Airbus sees the light - but will their clients?
Thread Starter
Airbus sees the light - but will their clients?
It will be a hard sell to convince Airbus operators to allow their crews to practice hand flying; particularly in Asia and the Middle East. Full marks to the manufacturer for trying, though.
Airbus Shifts Pilot-Training Focus to Emphasize Manual Flying
Change Is a Marked Shift From Traditional Principles That Relied on Automated Systems
By ANDY PASZTOR
BETHESDA, Md.- Airbus Group EADSY is significantly revising its pilot-training policies to focus more attention than ever before on manual flying skills.
Discussed at an international safety conference here on Wednesday, the change marks a marked shift from traditional Airbus principles that for decades relied heavily on automated aircraft systems and basically taught pilots to use them to fly out of trouble in nearly all circumstances.
But now, the European plane maker is emphasizing the importance of pilots practicing hand flying, and urging that they do so as early as possible when beginning to learn how to handle a new aircraft.
William Tauzin, director of international regulatory affairs for Airbus, told the conference those principles are an essential part of the training program under development for the A350 widebody jet, which is slated to begin service with lead customer Qatar Airways around the end of the year.
In proposing the training sequence for the A350, Mr. Tauzin said "we decided to put manual flying much earlier in the curriculum," before pilots are taught to perform normal procedures using automation. The program still must be approved by regulators on both sides of the Atlantic.
In an interview after his presentation, Mr. Tauzin said pilots will experience manual flying in the simulator after only a brief introduction to the A350. In the past, they would have spent more than a dozen sessions learning about the plane's various automated systems, and then started flying simulator sessions with the automation turned on.
The goal is to first "just have them feel the plane, and how it behaves without" turning on automation or presenting any complicated system failures or emergencies, according to Mr. Tauzin. Experts say it is a way to make pilots feel more comfortable and confident about their ability to revert to manual flying in an emergency.
Eventually, Airbus seeks to expand the revamped training approach to other models. "There is no reason why we wouldn't apply it to the rest of the fleet," Mr. Tauzin said.
The new focus is the strongest sign yet of industrywide concern about the hazards of excessive reliance on automated cockpits, and worries about pilots who may be reluctant to take over manual control when necessary. The result could be to accelerate the movement of airlines toward training programs highlighting manual flight maneuvers.
The A350 training changes are prompted by "the growing realization that pilots are losing their manual skills, and it's part of the industry's risk-management focus," according to Joachim Wirths, head of operations for Qatar's aviation regulator.
Increasingly sophisticated automation has played a big part in making flying safer than ever in the U.S. and globally, but more recently regulators, pilot unions and outside safety experts have highlighted potential downsides. A comprehensive study prepared for the FAA and released last November found that some pilots "lack sufficient or in-depth knowledge and skills" to properly control their plane's trajectory.
The study found that is partly because "current training methods, training devices and the time allotted for training" may be inadequate to fully master advanced automated systems.
Among the accidents and certain categories of incidents examined in that report, roughly two-thirds of the pilots either had difficulty manually flying planes or made mistakes using flight computers.
Airbus began making limited adjustments to its training philosophy in the wake of the 2009 crash of an Air France A330 in the Atlantic. The crew failed to recognize the plane was in a stall and was confused by cockpit instruments.
Initial changes Airbus introduced after that crash started training pilots how to avoid and recover from such high-altitude stalls. But the training program being developed for the A350 goes substantially further in explicitly emphasizing hand flying at various altitudes and across a wide range of maneuvers.
Some airlines already are far down that path. John Tovani, managing director of flight training for Delta Air Lines Inc., told the conference that pilots "are exploring this manual flight stuff in the simulator more and more," when instructors deliberately turn off computerized systems.
"There are times when you have to take over manually," according to Mr. Tovani, because even the most sophisticated automated systems can get planes into situations and "places from where the pilots are going to have to fly out."
