The Children of Magenta / Rage against the Machine

[Natstrackalpha]

No......all flying is fun. All flying has its boring bits. Going to an Airbus/Boeing/Whatever doesn't end flying in Cessna/Piper/Extra/Whatever. Are you a pilot or ego-driven SJS slave?

Sorry GF.

You are right. Also my response was unnecessary - apologies.

deleted text - not like you to be catty ?

[gums]

from the peanut gallery

I had some time to collect my thoughts and axioms since my last post.

I really like this thread, and that AA pilot's presentation rings home with this old fighter pilot. It should be a part of all commercial airline pilot's annual training.

There is no substitute for being able to fly the plane with little or no help from otto. The Sully incident and the Gimli glider incident show what can be done when otto goes Tango Uniform or is not able to do the approach/landing due to electronic failures, mechanical failures, structural damage, etc. .The Sioux City incident is another great example of what can be done when the "magenta line" is not available and the crew must rely upon basic airmanship and flying skills.

One observation by one of the pilots here is one that scares the hell outta me - engage otto soon after takeoff and then disengage at about 200 or 300 feet on final approach. Think about the "feel" of the plane due to gusts, crosswinds, changing conditions approaching the runway. Maybe the pilot should be flying a bit more without "help" to realize that things were gonna be tricky once at the end game, ya think?

We had various levels of automation ( otto) in the jets I flew, but for the most part we flew our planes manually with "guidance" from the various systems - TFR, nav guidance cues, etc. The "magenta line" for we light pukes. In my day, the only jet with otto for terrain following was the 'vaark.

Main Dog has it nailed: Use it or lose it.

In the 70's, USAF actually had a program to have the "heavy" pilots fly a few times a month in the T-37. No otto a,nd they could do stall avoidance or even spin recovery. No magenta line and they had to do the whole intrument approach using the charts and basic IFR techniques. No guidance cues as in the T-38, so course interception and let down rates were all done using basic flying skills and experience. Imagine that?

I take issue with Ater about the FMS nav data. Go look at Cali. You must still have good, if not great, situational awareness about MEA and hazards and the basic navaids/fixes for your destination.

The pilots here that fly lights when not hauling 200 SLF's around have my utmost respect and trust. After all, we pilots are supposed to be aviators first and foremost, and not "system monitors".

[USMCProbe]

Children of the Magenta Line.

When I think about the title of this thread, I don't think the Magenta line is the problem. As a matter of fact it massively increases situational awareness. An ILS and VOR are nothing more than another artificial way to navigate. Personally I will take the Magenta line.

The two things I have seen that destroy pilots ability to maintain situational awareness are too much AP and auto throttles, and here is a huge one: massive overreliance on VNAV for descents. Using VNAV and the FMC exclusively for descents allows one to be just along for the ride, instead of staying 10 minutes ahead of where the airplane is currently

Again, the choice to be a hero or a bum is not made on the day that determination is made, but in the months and years before. Did you maintain your proficiency?

If your answer is yes, you might end up being a hero some day. If the answer is no, you might be the causal factor in a smoking hole, that you were determined to have caused.

[BOAC]

Originally Posted by USMC

destroy pilots ability to maintain situational awareness

- you cannot dismiss the 'Magenta Line' in terms of 'situational awareness' - I have flown with a couple of pilots who COULD NOT navigate without it. Heaven knows how they passed an IR. Without the 'line' they were completely 'lost' - VOR/DME and PLOG were a mystery to them. One even asked me how I was managing to navigate between two VORs on an airway without LNAV.

[RAT 5]

2 stories about non-GPS a/c which of course still had a magenta line: and needles & dials.

