you never practice raw data flying. Do you think you will be able to manage when you need to fly raw data? Especially when stress levels are already high?

I reckon you never do manual landings either?????

I even practice raw data flying (when circumstances permit) when I have just done my sim.

[Rananim]

ask your mate if they are ok with you doing it etc

Sorry,not familiar with this type of pc flightdeck.Is this what we've come to?

Pick your moment to do it ie. decent weather, familiar airport

Again,too pc.You dont know what conditions will exist when you're called upon to utilize these fundamental skills.

All too frequently, I see pilots practice raw data hand flying in the aircraft (and reducing the safety margin) because they have a sim coming up.

Aaaaarrrgh...more pc.If theyre reducing the safety margin then thats why they need to do it.The world wont stop turning if you're a dot low/high.Practice it until you nail it.

Old Smokey,
Excellent advice from someone who obviously knows what its all about.

[gatbusdriver]

Rananim

I always take out the automatics and hand fly. Sometimes from the top of drop. Of course you ask your colleague if he is happy with that, mainly because you are increasing his work load.

The other thing I do is make sure it is not into busy airfields where both pilots should be on the look out for other aircraft and monitoring the aircraft. To do otherwise (IMHO) would be unproffessional.

[parabellum]

"What utter rubbish. Used in an appropriate ATC or environmental situation, raw data hand flying is perfectly safe. Unless of course the pilot lacks the ability - in which case he should not be either in command or second in command of a jet transport aircraft with passengers."

Oh dear, what an attitude, I agree with some of the sentiment but the expression of it leaves me wondering, don't think I want to fly with you Tee Emm.

On something like the B747-400 where handling is minimal it is common for the PF to want to hand fly where possible but it has to be remembered that in a busy ATC environment if the PF is hand flying then you have 1.5 pilots watching the ship but if the auto-pilot is selected then you have 3.0 pilots watching the ship. Departing LHR it was SOP to select auto pilot at 400' to ensure noise abatement whilst other airports did not require such close adherence to the SID, often canceling it shortly after take off, so hand flying was OK unless the PNF was getting buried under ATC as well as mode and configuration changes. Huge difference between arriving at ANC, (Anchorage), at 0600 on a clear spring morning and arriving at ORD, (Chicago) at around 1700 local on a wet Friday afternoon in winter.

Back to the thread, be careful about "preparing" for the SIM, stick to a sound knowledge of emergency and non-normal procedures. I have seen people so worked up about the SIM that when the engine failed they ignored all the clues and stuck in full wrong rudder, that was the one they had been practicing in their chair/sleep etc.

[hikoushi]

Fully agree with the above. Hand-fly regularly when workload permits, focusing on precision, striving to make each approach better than the last. Periodically review emergency procedures and associated SOPs, and if you can find a willing victim, do some SEPT (simulated emergency procedures training) and practice the callouts with someone from time to time. Good way to pass the time on long days when you're paired with someone who actually likes flying. On the ground between legs (or in extended cruise, or what not) is a great place do some occaisional study and review; already getting paid to be there, so why not make some of the down time useful instead of studying at home and wasting time off?

Outside of just drawing a real prick of a sim evaluator, stressful sim sessions are usually the result of day-to-day complacency or flying in a busy environment that is not conducive to being able to keep your physical skills sharp, and / or not devoting any regular time to procedural and checklist review. In other words being "out of practice" and "cramming" right before your ride ; no different than the academic side of things, really.

My personal experience, at least. Different for everyone, so take what works and ditch the rest. Aloha.

[Rainboe]

So brave Captain Rainboe sim training, doing heroic Cat III approach, fully execting to go around any second, runway comes into view, nothing wrong, then copilot loudly calls 'Decide', and the response is?............Loud and authoritative 'Go Around!'

Whilst Old Smokey is absolutely correct, to fully expect an event that doesn't occur can lead you to react sometimes as if it has occured, and make a complete plonker of yourself to boot!

(my excuse is I was tired)

[john_tullamarine]

I guess what the above posts are leading to is something along the lines of ..

(a) brief and anticipate what is likely to occur and/or what may have an adverse risk consequence if it does occur (eg one needs to know what the SID is all about while having a parallel capability in the event of any of the usual set of takeoff emergencies while, at the same time, not setting up the situation for an inappropriate anticipatory response)

(b) practise (where and when appropriate) to develop and maintain a useful manipulative and systems knowledge skill set .. get those aspects of that skill set (which are relevant) to the point where they become largely automatic so that the cognitive bits of the brain can be directed on the day more to management, assessment, and decision making rather than trying to keep up with the basic aeroplane driving and switchology things.

(c) avoid loading up the manager (and this is what the pilot is .. and always has been... whether we like it or not) .. because this will degrade management capability .. (ie one ought not to add optional physical/mental activities when such are inappropriate to the circumstances)

(d) be ruthless in exploiting all the potential for assistance which you have .. whether that be flight crew, autopilots, cabin crew, ATC, etc., etc ... in a manner and to the extent appropriate in the circumstances

.. and I'm sure that we could all add a few more bits to flesh out the philosophy ..

[Gary Lager]

I didn't read Dan's post as anti-raw data flying, as some did; I understood the irony to be some pilots are using raw-data flying to practice for the sim.