Airbus Shifts Pilot-Training Focus to Emphasize Manual Flying - WSJ
Airbus Shifts Pilot-Training Focus to Emphasize Manual Flying
Change Is a Marked Shift From Traditional Principles That Relied on Automated Systems
By ANDY PASZTOR
BETHESDA, Md.- Airbus Group EADSY is significantly revising its pilot-training policies to focus more attention than ever before on manual flying skills.
Discussed at an international safety conference here on Wednesday, the change marks a marked shift from traditional Airbus principles that for decades relied heavily on automated aircraft systems and basically taught pilots to use them to fly out of trouble in nearly all circumstances.
But now, the European plane maker is emphasizing the importance of pilots practicing hand flying, and urging that they do so as early as possible when beginning to learn how to handle a new aircraft.
William Tauzin, director of international regulatory affairs for Airbus, told the conference those principles are an essential part of the training program under development for the A350 widebody jet, which is slated to begin service with lead customer Qatar Airways around the end of the year.
In proposing the training sequence for the A350, Mr. Tauzin said "we decided to put manual flying much earlier in the curriculum," before pilots are taught to perform normal procedures using automation. The program still must be approved by regulators on both sides of the Atlantic.
In an interview after his presentation, Mr. Tauzin said pilots will experience manual flying in the simulator after only a brief introduction to the A350. In the past, they would have spent more than a dozen sessions learning about the plane's various automated systems, and then started flying simulator sessions with the automation turned on.
The goal is to first "just have them feel the plane, and how it behaves without" turning on automation or presenting any complicated system failures or emergencies, according to Mr. Tauzin. Experts say it is a way to make pilots feel more comfortable and confident about their ability to revert to manual flying in an emergency.
Eventually, Airbus seeks to expand the revamped training approach to other models. "There is no reason why we wouldn't apply it to the rest of the fleet," Mr. Tauzin said.
The new focus is the strongest sign yet of industrywide concern about the hazards of excessive reliance on automated cockpits, and worries about pilots who may be reluctant to take over manual control when necessary. The result could be to accelerate the movement of airlines toward training programs highlighting manual flight maneuvers.
The A350 training changes are prompted by "the growing realization that pilots are losing their manual skills, and it's part of the industry's risk-management focus," according to Joachim Wirths, head of operations for Qatar's aviation regulator.
Increasingly sophisticated automation has played a big part in making flying safer than ever in the U.S. and globally, but more recently regulators, pilot unions and outside safety experts have highlighted potential downsides. A comprehensive study prepared for the FAA and released last November found that some pilots "lack sufficient or in-depth knowledge and skills" to properly control their plane's trajectory.
The study found that is partly because "current training methods, training devices and the time allotted for training" may be inadequate to fully master advanced automated systems.
Among the accidents and certain categories of incidents examined in that report, roughly two-thirds of the pilots either had difficulty manually flying planes or made mistakes using flight computers.
Airbus began making limited adjustments to its training philosophy in the wake of the 2009 crash of an Air France A330 in the Atlantic. The crew failed to recognize the plane was in a stall and was confused by cockpit instruments.
Initial changes Airbus introduced after that crash started training pilots how to avoid and recover from such high-altitude stalls. But the training program being developed for the A350 goes substantially further in explicitly emphasizing hand flying at various altitudes and across a wide range of maneuvers.
Some airlines already are far down that path. John Tovani, managing director of flight training for Delta Air Lines Inc., told the conference that pilots "are exploring this manual flight stuff in the simulator more and more," when instructors deliberately turn off computerized systems.
"There are times when you have to take over manually," according to Mr. Tovani, because even the most sophisticated automated systems can get planes into situations and "places from where the pilots are going to have to fly out."
Airbus Shifts Pilot-Training Focus to Emphasize Manual Flying - WSJ
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: everywhere
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good to hear the industry is finally acknowledging the importance of hand-flying skills.
Having said that, I did my Airbus conversion in Toulouse 3 years ago and was surprised with the amount of handflying and raw-data* we did. IIRC, first 2 or 3 FFS sessions were mostly 'AP OFF'. Also quite a few approaches during later stages of the FFS and a lot of 'Alternate' and 'Direct' Law flying.
My course was already post-AF447, so I guess the ball had already started rolling...
