A320 - landing with manual thrust?

[Uplinker]

Originally Posted by BraceBrace

So do we go-around once a month as well now?

Are you mocking my suggestion ? It is all too easy to fly by twiddling knobs on the MCP, rather than moving Side-sticks and Thrust levers. The Airbus certainly**, with its FBW and excellent auto-thrust, is such a well designed and integrated aircraft and flight system, that it is very easy and safe to do so.
And we can all tell ourselves that the rosters are too demanding, the airspace is too busy, we have been awake since 0300 etc. etc. I do this myself, but a month after the latest SIM I start feeling rusty and I don't want to suggest it to PM in case I screw it up, (which has happened......ahem).

But if we were all mandated to log three manually flown raw data ILS approaches every 6 month period, we would all be on the same page and would have to find ways to do them and it might just help prevent us getting rusty. The mandate would also help prevent the: "Do you mind if I fly this approach fully manually ?........To be honest, I'd rather you didn't".

Practising Go-Arounds with passengers on board would obviously not be practical !!, as it would use extra fuel, take extra time, make airspace busier, and confuse, upset or annoy passengers. However, if we all - myself included - did our three manually flown raw data ILS approaches, we would all be a little less rusty, a little better at instrument flying and a little more willing and comfortable to fly manually, so the Go-Around - when it was needed for real - would be generally better flown. If we get better at manual and instrument flying, go-arounds should become less likely.

Three manual raw data ILS approaches in every six month period would be an easy way for us to practise our manual flying on instruments without incurring any significant negatives. We could all do this now - and some do - but human nature being what it is, I suggest that we need the mandate from our Fleet Management Captains to push us all into actually doing it.

Originally Posted by PEI_3721

BB, A very interesting view.

A difficulty in explaining performance is that most activities involve tacit skills; as learnt with experience, but hard to describe. You can read or be told how to ride a bike, but you still have 'to do it', learning though practice.

Quite so. If you did not allow a concert violinist to take their instrument home and only allowed them to play it at concerts; and if you then asked them to play a piece they had not played for six months, they would probably play a little hesitantly, possibly some notes too sharp or flat and certainly not to concert standard. Musicians practice at home - often daily - to keep their skills sharp.

But pilots are not allowed to take an airplane home to practise in their own time !! (I was not even allowed to use the Cardboard Bomber in my own time to practise drills etc. at one airline - thanks guys). Yet we are required to perform to high standards when the need arises. We therefore need to get the practise when and where we can, but without incurring extra costs, if possible.


**This is not an implied negative comment on Boeings - I have only flown the B737 Classic for real, so I don't know about the more modern ones, only what I read.

[vilas]

Originally Posted by pineteam

I generally do it with AP especially as demonstration to pilots willing to see one. But I agree in case of confusion, raw data would be a good option. I have seen pilots messing up so many times. Pulling OPN CLB while setting go around altitude, forgetting to manage speed( engines spooling up), not selecting a higher altitude and then reaching alt* or the worst of the worst not arming the GS…

I think you are mixing up. GA on AP all you do is hit TOGA and check FMA. You can't abandon automation because you can't execute properly. While setting up GA altitude is a weak spot needs to be done consciously or one can make a mistake of pulling into OP CLB. It has happened in 777 also. But you don't switch off AP for that. Moment SRS mode is engaged speed automatically becomes managed you don't managed speed it. Pilot who can't use automation for GA will have more problems in manual. All mistakes you mentioned are more likely to happen in manual because you have to fly the aircraft also.

[vilas]

follow the instruments (or look outside

That "or look outside" is what creates the possibility for somatogravic illusion. Follow instruments not outside because habits don't change but visibility does change and in poor visibility there's nothing to look outside. People who crashed were looking outside and pushing due to what they felt instead of pulling as per instrument indication because there was nothing to look outside.

