Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Why is automation dependency encouraged in modern aviation ?

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Why is automation dependency encouraged in modern aviation ?

Old 11th Jan 2021, 04:51
  #281 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 2,985
Originally Posted by Ollie Onion View Post
Pilots who insist on flying raw data in all sorts of conditions just to prove something are a pain in the arse and lower the safety margins in a day to day operation. Sure handily when conditions are appropriate but I have always felt it is exaggerated saying we lose our skills unless we continually practice. I have always found the flying of a visual approach a couple of times a month combined with the hand flying work in the sim is more than enough to maintain the required level of skill.
I agree with this. I​​​​​ had said the same thing. It could be more than a couple of times if required. In automated Aircraft it is also important to know the automation well. If to capture the GS from above one has to disconnect the AP it's not professionalism but poor knowledge of automation. Automation is installed for day to day use and not only for Sundays and holidays. Manual flights are to be resorted only to retain raw data skills. Passengers pay to travel safely from A to B and not for somebody's pleasure. Enjoying your profession(which includes using automation) and doing something all the time just for fun is not same. Importantly one has to be loyal to the pay check i.e. company policy and procedures.

Last edited by vilas; 11th Jan 2021 at 06:03.
vilas is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2021, 11:56
  #282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 201
I donít know which pilots are insisting to fly raw data in all sort of conditions but if that the case I agree itís looking for trouble. In my outfit we have restrictions on raw data flying in the line. Can not do it if the crosswind is more than 15kt or in case of low cloud base. I fly raw data quite often lately but mostly at my home base and always when the weather is within limit and my partner and I are not too fatigue which lately with the little amount of flying we do is not really an issue.
pineteam is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2021, 16:06
  #283 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Originally Posted by vilas View Post
I agree with this. I​​​​​ had said the same thing. It could be more than a couple of times if required. In automated Aircraft it is also important to know the automation well. If to capture the GS from above one has to disconnect the AP it's not professionalism but poor knowledge of automation. Automation is installed for day to day use and not only for Sundays and holidays. Manual flights are to be resorted only to retain raw data skills. Passengers pay to travel safely from A to B and not for somebody's pleasure. Enjoying your profession(which includes using automation) and doing something all the time just for fun is not same. Importantly one has to be loyal to the pay check i.e. company policy and procedures.
Just because you enjoy something does not make it wrong at all.
It can have very good reasons to be done, even if, yes, enjoyment alone is not a good reason.

Nobody is talking about disregarding automation just for fun. Why would you be talking about that ? Did you feel that someone suggested something like this ?
Originally Posted by pineteam View Post
I don’t know which pilots are insisting to fly raw data in all sort of conditions but if that the case I agree it’s looking for trouble. In my outfit we have restrictions on raw data flying in the line. Can not do it if the crosswind is more than 15kt or in case of low cloud base. I fly raw data quite often lately but mostly at my home base and always when the weather is within limit and my partner and I are not too fatigue which lately with the little amount of flying we do is not really an issue.
Does it apply for a 15kt crosswind flare ? Do you follow the FDs in that case ?
KayPam is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2021, 16:49
  #284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 2,985
Originally Posted by KayPam View Post
Just because you enjoy something does not make it wrong at all.
It can have very good reasons to be done, even if, yes, enjoyment alone is not a good reason.

Nobody is talking about disregarding automation just for fun. Why would you be talking about that ? Did you feel that someone suggested something like this ?

Does it apply for a 15kt crosswind flare ? Do you follow the FDs in that case ?
There are some who seem to suggest if every approach in raw data or atleast more the better. And about 15kt crosswind whether to follow FDs is answered before release on line. Look every company has rules you may not be comfortable with some but you can't just walk in and start teaching wisdom to everyone.
vilas is offline  
Old 11th Jan 2021, 17:00
  #285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 201
Originally Posted by KayPam View Post

Does it apply for a 15kt crosswind flare ? Do you follow the FDs in that case ?
Like any landings during flare I only look outside. At this stage only the PM is looking inside to check the pitch.
Even when I’m flying with FDs, I stopped following them when approaching the minimum. Primary reference are visual references like the Papi. Following blindly the FD bars below minimum during ILS CAT 1 might not be the smartest idea due to possible LOC and G/S fluctuations.

Last edited by pineteam; 12th Jan 2021 at 02:35. Reason: Typo
pineteam is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 02:38
  #286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 2,985
Originally Posted by pineteam View Post
Like any landings during flare I only look outside. At this stage only the PM is looking inside to check the pitch.
Even when Iím flying with FDs, I stopped following them when approaching the minimum. Primary reference are visual references like the Papi. Following blindly the FD bars below minimum during ILS CAT 1 might not be the smartest idea due to possible LOC and G/S fluctuations.
KP is trying to be humourous.
vilas is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 05:45
  #287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Oxford
Posts: 23
Originally Posted by vilas View Post
Importantly one has to be loyal to the pay check i.e. company policy and procedures.
Rather difficult to remain "loyal to the pay check" when the bean counters have been anything but loyal to us across the industry as a whole
CessNah is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 06:41
  #288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,137
"Thank you for all you do. We're all in this together."
Check Airman is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 08:27
  #289 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Commuting home
Age: 43
Posts: 3,367
The bean counters count the beans so that the airline stays afloat. At times like this it well might be their ingenuity that makes us survive.

