Hand flying in todays jet transports
It certainly should do. All teaching should be done layer by layer to build understanding and confidence - even with seasoned pilots.
I agree with the layered approach, but have often preferred the initial teach to include teaching and the use of full automation (as per the designed use) then once mastered slowly strip them back to the bare-bone basics.
The over reliance of auto-throttle has a lot to answer for. Astonishing to see in the training world how many people don't scan their IAS with dramatic consequences!
The over reliance of auto-throttle has a lot to answer for. Astonishing to see in the training world how many people don't scan their IAS with dramatic consequences!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.....good simulator training in crosswind landings is worth its weight in gold. 
It is great confidence generator or crusher. It has too be handled correctly. I does seems odd that some operators subject cadets to max X-wind landing being taught by F/O SFI's who never done it. Curious when considering training standards.
Often up to ten attempts are needed before a pilot is certified competent in the sequence and can consistently touch down smoothly with drift removed,
O how I wish time allowed, but as it is not in the LST, let's move quickly on. Often a students needs coaching with a bit of 'follow me through', but not so easy reference my SFI comment above.
It is great confidence generator or crusher. It has too be handled correctly. I does seems odd that some operators subject cadets to max X-wind landing being taught by F/O SFI's who never done it. Curious when considering training standards.
Often up to ten attempts are needed before a pilot is certified competent in the sequence and can consistently touch down smoothly with drift removed,
O how I wish time allowed, but as it is not in the LST, let's move quickly on. Often a students needs coaching with a bit of 'follow me through', but not so easy reference my SFI comment above.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but have often preferred the initial teach to include teaching and the use of full automation
Students can soon lose whatever situational awareness they may have had, with the result the aircraft gets away from them in a flash. At this stage a student may have no idea how to fall back on his basic flying training if he gets flustered with the automatics. That is because he has never been allowed to get the feel of flying a jet transport before being thrown into the deep end associated with the full use of automatics where heads down into the CDU happens shortly after lift off. Is it any wonder that students new to type become so addicted to the automatics that they never get the opportunity to get comfortable with "flying" the aeroplane. The rot soon sets in and an automatic monkey is born.
Last edited by sheppey; 23rd Feb 2018 at 07:38.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was extremely happy that my latest type training programme started with as few automatics as possible. But virtually every system is fully automatic (starting, electrics, pressurisation, anti-icing, hydraulics etc.) but we did do the stick, pedals and power ourselves! The point of this was to lay a foundation upon which the autoflight gubbins could be learnt. As Sheppy says, the volume of information (pointless guff?) laid out in front of you is overwhelming. The best way to absorb this is a bit at a time. Much like when we were learning the ATPL rubbish. We consumed that teaspoon by teaspoon; eating a spadefull at a time was hard on your digestion. The other reason for a totally manual entry point was to develop your back-up for when the nasty little Magenta Witch or her antisocial friend Apat have bad day. No matter how bad the spells cast by the Magenta Witch or damage done by Apat, a simple “Click-click....click-click” would undo their evil work.
But you have to keep that skill current. Once every few months is not enough. Every month I fly 30-40 sectors as PF and do the same and a few more as PNF (you have to give away the odd ones). It is typical for us to hand fly the first and last few thousand feet and grab a visual approach whenever we are able. Providing you are doing some of the work in that time such as changing power, speed, turning, changing configuration, levelling off, initialling descent etc. you will be keeping your flying tools sharp. I have no problems after a two week break but I notice I do have to work harder. Given a month off I’m sure I’ll be OK, but year after year of doing little other than looking at clouds and moaning about crewing and rosters will find your hand flying currency deficient.
But you have to keep that skill current. Once every few months is not enough. Every month I fly 30-40 sectors as PF and do the same and a few more as PNF (you have to give away the odd ones). It is typical for us to hand fly the first and last few thousand feet and grab a visual approach whenever we are able. Providing you are doing some of the work in that time such as changing power, speed, turning, changing configuration, levelling off, initialling descent etc. you will be keeping your flying tools sharp. I have no problems after a two week break but I notice I do have to work harder. Given a month off I’m sure I’ll be OK, but year after year of doing little other than looking at clouds and moaning about crewing and rosters will find your hand flying currency deficient.
I've not read through this entire thread, life is too short. With the state of the art of modern aircraft in terms of automation, performance, reliability and ease of operation then really a modern airline pilot cannot (& should not) expect to be earning £100k+ as a captain or even half that as a co pilot on what is now basically bus services in the sky.... ooh but i know when money is mentioned that can make things hypocritically contraversial...