[pineteam]

Originally Posted by vilas

I think you are mixing up. GA on AP all you do is hit TOGA and check FMA. You can't abandon automation because you can't execute properly. While setting up GA altitude is a weak spot needs to be done consciously or one can make a mistake of pulling into OP CLB. It has happened in 777 also. But you don't switch off AP for that. Moment SRS mode is engaged speed automatically becomes managed you don't managed speed it. Pilot who can't use automation for GA will have more problems in manual. All mistakes you mentioned are more likely to happen in manual because you have to fly the aircraft also.

Hello Vilas,
Sorry I missed your previous post.
All the go around that went wrong were indeed with AP off. I can remember at least 3 cases and 2 of them were considered serious as flaps overspeed occurred and one case quite significantly (over 20kt flaps overspeed) as the crew forgot the AP was off…
For Interception from above so far, I never had to revert to Raw data. But I agree in case of serious FMA confusion for example it can be considered to revert to raw data. I have witnessed and heard serious F*ck up during interception from above in line. The most serious one were going way below the GS as both pilots failed to arm the GS and to monitor the GS and they went way below the profile triggering GPWS alert…
Emirates had also a serious case of interception from above going seriously wrong that they even changed the Airbus SOP and can not do interception from above below the last clear altitude.

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/199901

I don’t think these kind of incidents would have happened if the crew were more pro efficient in these manoeuvres.
Sorry for the off topic. But I think it’s a nice discussion.

[1201alarm]

Regular manual flying without autothrust trains and improves your instrument scan including airspeed. Better scanning makes for better pilots, even when autopilot is on.

The Asiana crash in SFO or the Turkish crash in AMS are not imaginable with crews who have the habit of scanning airspeed continuously - a skill you aquire by regularly flying without autothrust.

Manual flight manual thrust in my outfit is the standard. And regular raw data ILS are done by most pilots as well, if conditions reasonable. No new FO will be checked out if he can't fly a raw data ILS. That is how it should be.

Still amazed that there are still a considerable amount of pilots or airlines who have not taken conclusions from all the accidents and incidents we had in the last 20 years due to lack of basic flying skills. Luckily they seem to become less and less.

[Vessbot]

Originally Posted by Ollie Onion

And there is the fundamental difference, Practice to me is everything, reading ex charts, fuel planning, flying a SID, conducting an ILS flying the odd visual approach is ALL practice.

Here again you say it is everything, but elsewhere you say you do not hand fly. So does it include everything, or not?

When did just hand flying equate to ‘practice’.

It is specifically the topic of this thread.

As said above pilots who pride themselves on their frequency of hand flying are judging their jobs and ability to do it on a very very small component of the overall picture.

I have never once seen someone deny the importance of all the the other elements of airmanship, based on them being good at hand flying. Have you?

Everytime I go to work I am aiming at achieving the perfect flight….. I have never achieved it and the flight becomes practice so that next time I can try again. If I go 6 months without flying a manual ILS I don’t consider myself out of practice. I turn up to the sim and demonstrate my ability in that area and are judged to be capable of that skill amongst many others.

The one time in the sim makes you so capable of that skill, that you aren't willing to do it in real life? I don't buy it.

Originally Posted by AerocatS2A

I think he’s saying we practice whatever it is we are doing. It’s not just manual flying skills that can be practiced. Effective management of automation is just as much of an art as hand flying. I’ve seen more pilots lose the plot trying to use automation than I have hand flying.

Are you suggesting that the industry is at a shortfall of practice at using the autopilot?

Given that 99% of the time is spent with the AP on, of course that's where you're going to see problems. How many problems with hand flying are you going to see starting from 1000 feet or less on the glideslope, with no configuration changes, already trimmed, with thrust already set (or even on AT)?

[AerocatS2A]

Originally Posted by Vessbot

Are you suggesting that the industry is at a shortfall of practice at using the autopilot?

No, I'm not saying that.

[Ollie Onion]

Originally Posted by Vessbot

Here again you say it is everything, but elsewhere you say you do not hand fly. So does it include everything, or not?


It is specifically the topic of this thread.


I have never once seen someone deny the importance of all the the other elements of airmanship, based on them being good at hand flying. Have you?