Every pilot is welcome to step up and do their work better. The board will be pleased, your ex peers thankful and bonuses roll in. Fixed sleep cycle in homely beds.

It always a daft surprise to see that mutual respect, professional courtesy, comeradrie and appreciation of honest work that we pilots show usually only extend twice the distance to the closest mirror.
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 09:52
  #290 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: An Island Province
Posts: 1,184
For debate, using the example of restrictions on raw data flying, this could create more problems than those supposed to be avoided.
The use of computed guidance (FD/AP) for an approach in high crosswinds reduces opportunity for pilots to gain knowledge of the drift angles involved and thus anticipate the manoeuvre for aligning the aircraft during a manual landing - the feel of the aircraft in higher crosswinds. Although pilots could make a mental note of the drift during a FD approach, but without consciously paying attention to this, thinking / flying, adding tacit knowledge - experience, pilots could be less skilled, less experienced.
Operators should be careful of introducing 'novel' safety interventions without considering side effects, which implies that the reasoning for raw data skills practice has to be understood by management.

This aspect runs throughout the thread; where is the need. Raw data flying can be fun, it can be encouraged, but is it really required; nice to have or must have - refer to bean counters.
In the example above, operators might encourage manual flight with computed guidance, but require a diversion for unaided approaches (failure case) in high crosswinds - safe without introducing problems.

But then the bean counters dislike diversions - but how much dislike in comparison with an accident. They lack experience in contemplating side effects, or an accident.
alf5071h is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 10:20
  #291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Age: 49
Posts: 1,947
The important bit in a crosswind landing is the flare-decrab-touchdown combination where there are usually issues, almost exclusively due to lack of practice of high crosswind landings (I would say a small amount of pilots lack theory). I do not really see any major benefit of handflying the approach but just an increase in workload. The SIM is definitely the place to practice all of that, and especially in the -hopefully soon- post covid, non jeopardy pure handling SIMs will be very important.
sonicbum is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 12:26
  #292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 2,985
Originally Posted by CessNah View Post
Rather difficult to remain "loyal to the pay check" when the bean counters have been anything but loyal to us across the industry as a whole
The purpose of any business is to count beans more the better and you should be happy to contribute to it because only then the beans you take home will increase. Why Don't you be an entrepreneur for a change?
vilas is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 12:45
  #293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blue sky
Posts: 121
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
Suggest you read the accident report on Flash Airlines Boeing 737-300 Registration CU-ZCF and then reflect on your post. There are countless other similar accidents where poor instrument flying ability coupled with contributory cause of automation dependancy have resulted in fatal accidents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_Airlines_Flight_604
In the above sentence you didn't once mention the word disorientation, aka getting lost in space. Disorientation: a threat that has ever been present in +100 years of aviation, well known and cause of many incidents and accidents.

Just to get this straight: I'm a fan of manual flying, I'm a fan of raw data flying. I'm sometimes in a fantastic position to "guide" people and in my company it is even part of the training program to do raw data approaches when possible. Because yes, you need the opportunity to learn assets, to young and old. Because it is an asset, it is a certain skill that can be handy. But it is not the whole freaking ultimate godlike saver and creator of 100% safe aviation like many like to think. And safe aviation is our goal.

I don't care if you are a master in raw data, I don't care if you are a master in FMC knowledge or APFD use. It's about you, as a pilot, knowing your weaknesses and strengths. Strengths are fine, but your weaknesses can get you killed. I'd rather have a guy asking me questions on use of AP when, why, how,... These people know their weaknesses and learn. What I don't like, is people who are going to "show" they know how to fly raw data. Those attitudes have created the worst situations I have seen in 20 years. Ego is the killer here, not automation. It is pretty ridiculous to debrief such situations and come to the conclusion that the way out of many "****up handflown raw-data" approaches is to set the AP, set appropriate modes and free your god damn brain from the probable overload you just created and the situational awareness that was long gone but you didn't realise it.

And that's the topic here: does APFD use decrease our situational awareness? No, it should increase. If not, maybe you need some training on the proper use of APFD systems. Otherwise it sounds like you are throwing away the baby with the bathwater.

Last edited by BraceBrace; 12th Jan 2021 at 13:38.
BraceBrace is online now  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 14:37
  #294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: An Island Province
Posts: 1,184
sonic, #293, I would argue otherwise, yet debatable.
I agree that the flare combination - coordination are important, but would replace 'practice' with 'exposure' in a range of situations. Continually flying in the same conditions adds little to the ability to adapt to other conditions; e.g. maximum winds and / or turbulence, the latter may be the greater challenge
Theory is not the knowledge of 'know what', but that of 'know how', particularly tacit knowledge - gained and improved with practice. The skills associated with this are the combination of knowing how-and-when to adapt technique, and the mental and physical 'gear change' required for the perceived situation.