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At one time, I was tasked with training 6 young newbies on to a large jet, and I had to conduct every stage of the full type rating.They all had 250 hours TT.By the time we went to the FFS I quickly realised they would all not complete the training unless I re-invented the methods used.I abandoned the structured modules for about 8 days, and just forced them to all fly manual circuits on a continuous basis until they got too tired, no AP no FD no AT.The results were quite good.Upon resumption of the normal modules with automatics on, their confidence was quite obvious, all passed the CAA final check with ease.250 hours!!!!
Previous generations of jet transports were designed to be flow, the level low level of automation available at the time required it. These days the pilot is increasingly being designed out of the loop but the automation isn't yet capable of completely removing the pilot or reliable enough to be entirely trusted.
Artificial intelligence would be the next level with algorithms deciding how to manage an emergency based on historical data and manufacturers recommendations. Manual intervention being possible via data link.
Thankfully I'll be retired by then.
Artificial intelligence would be the next level with algorithms deciding how to manage an emergency based on historical data and manufacturers recommendations. Manual intervention being possible via data link.
Thankfully I'll be retired by then.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Krismiler: That depends entirely on the destination. if you are flying into large airports under radar that tell you HDG, SPD & ALT you just dial the numbers in the MCP and intercept the ILS for an auto approach. At 500' your little eyes light up as you disconnect and earn the big bucks for the bringing everyone back to earth, gently.
Now, you take the same a/c and fly to a mountainous Mk.1 eyeball airfield where dexterity, skill & judgement is needed. The basic training and testing for both pilots has been the same. Sadly, the overall general level has been dumbed down focusing on the former candidate. It will be left up to the operator of the latter type to bring its own pilots up to speed for their network.
Now, you take the same a/c and fly to a mountainous Mk.1 eyeball airfield where dexterity, skill & judgement is needed. The basic training and testing for both pilots has been the same. Sadly, the overall general level has been dumbed down focusing on the former candidate. It will be left up to the operator of the latter type to bring its own pilots up to speed for their network.
Thread Starter
I was in the simulator recently,coaching a prospective candidate for his forthcoming flight simulator test which was part of the interview process with an airline. The test is conducted raw data no automatics, the purpose of which is to assess the candidate's basic instrument flying ability. It includes steep turns, climb and descent at set rates, basic asymmetric cruise flight, and ILS and VOR approaches. A fairly standard test used by many airlines.
This particular pilot previously flew as an aerial ambulance pilot operation in a single engine turbo-prop. Sometimes he was called out at night to fly to a remote desert airstrip where there were no navaids. These flights were often a long way into the desert and using GPS for navigation. On arrival the technique was to descend to GRID MORA until over the top and hope to see the portable strip lights. The operator supplied accurate charts giving sector min altitudes within 3NM of the strip and descend below GRID MORA in the appropriate sector would then be made in the hope of seeing the lights. Black night descents like this require first class manual instrument flying skills and my hat goes off to these pilots. All being well, the patient would be picked up and taken back to base for hospital treatment.
This operation required instrument flying skill of the highest order and being single pilot there was no co-pilot to help if needed.
This candidate was among the best instrument pilots I have ever seen. His handling of the jet simulator was mind boggling superb particularly as he had never flown a jet transport before. To know there are still people with superb instrument flying skills like this young pilot, is very encouraging.
MPL and other cadets who occupy the second in command seats of transport jets are trained in simulators to manage the automatics with great aplomb. Once on line however, the rest of their flying career will be operating the radio and monitoring an autopilot. Any raw data instrument flying skills they may gained in a simulator are in danger of being lost forever. This especially applies to those unfortunate enough to be with an airline that actively discourages manual flying on line. There are plenty of them in the airline world.
This particular pilot previously flew as an aerial ambulance pilot operation in a single engine turbo-prop. Sometimes he was called out at night to fly to a remote desert airstrip where there were no navaids. These flights were often a long way into the desert and using GPS for navigation. On arrival the technique was to descend to GRID MORA until over the top and hope to see the portable strip lights. The operator supplied accurate charts giving sector min altitudes within 3NM of the strip and descend below GRID MORA in the appropriate sector would then be made in the hope of seeing the lights. Black night descents like this require first class manual instrument flying skills and my hat goes off to these pilots. All being well, the patient would be picked up and taken back to base for hospital treatment.