B733 CL. Approaching the Azores for an ILS. Been over the ocean for quite a while, hence long time since IRS updates. F/O was in HDG SEL with VOR/LOC armed to capture ILS and about a 60 degree intercept. I was looking at ADF needle for OM, he was looking at Magenta line on MAP. Suddenly, about 1.0" before extended magenta centre line the a/c banked sharply and captured the ILS. F/O was shocked, disconnected and suggested false capture. I suggested he look at the LOC deviation on the EADI and also at the ADF OM. "Ah Ha! But the magenta line is off to the left." It quickly updated to the LOC. I explained about map shift. B757 into Cairo for a VOR on the easterlies. Again, long time since update over Africa. The ryw's are very widely spaced and viz was bad in sand. A/C was in HDG SEL with VOR/LOC armed for VOR approach. I asked PM to select RAW data on EHSI. Long before the magenta extended centre line the a/c banked and captured the VOR radial. I now looked at PROG/2 and showed the F/O the X-TK deviation. Not even the airfield was in sight at this point. I confirmed with the F/O that he was happy to continue using the raw data and I switched from MAP to same and we flew a successful VOR/NPA. I have to admit that I was concerned we may have tuned the wrong VOR and be lined up on the wrong rwy. He'd never seen anything as bad as that before.
In the B738 I spent many unsuccessful years trying to encourage F/O's to scan the green & blue arrows on the MAP. "Never seen map shift, so why should I?" "What are you going to do if the GPS fails? Should you descend if you do not confirm you are within 5 degrees of C/L on NPA? Is ANP?RNP enough on its own?"
I once tried to convert a B738 senior captain onto B733. When flying an NDB you had to use HDG SEL & V/S. To intercept the NDB inbd he just used HDG SEL to fly the magenta line; BUT there was map shift and he was way outside 5 degrees as he descended. When at MDA I froze the sim, switched on CAVOK, and heard "how is that possible?" It took a longtime to re-train this ex-B727 captain how to fly the needles again. He hadn't looked at them in years and forgotten how to use them. All very sad.
I still don't understand guys who teach, and those who follow, that you fly a 'raw data ILS' in MAP and not raw data APP mode. Putting the TK LIne on the magenta line does not always work.
There are some great new things out there, but sometimes the old ways can still be better.

[Centaurus]

I still don't understand guys who teach, and those who follow, that you fly a 'raw data ILS' in MAP

Horses for courses. Some prefer to use HSI VOR/ILS mode mode for ILS where you have a whacking big localizer CDI to follow. Much easier than squinting at the itsy bitsy LLZ needle situated under the ADI. Better still always have the standby ADI ILS set up if installed. Good cross-check airmanship.

[aterpster]

Centaarus:

Horses for courses. Some prefer to use HSI VOR/ILS mode mode for ILS where you have a whacking big localizer CDI to follow. Much easier than squinting at the itsy bitsy LLZ needle situated under the ADI. Better still always have the standby ADI ILS set up if installed. Good cross-check airmanship.

This does all of it:

[RAT 5]

....whacking big localizer CDI to follow. Much easier than squinting at the itsy bitsy LLZ needle situated under the ADI.

Quite agree. Trouble is, most of the SFI's who I encounter are children of the magenta line and know nothing else and have never flown a non-GPS a/c. They do not know how to teach the full APP mode display method.

For Aterpster: What does that name come from? I do not have a play station, but if I did................

[alf5071h]

The operational world is increasingly complex – ‘entropy’, more disorder, uncertainty, unpredictability; thus it is unlikely that there is a ‘simple’ solution such as # 115.

Most of the new integrated displays have to be optimized for a specific situation or task, and thus might not be suitable for other situations or tasks; worst still, they may introduce new or unforeseen problems.

These displays tend to mix vector graphics (like older, conventional instruments) with a ‘bit mapped’ background of picture-like graphics, simulating the real world. Neither of these is perfect, although the real world can be convincing.
Problems with ‘overlays’ can arise from the choice of scaling. Generally head-down instruments use more than 1:1, thus a pitch scale provides greater fidelity during instrument tasks; whereas in manual flight where the real world is like a bit map, the scaling is exactly 1:1.
Although the flying task is the same, the mental process may not be, pilots have to adjust for this.

If a bit-map is used as a backdrop to a vector display for instrument flying task, then 'the world' may have non standard scaling, which may be fine while head down, but might require some mental readjustment when transitioning to real world visual flight. Converse arguments might apply to visual flight transition to instrument flight. There is some evidence that the mental transition, the realigning the mental model, situation awareness and understanding, takes time; perhaps as much as 4 sec.

HUD tends to overcome this as the vector scaling is normally conformal with the real world (only one synthetic item). Also, during transition from HUD to real-world in low visibility, the bit-map real-world is increasingly of higher quality (less mental effort) as the visual scene improves (regulatory limits on DH and RVR – 'see to land'). However, if the visibility suddenly degrades (poor quality bit-map) there may be similar problems with mental switching, taking 2-4 sec to transition back to the vector display which requires ‘reinterpreting’.

There may be similar issues with the lateral axis, and with the depiction of track-course (over the ground) and flight-path vector (in space/time - 3D/4D on a 2D screen); further problems may arise with displays of vector accelerations such as potential flight path, which also interact with thrust.

