Once a pilot - now a computer's sidekick
DOVE
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Myself
Age: 77
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Next step?
I finally figured out ; my mood is “Bodhi”.
Thanks to a former colleague of mine (he was my co-pilot, and is now on AB330 FO) who told me: "You are an old pilot."
I became aware of my state: I am a Pterosaur.
Why scramble to teach how to prevent a stall, or how to come out of it?
Modern aircraft do not stall!
Why you should warn the students from spin, what makes it different from the spiral, the way to establish unequivocally the sense in which the aircraft is turning.
What use to teach drawing in the ether precise climb / descent at a constant rate simultaneously performing standard turns.
The automatics do it better.
And then to instruct how to imagine their position in space according to the indication of some Needle.
How to acquire and maintain a QDM or QDR, or to capture a radial, to what end?
Double drift in some holding entry, the triple in a certain leg to maintain it; dollar yes or dollar no!?. All this is best done by automation, and well-designed, in real-time on the screen of N. D. set on MAP.
Why warning: "dead foot: dead engine ..." or "foot chases ball…"
On modern aircraft yaw caused by engine failure is automatically corrected.
Why to check often during the descent that the distance remaining multplied 3 gives the actual altitude in order to avoid to arrive long and / or fast, for this there is the Vertical Nav.
Why to memorize attitudes and powers for (flight turbulence), for the initial, intermediate and final approach with all engines and with One Engine Inoperative and their corrections for weight, P.A and wind.
The A. T. maintains very well the speed needed for each and every occasion.
Why to point out that to maintain the glide rather than chasing the VSI, the secret is to make small changes to the attitude and power, that the locator displacement has not to be chased but prevented, by calculating and changing constantly and almost imperceptibly the heading according to the cross-wind component:
so even if we disconnect the A. P. there is the F / D, and then there is the Flight Path Vector, that will make those calculations before and better than us.
Why to do the Alt. Check & x-check at the FAF, FAP, we checked the FMS immediately after entering the STAR.
We can even build any type of instrument / visual approach and a circuit with PB, PBD or the coordinates of significant points to which we can associate altitude and speed.
Next step?
Guess what?
Thanks to a former colleague of mine (he was my co-pilot, and is now on AB330 FO) who told me: "You are an old pilot."
I became aware of my state: I am a Pterosaur.
Why scramble to teach how to prevent a stall, or how to come out of it?
Modern aircraft do not stall!
Why you should warn the students from spin, what makes it different from the spiral, the way to establish unequivocally the sense in which the aircraft is turning.
What use to teach drawing in the ether precise climb / descent at a constant rate simultaneously performing standard turns.
The automatics do it better.
And then to instruct how to imagine their position in space according to the indication of some Needle.
How to acquire and maintain a QDM or QDR, or to capture a radial, to what end?
Double drift in some holding entry, the triple in a certain leg to maintain it; dollar yes or dollar no!?. All this is best done by automation, and well-designed, in real-time on the screen of N. D. set on MAP.
Why warning: "dead foot: dead engine ..." or "foot chases ball…"
On modern aircraft yaw caused by engine failure is automatically corrected.
Why to check often during the descent that the distance remaining multplied 3 gives the actual altitude in order to avoid to arrive long and / or fast, for this there is the Vertical Nav.
Why to memorize attitudes and powers for (flight turbulence), for the initial, intermediate and final approach with all engines and with One Engine Inoperative and their corrections for weight, P.A and wind.
The A. T. maintains very well the speed needed for each and every occasion.
Why to point out that to maintain the glide rather than chasing the VSI, the secret is to make small changes to the attitude and power, that the locator displacement has not to be chased but prevented, by calculating and changing constantly and almost imperceptibly the heading according to the cross-wind component:
so even if we disconnect the A. P. there is the F / D, and then there is the Flight Path Vector, that will make those calculations before and better than us.
Why to do the Alt. Check & x-check at the FAF, FAP, we checked the FMS immediately after entering the STAR.
We can even build any type of instrument / visual approach and a circuit with PB, PBD or the coordinates of significant points to which we can associate altitude and speed.
Next step?
Guess what?
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bedford
Age: 48
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some skill needed.
Agree with Flygare. The more you practice, the easier it gets. The more familiar you are the less uncomfortable you feel when you have to think a bit more.At least with my Company we hand fly and practice raw data approaches as much as we like....not always because the automatics are so 
you have to....
The scary thing is in 30 years time new pilots will be amazed that we once had to keep the FD bars crossed using old fashioned control yokes and not a trackpad.
you have to....The scary thing is in 30 years time new pilots will be amazed that we once had to keep the FD bars crossed using old fashioned control yokes and not a trackpad.
