Crew workload in manual flying
Only half a speed-brake
Most mistakes happen at the end of the day. Skipping items when busy is a perilous path, especially under the conviction that the shortcut is common sense. Indeed many have elected to speed things up by not reading a checklist with predictable results. (link to Spanair in MAD here).
The procedure as described by the OP (identical to my understanding of the FCOM book) is inadequate. Respecting a high level rule that PF instructs, a task sharing model is created which increases workload and is inpractical to use. One that is being avoided by trained crews intending their reasonable best in every day line ops.
Almost a poster child how not to do it from https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...AC_120-71B.pdf
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ueeehhh.... NO.
Most mistakes happen at the end of the day. Skipping items when busy is a perilous path, especially under the conviction that the shortcut is common sense. Indeed many have elected to speed things up by not reading a checklist with predictable results. (link to Spanair in MAD here).
The procedure as described by the OP (identical to my understanding of the FCOM book) is inadequate. Respecting a high level rule that PF instructs, a task sharing model is created which increases workload and is inpractical to use. One that is being avoided by trained crews intending their reasonable best in every day line ops.
Almost a poster child how not to do it from https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...AC_120-71B.pdf
Most mistakes happen at the end of the day. Skipping items when busy is a perilous path, especially under the conviction that the shortcut is common sense. Indeed many have elected to speed things up by not reading a checklist with predictable results. (link to Spanair in MAD here).
The procedure as described by the OP (identical to my understanding of the FCOM book) is inadequate. Respecting a high level rule that PF instructs, a task sharing model is created which increases workload and is inpractical to use. One that is being avoided by trained crews intending their reasonable best in every day line ops.
Almost a poster child how not to do it from https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...AC_120-71B.pdf
Naturally, once the PM is back in the loop, the PF will bring the PM up to speed regarding any changes. This part isn’t in the book, but it’s how it’s done on the line (and in the sim) because it just makes sense to do so. I have no doubt both our airlines operate safely day to day.
Only half a speed-brake
Naturally, once the PM is back in the loop, the PF will bring the PM up to speed regarding any changes. This part isn’t in the book, but it’s how it’s done on the line (and in the sim) because it just makes sense to do so. I have no doubt both our airlines operate safely day to day.
My note was that underachieving on SOP is the first incline of a slippery slope. A trained pro knows how walk that line, needless to say.
To the original OP dilemma, IMHO the FCOM if fulfilled does not have a workable solution for this basic scenario.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only half a speed-brake
ROFL, will there be a change for After Parking C/L?
You see, aviation has given me the great gift of witnessing first-hand that from the gray matter inside, homo sapiens sapiens are truly identical to the last bit.
Hillarious moment, thanks for it.
You see, aviation has given me the great gift of witnessing first-hand that from the gray matter inside, homo sapiens sapiens are truly identical to the last bit.
Hillarious moment, thanks for it.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ha! Not yet. Undoubtedly, the current training manager has been considerate enough to leave that for his successor.
I’ll be sure to point out the discrepancy at my next training event.
I’ll be sure to point out the discrepancy at my next training event.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ueeehhh.... NO.
Most mistakes happen at the end of the day. Skipping items when busy is a perilous path, especially under the conviction that the shortcut is common sense. Indeed many have elected to speed things up by not reading a checklist with predictable results. (link to Spanair in MAD here).
The procedure as described by the OP (identical to my understanding of the FCOM book) is inadequate. Respecting a high level rule that PF instructs, a task sharing model is created which increases workload and is inpractical to use. One that is being avoided by trained crews intending their reasonable best in every day line ops.
Almost a poster child how not to do it from https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...AC_120-71B.pdf
Most mistakes happen at the end of the day. Skipping items when busy is a perilous path, especially under the conviction that the shortcut is common sense. Indeed many have elected to speed things up by not reading a checklist with predictable results. (link to Spanair in MAD here).
The procedure as described by the OP (identical to my understanding of the FCOM book) is inadequate. Respecting a high level rule that PF instructs, a task sharing model is created which increases workload and is inpractical to use. One that is being avoided by trained crews intending their reasonable best in every day line ops.
Almost a poster child how not to do it from https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...AC_120-71B.pdf
So this argument does not seem entirely convincing. In manual flight, he could also set the FCU himself, and keep the PM in the loop by saying what he's set, just like AP flight.
