Crew workload in manual flying
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely.
The problem is IMHO about the suitability of the candidates in the industry. We can take the Air Force as an example ; they have always worked with very small numbers compared to the airlines world (for obvious reasons) and thus the selection process has always been very demanding in terms of psychomotor skills. Now it is definitely a different job but on the other hand the civilian job went to the extreme with a race to the bottom whereas we need to demonstrate that the most average pilot is suitable to safely operate in a cockpit and we need to design rules and procedures around that.
The wrong assumption is that single pilot highly automated airliners and/or pilotless aircrafts will get rid of the human weakness component because the bar today is set at an incredibly low level.
Experienced, knowledgeable and skilled pilots are expensive, or at least they should be and this does not go well with ultra low cost business models.
The problem is IMHO about the suitability of the candidates in the industry. We can take the Air Force as an example ; they have always worked with very small numbers compared to the airlines world (for obvious reasons) and thus the selection process has always been very demanding in terms of psychomotor skills. Now it is definitely a different job but on the other hand the civilian job went to the extreme with a race to the bottom whereas we need to demonstrate that the most average pilot is suitable to safely operate in a cockpit and we need to design rules and procedures around that.
The wrong assumption is that single pilot highly automated airliners and/or pilotless aircrafts will get rid of the human weakness component because the bar today is set at an incredibly low level.
Experienced, knowledgeable and skilled pilots are expensive, or at least they should be and this does not go well with ultra low cost business models.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This brings back fond (and frustrating) memories.We can all imagine why he’d lie, but how he thought he’d get away with it...sigh. Some things never change
Happens to me often: Press the internet back key at top left of page - takes you back to what you have written. Tap to select all, (of your own post) then tap Copy. Try submitting again. If it asks you to sign in, do so and if it auto-saved it should say proceed and publish your post. If not, you can sign in, reply to thread again and paste what you copied
Many thanks for that top tip. Briefly, I wrote that I don’t buy into this theory that all the youngsters now are rubbish and that they are below par FOs that become equally sub standard Captains and Trainers. I’m not a trainer but friends of mine that are, in a large orange airline, say that they only thing they lack is experience. Give them a few years of intense low cost short haul and they’ll be as capable as say Hamble or Oxford cadets of old.
On the subject of hand flying I do think it is worth practicing but when appropriate and I will accept that is open to debate. Good handling skills are essential but they are not the ONLY skills required. Lastly, I think humans have always and will always make mistakes. I simply don’t see any evidence that the younger generation have a monopoly on such events. That was my point in referencing accidents and incidents from the pre EFIS era.
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would get seriously worried about someone if they've got a couple of years of EU LCC experience and haven't improved one bit since the beginning. I would even say that, to me, this sounds completely nonsensical. Those who make it into these companies are subjected to a substantial assessment, far-above-average level of training and lots of hours and sectors in every month afterwards. So, if you get into one of those places and you're half-decent, in a couple of years you stand all chances of becoming a skillful, competent, above-average pilot. And I would feel totally safe getting on a plane that's in the hands of such a pilot.
What I feel is the cause for concern are some smaller, worse-known places. Of course, there are brilliant pilots there as well and people have all sorts of reasons for ending up somewhere like that rather than in a major airline - but, IMHO, that's where you're most likely to find people with significant lapses in their skill set. There's often no true common standard there and newbies pick up the way of working of whoever they get paired with - and, having never seen otherwise, take everything they hear on trust and soak in all the good and bad habits of whoever they fly with. One other problem is that this sort of bottom-feeder carriers often only fly in the summer. So, on one hand, this often means little to no exposure to cold weather ops, LVO and all the other joys of year-round flying. I've personally seen someone with 5 years of experience in an airline like this who had never done de-icing/anti-icing just because he had only flown in warm temperatures! On the other hand, it means that the pilots routinely have long interruptions in their practice, which is not a good thing, especially combined with low experience. And the lack of firm skills and confidence resulting from all this can very easily translate into overreliance on automation. Someone who flies infrequently or doesn't fly at all for most of the year, paired with a colleague who is not happy with the AP being disengaged at any time above 1000 ft AGL, is likely to never develop his manual flying skills to a good standard.
What I feel is the cause for concern are some smaller, worse-known places. Of course, there are brilliant pilots there as well and people have all sorts of reasons for ending up somewhere like that rather than in a major airline - but, IMHO, that's where you're most likely to find people with significant lapses in their skill set. There's often no true common standard there and newbies pick up the way of working of whoever they get paired with - and, having never seen otherwise, take everything they hear on trust and soak in all the good and bad habits of whoever they fly with. One other problem is that this sort of bottom-feeder carriers often only fly in the summer. So, on one hand, this often means little to no exposure to cold weather ops, LVO and all the other joys of year-round flying. I've personally seen someone with 5 years of experience in an airline like this who had never done de-icing/anti-icing just because he had only flown in warm temperatures! On the other hand, it means that the pilots routinely have long interruptions in their practice, which is not a good thing, especially combined with low experience. And the lack of firm skills and confidence resulting from all this can very easily translate into overreliance on automation. Someone who flies infrequently or doesn't fly at all for most of the year, paired with a colleague who is not happy with the AP being disengaged at any time above 1000 ft AGL, is likely to never develop his manual flying skills to a good standard.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey! Deicing is a sensitive topic here 🙂. We have pilots who work haven’t seen snow in years. They wouldn’t know where to find the deicing checklist. I’m trying to be one of those pilots.
More to your point though, I’ve flown for airlines that have small fleets (under 50 planes) and large fleets (a few hundred). The larger fleets required more robust SOPs and safety management. There were more techniques going around at the smaller company.
More to your point though, I’ve flown for airlines that have small fleets (under 50 planes) and large fleets (a few hundred). The larger fleets required more robust SOPs and safety management. There were more techniques going around at the smaller company.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After a few months of flying the line with no instructor, my point of view has, fortunately, changed.
During the line training, the instructors tend to be "more of a royalist than the king" so they tend to respect the task sharing rules as per the manual to the maximum possible extent.
This extent often stops when ground asks to disconnect external power. The manual says that PM unplugs the GPU and PF answers "you may unplug" to ground.
(In practise, 95% of cases even with instructors, the same pilot will both unplug the GPU and answer to the ground crew.)
With normal captains, even instructors but outside of their instructing missing, I find the method much more reasonable and closer to what some people described here. I can now very easily fly manually and most captains will manage most of the FCU as required without having to ask.
I think I will open a new topic to discuss automation dependency.
During the line training, the instructors tend to be "more of a royalist than the king" so they tend to respect the task sharing rules as per the manual to the maximum possible extent.
This extent often stops when ground asks to disconnect external power. The manual says that PM unplugs the GPU and PF answers "you may unplug" to ground.
(In practise, 95% of cases even with instructors, the same pilot will both unplug the GPU and answer to the ground crew.)
With normal captains, even instructors but outside of their instructing missing, I find the method much more reasonable and closer to what some people described here. I can now very easily fly manually and most captains will manage most of the FCU as required without having to ask.
I think I will open a new topic to discuss automation dependency.