DOVE
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Myself
Age: 77
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Next step?
LeftBlank
In 30 years time?
In much less time there will be nobobody in the cockpit and the pilot will be sitting at home in front of his PC.
The scary thing is in 30 years time new pilots will be amazed that we once had to keep the FD bars crossed using old fashioned control yokes and not a trackpad.
In much less time there will be nobobody in the cockpit and the pilot will be sitting at home in front of his PC.
Last edited by DOVES; 6th Aug 2012 at 17:00.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: LPPR
Age: 66
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do we still need pterosaurs?
@DOVES
Why do I keep teaching and practising hand sutures when 99% of them are (adequately, if not better) performed mechanically by a multitude of gadgets or a robot (an industry-driven "need")?
Because when the machine fails, you have to do it yourself, and you better know how! My patients, as your A/C ultimately still depend on our capability of hand-flying (or hand-suturing), no matter how complex and "reliable" automation is...
Maybe I'm a pterosaur too... But I feel I'm still usefull.
Why do I keep teaching and practising hand sutures when 99% of them are (adequately, if not better) performed mechanically by a multitude of gadgets or a robot (an industry-driven "need")?
Because when the machine fails, you have to do it yourself, and you better know how! My patients, as your A/C ultimately still depend on our capability of hand-flying (or hand-suturing), no matter how complex and "reliable" automation is...
Maybe I'm a pterosaur too... But I feel I'm still usefull.
DOVE
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Myself
Age: 77
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do we still need pterosaurs?
costamaia
Obviously I was joking.
Even when and if I will be no longer allowed to teach to love my art to aspiring airline pilots I will continue to teach as I do now, on real planes "Light sport aircraft" piloted with the seat of the pants, stick, rudder and throttle, and without the intermediation of one or more computers.
Obviously I was joking.
Even when and if I will be no longer allowed to teach to love my art to aspiring airline pilots I will continue to teach as I do now, on real planes "Light sport aircraft" piloted with the seat of the pants, stick, rudder and throttle, and without the intermediation of one or more computers.
In much less time there will be nobobody in the cockpit and the pilot will be sitting at home in front of his PC.
The pilot will be there to feed the dog, and the dog will be there to see that the pilot desn't touch anything.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: South Korea
Age: 62
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowering accident rate due to automation
Some people on this thread attribute the lowing accident rate over the past decades at least partly to the use of automation. Does this mean we can expect the 737 to have more accidents than the 320 because it hasless automation?
Last edited by Cool Guys; 9th Aug 2012 at 08:40.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think automated flight controls are crucial nowadays, considering the sheer number of aircraft up there. But I do think there's a fine line between computers reducing workload and controlling so many flight parameters that the pilots can't practice their skills.
There's absolutely no mechanical connection between the stick and the surfaces on an airbus right?
But automation probably makes ATC life a hell of a lot easier!
There's absolutely no mechanical connection between the stick and the surfaces on an airbus right?
But automation probably makes ATC life a hell of a lot easier!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: middle of nowhere
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would like to recall a term that I miss in the conversation:
Automation induced pilot error.
There will always be human errors, but there will always be electronic failures.
There is a very well established statistic about pilot error in airline crashes, not surprisingly a high one and, even less surprisingly a very meagre statistic about automation failure. In most cases there is mention about some electronic failure, however there is always the mention about the failure of the crew to either prevent it or correct it, thus blaming the pilot and statistically put it down to pilot error.
Take away some automation and I admit we will have some accidents happen that could have been prevented through protections. However we might have some other accidents not happen because the pilots would not have been misled by badly designed or failed automation. Furthermore the training would have not been outsourced to poorly programmed online courses and reduced to the bare minimum and such trained professionals might have avoided some more accidents.
Automation is great, if you have it as nice to have and use when appropriate. Today though, due to poor pilots skills and even poorer manger skills, it has become need to use. I pretend that this philosophy is slightly flawed and sort of originating a lot of accidents.
How convenient for airlines, manufacturers and regulators though: It leaves them with the omnipresent pilot error.
D'you wann bet neither AF nor AB will be indicated in any way for AF447?
It will remain the way it is: Everybody hitting on the admittedly below adequate standard pilots!
Automation induced pilot error.
There will always be human errors, but there will always be electronic failures.
There is a very well established statistic about pilot error in airline crashes, not surprisingly a high one and, even less surprisingly a very meagre statistic about automation failure. In most cases there is mention about some electronic failure, however there is always the mention about the failure of the crew to either prevent it or correct it, thus blaming the pilot and statistically put it down to pilot error.