I did not understand the end of your message though ?
I qualify my statement by writing that I have not read every post on the thread, but;
I have been constantly dismayed over the years when being checked by, very capable, younger TREs who have "bought" their TRE rating and constantly talk about improving situational awareness by using the the autopilot and flight management system when I see their heads go down to the screen and their eyes never move anywhere else and for those of us of a certain age flying manually massively increases our situational awareness.
Just my tuppence worth, if you know what tuppence is
I have been constantly dismayed over the years when being checked by, very capable, younger TREs who have "bought" their TRE rating and constantly talk about improving situational awareness by using the the autopilot and flight management system when I see their heads go down to the screen and their eyes never move anywhere else and for those of us of a certain age flying manually massively increases our situational awareness.
Just my tuppence worth, if you know what tuppence is
Miles that reminds me of the time I had strips torn off me here in a thread when discussing an A320 that busted levels steps on a visual approach. PM was head down trying to program the box and they forgot there they were.
i had simply said just disconnect the automatics, look out the window fly it like a Cessna!
i had simply said just disconnect the automatics, look out the window fly it like a Cessna!
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The use of managed modes to improve situational awareness can be a double-edged sword. Many people misunderstand is as "go managed at all times to improve your situational awareness". And it's not that clear-cut. The use of managed guidance can pay off in a situation where you've had the chance to instert everything in advance and then just monitor its execution while focusing on the bigger picture. But fiddling with the MCDU in descent instead of flying the aircraft is neither good airmanship, nor a precursor to good situational awareness. If it doesn't do what you want it to do or the situation has changed (e.g. change of routing invalidating your lateral flight plan) - go selected, focus on flying and, if necessary, ask the PM to sequence the flight plan whenever his workload allows for it.
I bet with your turboprop experience, you could fly circles around the guys who were turning you down from jet jobs.
To your last paragraph, I think the difficulty with the OP’s company is that they force the PF to tell the PM to set the FCU. That does increase workload.
Fully agree with your last statement though. At the end of the day, good sense must prevail. If the PM is busy, set the FCU yourself if necessary.
To your last paragraph, I think the difficulty with the OP’s company is that they force the PF to tell the PM to set the FCU. That does increase workload.
Fully agree with your last statement though. At the end of the day, good sense must prevail. If the PM is busy, set the FCU yourself if necessary.
My company has the same rule during manual flight, not on Airbus though. As PF I am supposed to order all the changes during manual flight, and like I mentioned, I still don't quite understand the purpose or benefit of this way of doing things. But you learn to go with the flow.
I think Airbus are trying to keep both pilots in the flying part of the loop. Which is laudable enough. But if I am flying manually and setting off drift to track a course, it is a right pain for both of us if I keep saying Heading left 3° Heading right 2° etc, just to centre the heading bug. Much easier for PF to click the HDG knob as required.
I would like to think that PM is always watching the PFD, ND and N1/EPR even when talking to ATC or the cabin. I certainly do when I am PM.
When PM has been head down in the MCDU, they should look carefully to see what I might have changed, (I do if I am PM), and I will tell them anything significant as well.
But, I don't write the SOPs
I would like to think that PM is always watching the PFD, ND and N1/EPR even when talking to ATC or the cabin. I certainly do when I am PM.
When PM has been head down in the MCDU, they should look carefully to see what I might have changed, (I do if I am PM), and I will tell them anything significant as well.
But, I don't write the SOPs
I remember back in the 80s flying manually and keeping a good lookout was paramount - not looking out of the window into a turn would get a clipboard round the back of one's head from the IRE/TRE in the sim! Very sadly, the flightdeck is no longer a place for those skills, TCAS has replaced lookout and the magenta line provides a synthetic situational awareness - hell at my company, the raw data ILS is taught with the ND as part of the scan, but if the ND is available, why would you need to fly raw data? If it's for practice, then why increase the scan beyond the necessary instruments.