The sim is there to practice for real-life; it's the place to make the mistakes. Any mindset which suggests the opposite is unfortunate and is far from ideal in a professional & safe culture.

By all means practice hand-flying when appropriate (and I do), but not just becasue you have a sim coming up! In parallel with Old Smokey's post, in the same way we should revise our EFATO (and other) non-normal profiles for day-to-day operations, not just because we have check coming up.

This check-minded mentality can be detrimental, since once the pilot gets out of the sim, he is prone to relax: "another one done for 6 months!", when in fact the opposite ought to be the case!

[SR71]

I'm interested to know whether, when people use the term hand flying, they mean:

a) AP and/or AT out but FD on, or

b) AP and/or AT out and FD off?

Secondly, how many times have you had the FD failed on you in the sim?

Which begs another few questions....

[alf5071h]

A simulator session is a major opportunity to gain experience. Before practicing any specific maneuver, consider how the simulation might differ from the real aircraft or flight situation.
Few simulators provide a meaningful range of engine failure cues, most lacking adequate sound or vibration; thus, there could be a tendency to over-focus on the engine instruments (PSM+ICR report). Engine instruments must be scanned, but they might not be the primary cue for determining a failure, and even in rare circumstances, they could indicate a normal range of parameters. A good reminder is to recall what the normal range of the engine parameters are. The instruments are of course invaluable for any follow up action – determine the situation before deciding.

Detecting the failure in the aircraft uses aspects of the visual cue of yaw (if available) and the body sense of lateral acceleration. Some simulators suffer small, hardly perceptible lags in yaw, but which can complicate the visual detection process. Of greater concern is that few simulators represent body force / lateral acceleration very well, if at all, thus the detection of an engine failure in the simulator again places greater emphasis on the instruments and the lateral accelerometer (slip ball). And yet again, the simulation display of lateral acceleration does not always match the aircraft precisely.
Most of the criticisms of simulations are generic; modern simulations of an all-glass flight deck are much better, but they are never a perfect match for the aircraft or situation (they are meant to be ‘good enough’).

Use of the lateral accelerometer to detect and control the yaw is a valuable learning point. Consider how often your normal instrument scan includes this parameter just after take off? Relate this to how you would fly the aircraft – wings level, pitch commensurate with speed, control the yaw with rudder – do you normally use rudder? Do you reduce the workload by using the FD as in normal operations, do you rely on it? Remember that there is no FD for yaw and only a few aircraft have auto control of yaw, some of which depend on the state of engagement before of after the engine failure.
Additional ‘what ifs’ bring together aspects of non FD instrument scans and normal vs non normal instrument scans; What to look at, Where is it, When to look – frequency, Why - importance.
Non FD flight might introduce some interesting effects in speed control with EFIS strip speed displays; consider very carefully which way to pitch the aircraft in response to a speed deviation. If you don’t think that there are potential problems, then try an engine fail climb, FD off, on a dark night at heavy wt – in the simulator.
Manual flight has advantages in those aircraft which have a large change in lateral acceleration with speed change; the aircraft provides a feel for the situation (speed deviation) through the rudder force. Don’t be over anxious to trim out the yaw (follow you SOPs); the workload and attention to trim might be best used elsewhere; no commercial aircraft has impossible foot forces for a qualified pilot during a 5 min climb.

Also, consider some of the more unusual failure situations. What happens if an upwind engine fails in a limiting crosswind? The aircraft will weather cock into the wind as per any all engines operating takeoff, but depending on the point of failure and the nature of thrust loss, the aircraft my continue to yaw.
Alternatively, there are those failures with stressful levels of noise and/or vibration; consider how you will manage the stress of surprise or the unusual – sound, smell, or sight (fire at night). Sim instructors, introduce some additional surprise at the point of failure – drop the Jep bag on the sim floor!

Reconsider the differences between normal and non normal operation, ensure that these are not just tricks for use in the simulator – fly as you train, train as you fly
First, fly the aircraft with reference to the appropriate cues.
Second, navigate the obstacles – emergency turn if required. Is it likely that any of operational situations will give a EGPWS alert (amber)? Remember that EO flight path does not provide normal terrain clearances – does the simulator simulate EGPWS correctly – another potential surprise – what if? (Sims should replicate the alerts and warnings; the terrain data base is there for free so use it).
Third, communicate – with your crew, they are part of flying and navigating. Don’t be over hasty in telling the world; tell them what they need to know – your intentions – you are in control, the controllers are there to assist you.
Fourth, manage – everything else as their priorities require; remember that they are fourth.
Scan, Scan, Scan:- Plane, Path, People.

[AirRabbit]

After reading "Old" Smokey's post, my first response was "THAT is why he's "OLD" Smokey. He's done enough things right in the airplane to be around long enough to claim the moniker "old." I couldn't agree with him more!

[Dan Winterland]

Thanks Gary, that't exactly what I meant. I'm not against raw data flying, I do plenty of it. It's the system where practicing in the aircraft for the sim has become common I'm protesting. I was always led to believe that it was the sim which was the training aid. It dosen't seem to be the case anymore and it's particularly bad in my company which has a confrontational training environment.

[Rananim]

Last minute runway changes need careful attention especially if you fly big metal.Performance,FMC and engine-out procedure all need to be reviewed;the sim instructor might try and rush you so you miss one.