Take away some automation and I admit we will have some accidents happen that could have been prevented through protections. However we might have some other accidents not happen because the pilots would not have been misled by badly designed or failed automation. Furthermore the training would have not been outsourced to poorly programmed online courses and reduced to the bare minimum and such trained professionals might have avoided some more accidents.
Automation is great, if you have it as nice to have and use when appropriate. Today though, due to poor pilots skills and even poorer manger skills, it has become need to use. I pretend that this philosophy is slightly flawed and sort of originating a lot of accidents.
How convenient for airlines, manufacturers and regulators though: It leaves them with the omnipresent pilot error.
D'you wann bet neither AF nor AB will be indicated in any way for AF447?
It will remain the way it is: Everybody hitting on the admittedly below adequate standard pilots!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: middle of nowhere
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just do it. If you can't because of SOP, try to discuss and influence change
Consider yourself lucky to fly in your company, if it really exists or works that way .....
Sabenaboy, how do you dare spoil the fun and interrupt this thread's brash display of popular prejudices, misunderstandings and general ignorance of how aeroplanes fly by discoursing sensibly? Who do you think you are? A pilot?
Naughty boy....
Naughty boy....
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Usually Oz
Posts: 732
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've possibly posted this earlier in the automation debate, but one of the aforementioned chaps posted in our discussion group that it's dangerous to hand-fly above FL250 and the seatbelt sign should be put on if you do so!
Discussion ceased after an emotional post from me that this was utter bulls#!t and setting the matter straight. However, the thoughts are out there!!
G'day
Discussion ceased after an emotional post from me that this was utter bulls#!t and setting the matter straight. However, the thoughts are out there!!
G'day
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 85
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a competition between pilot and computer. Computers fly an aircraft better, more accurate and more efficiently than hand flying.
99.9% of the time.
I would like to think, as a passenger nowadays, that my pilot could cope if I was in the 0.1% situation. That's surely what they are there for otherwise, it could be argued, you don't need a human pilot at all.
99.9% of the time.
I would like to think, as a passenger nowadays, that my pilot could cope if I was in the 0.1% situation. That's surely what they are there for otherwise, it could be argued, you don't need a human pilot at all.
DOVE
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Myself
Age: 77
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At last!
Gretchenfrage:
The good news is that "pilot error" will disappear for ever, there will only be "automation error". Computer operators will be like surgeons: they will not risk even a nail in the operation.
The good news is that "pilot error" will disappear for ever, there will only be "automation error". Computer operators will be like surgeons: they will not risk even a nail in the operation.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New FAA policy on manual flying
A cut and paste of a document published 4 Jan 2013. Interesting reading and somewhat of a wise about-face IMHO.
A SAFO contains important safety information and may include recommended action. SAFO content should be especially valuable to air carriers in meeting their statutory duty to provide service with the highest possible degree of safety in the public interest. Besides the specific action recommended in a SAFO, an alternative action may be as effective in addressing the safety issue named in the SAFO.
Subject: (FAA) Manual Flight Operations
Purpose: This SAFO encourages operators to promote manual flight operations when appropriate.
Background: A recent analysis of flight operations data (including normal flight operations, incidents, and accidents) identified an increase in manual handling errors. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) believes maintaining and improving the knowledge and skills for manual flight operations is necessary for safe flight operations.
Discussion: Modern aircraft are commonly operated using autoflight systems (e.g., autopilot or autothrottle/autothrust). Unfortunately, continuous use of those systems does not reinforce a pilot’s knowledge and skills in manual flight operations. Autoflight systems are useful tools for pilots and have improved safety and workload management, and thus enabled more precise operations. However, continuous use of autoflight systems could lead to degradation of the pilot’s ability to quickly recover the aircraft from an undesired state.
Operators are encouraged to take an integrated approach by incorporating emphasis of manual flight operations into both line operations and training (initial/upgrade and recurrent). Operational policies should be developed or reviewed to ensure there are appropriate opportunities for pilots to exercise manual flying skills, such as in non-RVSM airspace and during low workload conditions. In addition, policies should be developed or reviewed to ensure that pilots understand when to use the automated systems, such as during high workload conditions or airspace procedures that require use of autopilot for precise operations. Augmented crew operations may also limit the ability of some pilots to obtain practice in manual flight operations. Airline operational policies should ensure that all pilots have the appropriate opportunities to exercise the aforementioned knowledge and skills in flight operations.
Recommended Action: Directors of Operations, Program Managers, Directors of Training, Training Center Managers, Check Pilots, Training Pilots, and flightcrews should be familiar with the content of this SAFO. They should work together to ensure that the content of this SAFO is incorporated into operational policy, provided to pilots during ground training, and reinforced in flight training and proficiency checks.