This operation required instrument flying skill of the highest order and being single pilot there was no co-pilot to help if needed.
This candidate was among the best instrument pilots I have ever seen. His handling of the jet simulator was mind boggling superb particularly as he had never flown a jet transport before. To know there are still people with superb instrument flying skills like this young pilot, is very encouraging.
MPL and other cadets who occupy the second in command seats of transport jets are trained in simulators to manage the automatics with great aplomb. Once on line however, the rest of their flying career will be operating the radio and monitoring an autopilot. Any raw data instrument flying skills they may gained in a simulator are in danger of being lost forever. This especially applies to those unfortunate enough to be with an airline that actively discourages manual flying on line. There are plenty of them in the airline world.
Last edited by Centaurus; 14th Mar 2018 at 11:49.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've not read through this entire thread, life is too short. With the state of the art of modern aircraft in terms of automation, performance, reliability and ease of operation then really a modern airline pilot cannot (& should not) expect to be earning £100k+ as a captain or even half that as a co pilot on what is now basically bus services in the sky.... ooh but i know when money is mentioned that can make things hypocritically contraversial...
Edit: Centaurus, I also agree with you. Talking about those airlines who discourage handflying they are definetely off my list for next move. I rather quit aviation and do something else than being a « knobs selectors ».
Last edited by pineteam; 14th Mar 2018 at 12:31. Reason: Added one sentence
Airline flying might come to be regarded as a separate, specialised area similar to crop spraying. ie you train specifically for it and are most likely to stay in for your career. Many of today’s airline first officers wouldn’t be able to fly a charter in a Baron to an uncontrolled airport without an approach aid.
Some recently upgraded captains on narrow bodies wouldn’t meet the insurance requirements for some turboprop jobs.
Some recently upgraded captains on narrow bodies wouldn’t meet the insurance requirements for some turboprop jobs.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centaurus: we are from the same old school.
I was in the simulator recently,coaching a prospective candidate for his forthcoming flight simulator test which was part of the interview process with an airline. The test is conducted raw data no automatics, the purpose of which is to assess the candidate's basic instrument flying ability. It includes steep turns, climb and descent at set rates, basic asymmetric cruise flight, and ILS and VOR approaches. A fairly standard test used by many airline
Any raw data instrument flying skills they may gained in a simulator are in danger of being lost forever. This especially applies to those unfortunate enough to be with an airline that actively discourages manual flying on line. There are plenty of them in the airline world.
What surprises and saddens me is that those airlines that discourage manual flying still use the tests you mention as a recruitment criteria. Why?
I used to write TR's for such an airline at an external TRTO. The first day was raw data climbing & descending, turning & twisting in an aerial ballet. The cadets, who'd never seen a PFD or ND or N1% gauges not only learnt the dexterity of how to be delicate with attitude & power changes, they also learnt where to scan. It was nothing like the T scan they knew; and agricultural attitude adjustments and/or power changes don't cut it. They learnt finesse on the trim as well, and over it.
When the airline took over the TR syllabus this was binned and the new TR syllabus included minimal mandatory items with a couple more raw data ILS's to satisfy their thought that more manual manoeuvring was included. Trouble was the cadets hadn't built the foundations yet and confidence suffered. As it was a test item, and often failed (surprise) it was thought this would kill two birds with one rock. No it didn't. And then after all this supposed good raw data push & pull stuff they were prohibited from doing it on the line. i.e. the training was for test only. Ugh!
And this discussion has been 'circulating' on here for years. When/how will it change? The problem with the 'fully automatic' airlines is, from a business & safety point of view, they don't see a problem, therefore no need to change anything.
I was in the simulator recently,coaching a prospective candidate for his forthcoming flight simulator test which was part of the interview process with an airline. The test is conducted raw data no automatics, the purpose of which is to assess the candidate's basic instrument flying ability. It includes steep turns, climb and descent at set rates, basic asymmetric cruise flight, and ILS and VOR approaches. A fairly standard test used by many airline
Any raw data instrument flying skills they may gained in a simulator are in danger of being lost forever. This especially applies to those unfortunate enough to be with an airline that actively discourages manual flying on line. There are plenty of them in the airline world.
What surprises and saddens me is that those airlines that discourage manual flying still use the tests you mention as a recruitment criteria. Why?