My colleagues these days on the flight deck have between 200hrs and 3000hrs total time before they are rushed into the LHS...hopefully C-19 will slow this down, but the lack of airmanship that I deal with on a daily basis is simply jaw dropping. They get their RT from you tube, their IF procedures from NAVBLUE, and their common sense (airmanship) from their equally inexperienced 3000hr LHS mates - I won't call these LHS pilots captains, because at most airlines, they wouldn't be captains, they'd have to spend a few more years in the RHS learning the ropes.
Fortunately, I have very few real issues flying the line safely these days as modern aircraft are so much more reliable than the turboprops and second generation twinjets that I flew as a youngster with no FMC or AFDS to programme, but I would contend that the skillset nowadays is completely different - the only similarity being that we are at the controls of many tons of aluminium hurtling through the atmosphere propelled by Jet A1. The generation of youth starting on the Kirby Cadet T3 and progressing to chipmunks and JPs like I did is over, todays pilots are kids who start with Flight Sim, get their Dads to fund their dream career and learn their skills by pushing buttons, going online and pressing CTL ALT DEL when it all goes wrong.
I would mourn the now redundant skills of manual flying or using raw data or VOR point to point Navigation with the help of an en-route chart or taking a VOR or NDB cross cut - or even being able to read a TAF or a METAR and perish the thought of using the basic T scan and the black art of airmanship....but I'd hate to stand in the way of progress.
Sorry if this seems hubristic on my part, but the loss of basic airmanship and common sense I have seen over the years really is jaw dropping.
My colleagues these days on the flight deck have between 200hrs and 3000hrs total time before they are rushed into the LHS...hopefully C-19 will slow this down, but the lack of airmanship that I deal with on a daily basis is simply jaw dropping. They get their RT from you tube, their IF procedures from NAVBLUE, and their common sense (airmanship) from their equally inexperienced 3000hr LHS mates - I won't call these LHS pilots captains, because at most airlines, they wouldn't be captains, they'd have to spend a few more years in the RHS learning the ropes.
Fortunately, I have very few real issues flying the line safely these days as modern aircraft are so much more reliable than the turboprops and second generation twinjets that I flew as a youngster with no FMC or AFDS to programme, but I would contend that the skillset nowadays is completely different - the only similarity being that we are at the controls of many tons of aluminium hurtling through the atmosphere propelled by Jet A1. The generation of youth starting on the Kirby Cadet T3 and progressing to chipmunks and JPs like I did is over, todays pilots are kids who start with Flight Sim, get their Dads to fund their dream career and learn their skills by pushing buttons, going online and pressing CTL ALT DEL when it all goes wrong.
I would mourn the now redundant skills of manual flying or using raw data or VOR point to point Navigation with the help of an en-route chart or taking a VOR or NDB cross cut - or even being able to read a TAF or a METAR and perish the thought of using the basic T scan and the black art of airmanship....but I'd hate to stand in the way of progress.
Sorry if this seems hubristic on my part, but the loss of basic airmanship and common sense I have seen over the years really is jaw dropping.
hec7or
How do explain accidents like Tenerife, Staines and Washington national? Or how about events that were nearly catastrophic like the BA 742 at LHR that nearly hit the Penta hotel and Concorde on low fuel.
My original reply was much longer but you’ve been spared as my WiFi dropped out and I lost it!
How do explain accidents like Tenerife, Staines and Washington national? Or how about events that were nearly catastrophic like the BA 742 at LHR that nearly hit the Penta hotel and Concorde on low fuel.
My original reply was much longer but you’ve been spared as my WiFi dropped out and I lost it!
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FL390
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Airbus are trying to keep both pilots in the flying part of the loop. Which is laudable enough. But if I am flying manually and setting off drift to track a course, it is a right pain for both of us if I keep saying Heading left 3° Heading right 2° etc, just to centre the heading bug. Much easier for PF to click the HDG knob as required.
Lazier solution: "I'm going to fly TRK/FPA".
Laziest solution: "I'm going to stick the green track diamond over the top of the ILS dagger."
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aim of the industry over the past 20 years or so has been to make the path to an airliner flight deck as easy and flexible as possibile in order to have more suitable candidates and hence have better flexibility when handling T&Cs.
One of the main points is to relieve the pilots from having to control the aircraft in manual flight as statistics have historically shown this is where people cock up big time.
If today we are talking about manual flying on the line like a great achievement and something that has to be highly and strictly regulated it is (also) because of the above reason.