Contact: Questions or comments regarding this SAFO should be directed to the Air Carrier Training Branch, AFS-210, at (202) 267-8166.

A SAFO contains important safety information and may include recommended action. SAFO content should be especially valuable to air carriers in meeting their statutory duty to provide service with the highest possible degree of safety in the public interest. Besides the specific action recommended in a SAFO, an alternative action may be as effective in addressing the safety issue named in the SAFO.
Subject: (FAA) Manual Flight Operations
Purpose: This SAFO encourages operators to promote manual flight operations when appropriate.
Background: A recent analysis of flight operations data (including normal flight operations, incidents, and accidents) identified an increase in manual handling errors. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) believes maintaining and improving the knowledge and skills for manual flight operations is necessary for safe flight operations.
Discussion: Modern aircraft are commonly operated using autoflight systems (e.g., autopilot or autothrottle/autothrust). Unfortunately, continuous use of those systems does not reinforce a pilot’s knowledge and skills in manual flight operations. Autoflight systems are useful tools for pilots and have improved safety and workload management, and thus enabled more precise operations. However, continuous use of autoflight systems could lead to degradation of the pilot’s ability to quickly recover the aircraft from an undesired state.
Operators are encouraged to take an integrated approach by incorporating emphasis of manual flight operations into both line operations and training (initial/upgrade and recurrent). Operational policies should be developed or reviewed to ensure there are appropriate opportunities for pilots to exercise manual flying skills, such as in non-RVSM airspace and during low workload conditions. In addition, policies should be developed or reviewed to ensure that pilots understand when to use the automated systems, such as during high workload conditions or airspace procedures that require use of autopilot for precise operations. Augmented crew operations may also limit the ability of some pilots to obtain practice in manual flight operations. Airline operational policies should ensure that all pilots have the appropriate opportunities to exercise the aforementioned knowledge and skills in flight operations.
Recommended Action: Directors of Operations, Program Managers, Directors of Training, Training Center Managers, Check Pilots, Training Pilots, and flightcrews should be familiar with the content of this SAFO. They should work together to ensure that the content of this SAFO is incorporated into operational policy, provided to pilots during ground training, and reinforced in flight training and proficiency checks.
Contact: Questions or comments regarding this SAFO should be directed to the Air Carrier Training Branch, AFS-210, at (202) 267-8166.

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: planet earth
Age: 59
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you have a link to this document?
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviat.../SAFO13002.pdf
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do this long enough and you start to get a feel for who the airline manufacturers are making planes for. Some has been written about the insiders saying 'we assume the biggest idiot nepotist hiring Chief pilot moron, hiring from the bottom of the resume pile, stuff the seats with incompetent kids'.
So they design slow planes, docile flying characteristics, where the computers handle the stick and big screens tell the pilots where they are. All in the hopes that the pilot salary savings equals more in cash then insurance costs and lawsuits from crashes.
It's working to a certain extent except what your not told is the massive debt the airlines have piled up buying new planes instead of just flying around paid off 737s with new engines. Nope, you don't hear about that. Nor do you hear about how most of the system has gone short haul commuters, nor do you hear that the 'flying' is the same place, same time, over and over, back and forth.
So the kids love it, they can call themselves pilots, the chief pilots love it because they have robots working for them, the passengers love it because they get cheap tickets.
But at a certain point you can't finance $50 million dollar planes to shoe horn kids in to the cockpit to make it work.
Sooner or later the debts come due. I suspect it will wander back to real pilots getting hired, but who cares, really, if no one cares if the Air France guys can't stay straight and level, so be it, a Darwinian outcome.
So they design slow planes, docile flying characteristics, where the computers handle the stick and big screens tell the pilots where they are. All in the hopes that the pilot salary savings equals more in cash then insurance costs and lawsuits from crashes.
It's working to a certain extent except what your not told is the massive debt the airlines have piled up buying new planes instead of just flying around paid off 737s with new engines. Nope, you don't hear about that. Nor do you hear about how most of the system has gone short haul commuters, nor do you hear that the 'flying' is the same place, same time, over and over, back and forth.
So the kids love it, they can call themselves pilots, the chief pilots love it because they have robots working for them, the passengers love it because they get cheap tickets.
But at a certain point you can't finance $50 million dollar planes to shoe horn kids in to the cockpit to make it work.
Sooner or later the debts come due. I suspect it will wander back to real pilots getting hired, but who cares, really, if no one cares if the Air France guys can't stay straight and level, so be it, a Darwinian outcome.