In isolation, instrument or visual flight tasks, then a suitable format might be chosen, but with transition between them, or for intermediate tasks, problems could occur. Compare this point with current safety issues of awareness and transition from auto-flight to head-up manual flight. Would a futuristic display simplify the mental process or just add more data, more mental workload, without improving understanding?

[Natstrackalpha]

Radio Aids and DR

One assumes then that the use of Radio Aids and DR with Pilot Navigation can be `confirmed` by reference to the `magenta` as opposed to relying on the magenta whilst trying to remember where they put the VOR dial.

Its a bit like having a light aircraft and stuffing it full of GPS kit, which is the same as Tom Tomisation in cars - point . . . ?

Point is - the mind, if not the brain becomes GPS dependent or `lazy` or more importantly one dimensional. In the case of the Tom Tom road navigation . . . kit, you can navigate around the world - but when you get there, you won`t really know where you are - as you would have been a passenger.

In fact, if you think too much magenta - then when you turn your head away to `think`about your nav you find yourself - very momentarily - having to tranfer dimensions.

The whole mindset of `where are we?` `where are we now?` and `where are we going to be in how long?` has not been used - unless, hopefully, in conjuction with reality, namely Radio Aids and if in VMC the Mk1 eyeball and position dist/spd = That sort of thing, and that other piece of equipment, ah yes, thats it . . a chart . . . I wonder how long it would take to get the chart out if all the kit went TU?

Obviously, we do not follow momma magenta blindly . . . .and yet, there is a tendency for the human brain to stay safe - staying safe in a wood with a swamp means avoiding the swamp say - so being in a mass of work, swamped, the magenta child will refer to momma magenta as opposed to trying to satisfy an innate desire to know! where one is - position, altitude/level. Or putting it a little less delicately, WTF R WE?

[Teldorserious]

At this point, I really think people are so stupid that a requisite amount of people have to die before any real change occurs.

[Tee Emm]

See Post 115 the beautiful picture of the integrated PFD. That is most impressive with all that info packed into one TV screen.

Yet, I must say looking at the picture, have you ever wondered why the "little aeroplane" symbol with its wings drooping in anhedral is so tiny, when it is the most important symbol of the lot.

I prefer a whacking big "little aeroplane" symbol that stands out like dogs balls and looks like a real model aeroplane viewed from the back.

Remember the old Sperry Artificial Horizons that showed the little aeroplane as a big little aeroplane which certainly concentrated your scan when flying on instruments. You couldn't miss it even in poor lighting conditions.

Maybe a Ppruner could cut and paste a photo of a typical DC3/ DC4 AH or the huge AH symbol in some of the early fighters like the F86 Sabre.

Again, I have often wondered if recovering from an unusual attitude on instruments is much easier when using a realistic large aeroplane symbol rather than a small flattish triangle shaped symbol designed primarily to accommodate a flight director symbol like the V-Bars.

Look at the latest EFIS displays in Cessna 172 training aircraft. All that peripheral information and an itsy bitsy artificial horizon in the middle of that lot and so small that a student could be forgiven for not appreciating the vital purpose of that symbol which is to keep the blue side up.

[aterpster]

Tee Emm:

See Post 115 the beautiful picture of the integrated PFD. That is most impressive with all that info packed into one TV screen.

It's a screen capture from the PC trainer for the Garmin G-3000, which is going into the Phenom Jet 300 beyond a specified serial number in production. The MFD and touch screen data entry display are quite impressive as well.

https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/in-t...prod66916.html

The G-3000 is a major, but incremental improvement of Garmin's G-1000 system.

The G-3000 will likely be certified for single-string RNP AR using AHRs.

[Natstrackalpha]

At this point, I really think people are so stupid that a requisite amount of people have to die before any real change occurs.

People die because they are stupid? Or do you mean you want to shoot a requisite number of instructors?


Quote:
The G-3000 will likely be certified for single-string RNP AR using AHR.



By the same token, have you seen Chelton PFDs and associated FMS?

Cool three dimensional displays, you can watch the mountain in threeD as you pass by it - hopefully by a long way - and also fly through valleys in IMC complete with top view, profile view and Highway In The Sky (HITS) - you can use this kit on a small aeroplane like an Otter or Cessna, nice!

IFR -- airways, TAWS, WAAS approaches, and visual approaches with a glide path.