The one time in the sim makes you so capable of that skill, that you aren't willing to do it in real life? I don't buy it.




Are you suggesting that the industry is at a shortfall of practice at using the autopilot?

Given that 99% of the time is spent with the AP on, of course that's where you're going to see problems. How many problems with hand flying are you going to see starting from 1000 feet or less on the glideslope, with no configuration changes, already trimmed, with thrust already set (or even on AT)?

Bloody hell, this is like pulling teeth. What I am saying is those pilots who insist on hand flying all the time due to some false belief that we must all hand fly regularly or we are not real pilots are actually the ones who are the pain in the ass. Most Pilots don't need to hand fly all the time to practice and are of a good enough standard through day to day operations which at times will include some hand flying and of course the mandated simulator programme certified by your regulator. No where did I say that I don't hand fly, I did say that I don't feel any need to practice every day or every week as my skills are good enough through the practice I get in normal day to day operations. It is a real concern that we have Chuck Yeagers on here who actually think procedures like GS from Above and Missed Approaches are better flown manually as there are too many 'button pushes' required to do it with automation. I will say again, if your normal day to day operations and simulators are not sufficient to keep you practiced enough to handle that one day in a thousand where you are required to hand fly due to a non normal or MEL then you shouldn't be a professional pilot. I reckon I do a manually flown approach a couple of times a year and my skills are top notch as evidenced by all my training reports. I don't know why anyone has an issue with this, what I get sick of is those pilots who pressure others into lots of manual flying when it is just not needed in most situations.

[Uplinker]

I share your frustration Ollie, but some skills do atrophy unless they are regularly practised, ask a musician.

However, like you, I personally don't have a problem going manual thrust, and on all the types I have flown, from Shorts 360 to Airbus A330, it was not difficult. Possibly because the first four types I flew commercially did not have auto-thrust; I learned to constantly scan properly and adjust thrust manually, so I have that "motor programme" fixed in my brain. But I am certainly not Chuck Yeager - just an ordinary Joe.

However, manual flying does use up more brain power and scanning time, and is therefore not always appropriate when in busy airspace, or when tired. With auto-thrust in, when I see the trend arrow and speed dropping, I flick between the speed tape and the Engine N1 or EPR gauges, expecting to see a small increase in thrust. If that does not happen I am ready to intervene, but 95% of the time the Airbus gets it right.

The 5% of actual interventions have mostly been certain A330s with older software getting slow on short finals on thermally days; where literally two seconds out of the CLB gate and back sorts it out.

[pineteam]

Maybe Ollie you are one of these guys; I know and saw few pilots flying very accurately and they hand fly once in a blue moon. But this is definitely not the majority of the pilots and definitely not me. I have seen much more cases of :” I don’t need to hand fly, I’m confident in my skills” and then you see them flying and they are all over the place in the simulator… lol.
I have never forced anyone to hand fly; I recommend to do it once in a while as our FOM states. I agree pilots who insist to do it all the times is annoying and can be overwhelming for the PM in some cases. I remember one captain ex fighter pilot was doing all the times in every airport until one day he over bank more than 50 degrees xD. There is a time and place to do it considering weather fatigue etc… I love flying with or without AP. I also enjoy watching other flying to see different styles and techniques of flying. Flying should be professional but also enjoyable. =)

[vilas]

Let's get into reality. Is flying a manual approach in airbus FBW normal or most alternate laws an evidence of extra ordinary skill? You just put the pitch and bank where you want it and it stays there. Set thrust at average setting and it will keep speed around the desired. Just keep speed in your scan. It's a different story if you are in direct law. Where It's not flight path stable you need to manoeuvre it where you want it and keep it there with manual trimming. There's no aerodynamic feel so the tactile feed back is lost and makes it very difficult to keep it stable without proper trimming. Also this can only be practiced in simulator once in six months. Anyone who flies it well I don't see what the big deal about normal law approach?

[Capn Bloggs]

Originally Posted by Ollie

I reckon I do a manually flown approach a couple of times a year and my skills are top notch as evidenced by all my training reports.