Hand flying an approach provides opportunity to get in the loop earlier, experience wind / turbulence change with reducing altitude, and gusts affecting all axis - the 'combination'.
Many simulators have significant limitations in crosswinds, yaw - roll modelling is difficult, low turbulence fidelity, and the non existent lateral acceleration for the important seat of the pants feedback - instead reliance on the sim visuals to judge sideways movement.

The view of increased workload is a concern; why should this matter if the piloting task, aircraft capability, and situation are within the certification assumptions. Perhaps the assumptions have been misjudged, pilot capability vs situation. More sim training cannot guarantee improving all pilots, but restricting the situation to match aircraft - pilot capability in abnormal conditions could be more effective - safety wise. Auto flight is not necessarily less work load, only different.

BB, situation awareness
However, the FD/AP (flying via technology) provides a different awareness, not necessarily that for manual abnormal operations.

alf5071h is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 17:02
  #295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,694
Originally Posted by sonicbum View Post
The important bit in a crosswind landing is the flare-decrab-touchdown combination where there are usually issues, almost exclusively due to lack of practice of high crosswind landings................... I do not really see any major benefit of handflying the approach but just an increase in workload..
On your first point I would say the approach is just as important on those bad weather days, and on your second point I DO see the benefit of handflying the approach. Those who leave the A/P in until 1nm from touch-down on a turbulent, crosswind approach, often get a nasty surprise when they finally take the A/P out. They suddenly realise what a challenging day it is that the A/P has been coping with, but have left themselves no time to get their responses up to speed and firmly into the groove of turbulent crosswind flying, so their flare, decrab and "landing" are usually poor in my experience of sitting next to them.

Much better to take the A/P out at 7-10 nm, so you have plenty of time to get into the groove of the conditions and for your motor responses to rev up. By the time you get to the flare and decrab, it is all nicely under control, (or you have gone around!).

NB, I am referring to A320 family, in which I usually leave the A/THR in, since it (and GS mini) do an excellent job on all but the most awful days, and I concentrate on keeping the plane the right way up and flaring and decrabbing correctly. In A330 one sometimes has to manually control the thrust as well.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 19:53
  #296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Bonvoy Marriott
Posts: 143
Gusty and windy: disconnect early and get in the groove. Keep the FD in.

I try to choose my visuals and raw data approaches on clear weather days and nights.

I never fly manual with the ATHR active. Didnít do it on the Bus, donít do it on the Boeing. I found that it over reacts and destabilizes the approach.
SaulGoodman is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2021, 20:33
  #297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,137
raw data at night? sounds dangerous
Check Airman is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2021, 00:43
  #298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Oxford
Posts: 23
Originally Posted by vilas View Post
Why Don't you be an entrepreneur for a change?
That has been my side hussle just prior to the pandemic and believe me, I did not decide to treat myself to a raging bonus and payrise while the rest of my employees are either getting sacked or having pay cuts to the point it could hardly be called a job anymore You just can't throw words like "loyal" around in aviation anymore that's all
CessNah is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2021, 03:51
  #299 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 201
Originally Posted by Uplinker View Post
On your first point I would say the approach is just as important on those bad weather days, and on your second point I DO see the benefit of handflying the approach. Those who leave the A/P in until 1nm from touch-down on a turbulent, crosswind approach, often get a nasty surprise when they finally take the A/P out. They suddenly realise what a challenging day it is that the A/P has been coping with, but have left themselves no time to get their responses up to speed and firmly into the groove of turbulent crosswind flying, so their flare, decrab and "landing" are usually poor in my experience of sitting next to them.

Much better to take the A/P out at 7-10 nm.
Totally agree with you. My worst landing was with a captain who asked me to keep AP ON until the last minute as he wanted to confirm the wind with the tower at 500 feet AAL since we have crosswind limitation for first officers. By the time he read back I was around 400 feet
with tail/crosswind of 15kt. No time to feel the aircraft and ended doing a 1.55G landing.
I always recommend my colleagues if they ask me, to disconnect at latest at 1000 feet to feel the aircraft especially in bumpy conditions. I personally disconnect around 7/8 miles when flying with FDs on.

Originally Posted by Check Airman View Post
raw data at night? sounds dangerous
Right? Flying at night should not be legal at the first place. Too risky.

Last edited by pineteam; 13th Jan 2021 at 04:38. Reason: Added a sentence
pineteam is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2021, 06:09
  #300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,137
Originally Posted by pineteam View Post
Totally agree with you. My worst landing was with a captain who asked me to keep AP ON until the last minute as he wanted to confirm the wind with the tower at 500 feet AAL since we have crosswind limitation for first officers. By the time he read back I was around 400 feet
with tail/crosswind of 15kt. No time to feel the aircraft and ended doing a 1.55G landing.
I feel your pain. That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've read all week.
Check Airman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.