* As much as you can call flying the Bus 'handflying'
Having said that, I did my Airbus conversion in Toulouse 3 years ago and was surprised with the amount of handflying and raw-data* we did. IIRC, first 2 or 3 FFS sessions were mostly 'AP OFF'. Also quite a few approaches during later stages of the FFS and a lot of 'Alternate' and 'Direct' Law flying.
My course was already post-AF447, so I guess the ball had already started rolling...
* As much as you can call flying the Bus 'handflying'
Last edited by C_Star; 20th Jun 2014 at 14:49.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hear Ye!, Hear Ye!
So it takes the past twenty years of using in understanding the automation, for the importance of understanding basic push, pull and turn. I've worked with large jets, both Boeing and Airbus. Every school house event in the past twenty or thirty years was, "gear up, autopilot on." Then all heads down loading what ever event was coming up next. Maybe a stall series would be by hand and a steep turn or two, and that was it. I have spent years training after the simulator. I'd ask the new guy to hand fly to at least 10,000 by hand. The only exception was in heavy ATC environments. I would even encourage the new guy to hand fly for the first thirty minutes. It is up at FL at heavy weights that the cross check and smooth small inputs are most important. Captain Eddy Rickenbacker was not in favor of autopilots. "I hire pilots to fly, not drink coffee." There is a middle road, glad to see the hands/eyes coming back into training.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope they don't end up like CAsA.
you've got to fly like this 'cause that old way is dangerous.
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
you've got to fly like this now.
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
you've got to fly this way....
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
....hmmm maybe we should go back to the way they used to do it...
you've got to fly like this 'cause that old way is dangerous.
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
you've got to fly like this now.
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
you've got to fly this way....
....oh this isn't foolproof either.
....hmmm maybe we should go back to the way they used to do it...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tarmac
Age: 39
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Human is the weakest link in the ergonomics of man n flying machines. Initially aircraft manufacturers believed that taking away the tasks of humans from them and making a machine do it all would do the job. But, nice to see that they are starting to understand "WHO'S THE BOSS" and rather too much of automation is a bane or boon.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Now at Home
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very good trend, now even the manufacturer are playing the same song, that a lot of the real and only BOSSES of the Aircraft want to play. Back to basics. Yes - Get rid of all this fancy and usless computers and electronics in the aircrafts. Saves a lot of money.
I am BOSS pilot. I am god pilot. Back to Lindbergh-century. Get rid of everything. Why we need that stuff. We take our Bosspilot full-head-leather-cap, pilots-leather-jerkins, etc ...No more managing the aircraft and it's profile.
Why flying RNAV etc pp. Back to basics. Who cares about traffic around. I am BOSS PILOT. Who cares about the additional workload of the PNF/PM in nowadays air-traffic-scenarios? I am BOSS PILOT. I have everything under control..... I must hand-fly...up to the moon. Congrats! That's the ideal attitude to be a 21century pilot !
Back to the roots. Back to stone-age......we are on track. yippee !!
But, why not get just rid of an modern airliner flightdeck and instead take just a SEP and fly. Then you are the one and only big boss of the aircraft and YOU have everything under YOUR control. BTW: welcome to CRM
I am BOSS pilot. I am god pilot. Back to Lindbergh-century. Get rid of everything. Why we need that stuff. We take our Bosspilot full-head-leather-cap, pilots-leather-jerkins, etc ...No more managing the aircraft and it's profile.
Why flying RNAV etc pp. Back to basics. Who cares about traffic around. I am BOSS PILOT. Who cares about the additional workload of the PNF/PM in nowadays air-traffic-scenarios? I am BOSS PILOT. I have everything under control..... I must hand-fly...up to the moon. Congrats! That's the ideal attitude to be a 21century pilot !
Back to the roots. Back to stone-age......we are on track. yippee !!