The concept today is that aviation is for everybody and everybody can be trained to the required aviation standards but sticking to this will drive us to a not so distant future where autolands will become the norm even in cavok conditions, not to mentions the already available auto takeoffs.
One of the main points is to relieve the pilots from having to control the aircraft in manual flight as statistics have historically shown this is where people cock up big time.
If today we are talking about manual flying on the line like a great achievement and something that has to be highly and strictly regulated it is (also) because of the above reason.
The concept today is that aviation is for everybody and everybody can be trained to the required aviation standards but sticking to this will drive us to a not so distant future where autolands will become the norm even in cavok conditions, not to mentions the already available auto takeoffs.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aim of the industry over the past 20 years or so has been to make the path to an airliner flight deck as easy and flexible as possibile in order to have more suitable candidates and hence have better flexibility when handling T&Cs.
One of the main points is to relieve the pilots from having to control the aircraft in manual flight as statistics have historically shown this is where people cock up big time.
If today we are talking about manual flying on the line like a great achievement and something that has to be highly and strictly regulated it is (also) because of the above reason.
The concept today is that aviation is for everybody and everybody can be trained to the required aviation standards but sticking to this will drive us to a not so distant future where autolands will become the norm even in cavok conditions, not to mentions the already available auto takeoffs.
One of the main points is to relieve the pilots from having to control the aircraft in manual flight as statistics have historically shown this is where people cock up big time.
If today we are talking about manual flying on the line like a great achievement and something that has to be highly and strictly regulated it is (also) because of the above reason.
The concept today is that aviation is for everybody and everybody can be trained to the required aviation standards but sticking to this will drive us to a not so distant future where autolands will become the norm even in cavok conditions, not to mentions the already available auto takeoffs.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Planet no. 3
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comment above is spot on. The truth is: deteriorating flying skills are a result of the race to the bottom of the last 20 years. I get all the comments lamenting this fact and I too used to fly a lot of raw data and visual. Now, however, flying for a European low cost operator that seems a bit too keen on flight data monitoring, fear culture is becoming the norm in Europe too. Why do a visual approach when your safety ops reprimands its pilots for being a few knots above Vapp on a visual in windy conditions? Combine this with a punishing and fatiguing summer roster where everyone is worked to the max, and yes, we are going to start behaving like monkeys flying from ILS to ILS. A lot of us are indirectly being encouraged not to maintain our actual flying skills. We're either too knackered or scared and don't want the hassle of filing ASR's.
Don't blame individuals, blame the whole system that makes this possible.
Don't blame individuals, blame the whole system that makes this possible.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Discovery of more and more human factors is one of the reasons for more and more automation and development towards pilotless aircraft. It's almost an advertisement of how humans are unsuitable for the job. For the industry and the travelling passengers what matters is if accidents have to happen then with pilotless aircaft will fares be significantly less and will accidents reduce?
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 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comment above is spot on. The truth is: deteriorating flying skills are a result of the race to the bottom of the last 20 years. I get all the comments lamenting this fact and I too used to fly a lot of raw data and visual. Now, however, flying for a European low cost operator that seems a bit too keen on flight data monitoring, fear culture is becoming the norm in Europe too. Why do a visual approach when your safety ops reprimands its pilots for being a few knots above Vapp on a visual in windy conditions? Combine this with a punishing and fatiguing summer roster where everyone is worked to the max, and yes, we are going to start behaving like monkeys flying from ILS to ILS. A lot of us are indirectly being encouraged not to maintain our actual flying skills. We're either too knackered or scared and don't want the hassle of filing ASR's.
Don't blame individuals, blame the whole system that makes this possible.
Don't blame individuals, blame the whole system that makes this possible.
All of that is simply WRONG ! I am still lucky to work for a European legacy carrier (effin' covid 19 permitting) where common sense still prevails, but I am well aware of all the BS going on within the industry - especially the kind of stuff You have exposed above.
This way of doing things is typical of those places where nobody wants to get any sort of responsibility or use their brain/airmanship and thus if Vapp +10 is ok, Vapp +11 gets you a warning letter.
With things like that it is obvious that sooner or later the industry will end up pilotless, as the machine will maintain the speed better than us untrained pilots who are too afraid to try !