I used to write TR's for such an airline at an external TRTO. The first day was raw data climbing & descending, turning & twisting in an aerial ballet. The cadets, who'd never seen a PFD or ND or N1% gauges not only learnt the dexterity of how to be delicate with attitude & power changes, they also learnt where to scan. It was nothing like the T scan they knew; and agricultural attitude adjustments and/or power changes don't cut it. They learnt finesse on the trim as well, and over it.
When the airline took over the TR syllabus this was binned and the new TR syllabus included minimal mandatory items with a couple more raw data ILS's to satisfy their thought that more manual manoeuvring was included. Trouble was the cadets hadn't built the foundations yet and confidence suffered. As it was a test item, and often failed (surprise) it was thought this would kill two birds with one rock. No it didn't. And then after all this supposed good raw data push & pull stuff they were prohibited from doing it on the line. i.e. the training was for test only. Ugh!
And this discussion has been 'circulating' on here for years. When/how will it change? The problem with the 'fully automatic' airlines is, from a business & safety point of view, they don't see a problem, therefore no need to change anything.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a magenta line in sight.
Reminds me of a small Greek island along the beach in B767. The landing would be the same, plus spoilers. The takeoff would have been a little more conservative, but still a turn ASAP.
He touched down ahead of the runway...
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Private Jet - I’ll take your comment at face value and not one of a troll. Your comment suggesting that we are not worth the pay is risible. The main reason is that we are not paid to actually handle the controls but to operate the aircraft, the bit that automation finds almost impossible. The reliability of the systems installed is such that the flying bit of our jobs is simple, providing the automatics work as advertised. But far too often they don’t. And by far too often I mean more often than we suffer engine failure, pressurisation failure, smoke/fume events, passengers dying, trim runaways etc. And who is there to save you when the automatics fail? Hopefully two pilots who can still fly and operate an aircraft in such a fashion that you won’t even know there has been a failure - because they regularly hand-fly the aircraft. At £100,000 a year for a captain you have a bargain. £200,000 is far more reasonable, after all what are your mother and children’s lives worth? Or do you want to take a risk and have people who are cheap but actually rubbish at flying? If we are not paid the going rate we’ll find more lucrative employment.
PM
PM
My two penneth!
When Flying my Canberra it was all by hand, even at v high altitude, no autopilot, never a problem !
When flying my 767 I always considered that I MIGHT just MIGHT, have to land the jet at 3am at Narsusuaq, (sp) or some other unfamiliar place on just one engine and with degraded or inop. Automatics. I was going to nail it, not refresh my flying skills when trying to do so.
So hand flying when quiet ATC circumstances would allow was my policy and practice, sometimes questioned by FOs but certainly not prohibited by my enlightened airline management.
So BA has an engine failure in a 320 but the captain was unable to control airspeed, or so I read, no surprise there if pilots are not allowed to use manual thrust but can despatch with inop auto throttle. Bizarre.
When Flying my Canberra it was all by hand, even at v high altitude, no autopilot, never a problem !
When flying my 767 I always considered that I MIGHT just MIGHT, have to land the jet at 3am at Narsusuaq, (sp) or some other unfamiliar place on just one engine and with degraded or inop. Automatics. I was going to nail it, not refresh my flying skills when trying to do so.
So hand flying when quiet ATC circumstances would allow was my policy and practice, sometimes questioned by FOs but certainly not prohibited by my enlightened airline management.
So BA has an engine failure in a 320 but the captain was unable to control airspeed, or so I read, no surprise there if pilots are not allowed to use manual thrust but can despatch with inop auto throttle. Bizarre.
Last edited by RetiredBA/BY; 25th Mar 2018 at 15:04.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When flying my 767 I always considered that I MIGHT just MIGHT, have to land the jet at 3am at Narsusuaq, (sp) or some other unfamiliar pace on just one engine and with degraded or inop. Automatics. I was going to nail it, not refresh my flying skills when trying to do so.
...
So BA has an engine failure in a 320 but the captain was unable to control airspeed, or so I read, no surprise there if pilots are not allowed to use manual thrust but can despatch with inop auto throttle. Bizarre.
...
So BA has an engine failure in a 320 but the captain was unable to control airspeed, or so I read, no surprise there if pilots are not allowed to use manual thrust but can despatch with inop auto throttle. Bizarre.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can people seriously beleive that flying raw data in a sim only once every 6 months is enough to maintain their skills?! Every time I go on vacation and I don’t do raw data for 3 weeks, I already notice a downgrade in my skills. Lol.