But, why not get just rid of an modern airliner flightdeck and instead take just a SEP and fly. Then you are the one and only big boss of the aircraft and YOU have everything under YOUR control. BTW: welcome to CRM
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tarmac
Age: 39
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The term BOSS relates to the relationship between humans and machines and their interface. Better understand what the point was rather than catch a word and start criticism. Automation is important but, when and if time comes, the flight manager should be capable of acting as a pilot and deal with the situation. Worlds trend is changing because they want to make the weakest link much stronger by training, procedures, regulations and practice. Otherwise best bet would be a UAV, why would they need an on-board IT specialist to fiddle with automation only.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
an automated system is only as good as it's sensors and only as good as the connections to those sensors.
if you could guarantee that all faults would occur on the ground and all faults would be detected by the power on self test then pilots would be a memory.
as an old control systems engineer :-) I can assure you that pilots have a good future.
if you could guarantee that all faults would occur on the ground and all faults would be detected by the power on self test then pilots would be a memory.
as an old control systems engineer :-) I can assure you that pilots have a good future.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots have a great future as long as there are people in the back.
These people know that all automation has a failure rate. Most airlines realize this too so putting pilots in the loop, not as programmers but as competent pilots capable of flying comfortably when it all fails is mandatory, not an option.
These people know that all automation has a failure rate. Most airlines realize this too so putting pilots in the loop, not as programmers but as competent pilots capable of flying comfortably when it all fails is mandatory, not an option.
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I imagine the airbus is a great plane to fly manually so it's nice to see some encouragement to do so. Automation is just a tool and has its place in the flight envelope even though the bean counters would like to see it used everywhere - but do they fly planes - no.
One extra item of concern to make the manual flying experience even better is stick feedback. I believe an airbus was lost because though the stick was at its most aft position the nose refused to go up because the trim was set wrongly and the problem was unfortunately not identified.
Now if a bit of stick feedback was built into the controls then flying the bus would be absolute bliss.
One extra item of concern to make the manual flying experience even better is stick feedback. I believe an airbus was lost because though the stick was at its most aft position the nose refused to go up because the trim was set wrongly and the problem was unfortunately not identified.
Now if a bit of stick feedback was built into the controls then flying the bus would be absolute bliss.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, as a first step to improving hand flying how about we scrap the MCPL, insist that new pilots get a minimum of 1500 hours GA or similar and banish being able to buy one's way from school to the RHS of a jet? I'm not joking.
Also, it is very important that pilots fully understand the capabilities of automation and not just how to use it on a nice day. All too often there have been cases of a serious problem and the immediate reaction has been to dump the auto pilot and hand fly! Nothing could be more dangerous, (Kegworth). On a two pilot, no FE aircraft it is far safer to use the auto pilot whilst two sets of eyes and two brains properly analyse the problem and take the correct actions.
Remember what the instructor used to say?, "Never rush a fire drill"
Also, it is very important that pilots fully understand the capabilities of automation and not just how to use it on a nice day. All too often there have been cases of a serious problem and the immediate reaction has been to dump the auto pilot and hand fly! Nothing could be more dangerous, (Kegworth). On a two pilot, no FE aircraft it is far safer to use the auto pilot whilst two sets of eyes and two brains properly analyse the problem and take the correct actions.
Remember what the instructor used to say?, "Never rush a fire drill"
I don't understand the rationale for using automation so as not to 'load up the PNF'
Seriously ? that's his or her job and if they find the workload too oppressive they could find a nice quiet job as a librarian.
What nonsense, just another excuse by the 'gear up, autopilot on' fans to minimize the necessity for that scary 'hand flying'
Seriously ? that's his or her job and if they find the workload too oppressive they could find a nice quiet job as a librarian.
What nonsense, just another excuse by the 'gear up, autopilot on' fans to minimize the necessity for that scary 'hand flying'
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: MC80 Home One type Star Cruiser
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen Captains who's stress level rose dramatically when I disconnected the AP on a CAVOK, low traffic and low workload day. Just because it was something they weren't used to do.
Some companies make it kind of "non-normal" to disconnect the AP.
But I fully agree that if you aren't capable of doing the PMs tasks on a low workload situation, you've got the wrong job.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Village of Santo Poco
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by glendalegoon
amadis of gaul
I'll side with eddie any day.