​​​​​​​You are non-normal.

[Speed_Trim_Fail]

I fly raw data probably 2-3 times a week if conditions and colleagues allow. I’m not a sky god by any means, solidly middle of the road line pilot, but on a lovely morning with low workload/energy under control and manageable winds am I the only one who enjoys either a raw data or, god forbid, a visual? Yes it’s not really much of a test of one’s skill, nor should it be but it’s enjoyable and satisfying isn’t it?

If my colleague doesn’t feel like it for reasons of tiredness, experience or simply doesn’t feel like working harder than necessary I would never force them or even try and persuade them - but I have flown with guys before who after a raw data ILS have turned to me and said “Hey I haven’t done that for a long time - that was great fun, thank you.” with a big grin on their face.

[sonicbum]

May I suggest…

Luckily as pilots we are all different, with different needs and preferences, as we are (amazing!) human beings (at least for now, then AI will fly us around ). Do what works best for You, as long as it’s not against Your OMs and does not make Your colleagues uncomfortable.

[1201alarm]

Let's get into reality. Is flying a manual approach in airbus FBW normal or most alternate laws an evidence of extra ordinary skill? You just put the pitch and bank where you want it and it stays there. Set thrust at average setting and it will keep speed around the desired. Just keep speed in your scan.

No, it is not an extraordinary skill, but a necessary skill for every pilot. If you have that skill it means you have a good instrument scan and a natural understanding of the basics of flying like appropriate pitch, power, roll rates, spool up time etc.

As with every skill, most people need regular practice, and more practice improves the skill up to a certain point where the improvement flattens out. Asiana in SFO and Turkish in AMS did not have the instrument scan and impacted badly.

[ScepticalOptomist]

Flying an Airbus manually is not really the same as flying something like a 737 manually.

If one finds the Airbus difficult without the AT I’d be concerned. The aircraft is already trimming for you - what more do you need?

[JH870]

Originally Posted by ScepticalOptomist

Flying an Airbus manually is not really the same as flying something like a 737 manually.

If one finds the Airbus difficult without the AT I’d be concerned. The aircraft is already trimming for you - what more do you need?

If it's so easy then why are so many getting their knickers in a twist about it?

If you can do it safely, and you enjoy it, then why not.

[Ollie Onion]

Originally Posted by JH870

If it's so easy then why are so many getting their knickers in a twist about it?

If you can do it safely, and you enjoy it, then why not.

Of course you should enjoy it in conjunction with the other pilot. I fly in both seats and had a Captain say to me the other day, 'I will request a visual approach for you', I said 'no thanks' and he proceeded to tell me for the next 10 minutes that we are 'pilots' and should manually fly whenever we get the chance. I reminded him I was only there as he was getting checked back to line after an incident and he should perhaps be more picky about what he does and when. If an FO wants to do a visual then that is not a problem and I encourage it, I will however say no if I don't feel like being PM on a visual (not a common occurance) and that is alright too. I just hate the attitude displayed by some that it should be a requirement to fly manually all the time or you are not a real pilot.

[JH870]

Originally Posted by Ollie Onion

Of course you should enjoy it in conjunction with the other pilot. I fly in both seats and had a Captain say to me the other day, 'I will request a visual approach for you', I said 'no thanks' and he proceeded to tell me for the next 10 minutes that we are 'pilots' and should manually fly whenever we get the chance. I reminded him I was only there as he was getting checked back to line after an incident and he should perhaps be more picky about what he does and when. If an FO wants to do a visual then that is not a problem and I encourage it, I will however say no if I don't feel like being PM on a visual (not a common occurance) and that is alright too. I just hate the attitude displayed by some that it should be a requirement to fly manually all the time or you are not a real pilot.

Valid points. There is a large middle ground that exists between "not a real pilot" and "risk taker sky god" where most of us comfortably reside by being able to competently fly manual visual approaches a couple of times a week without any issues. Incredible it has caused such a debate!

[stilton]

Is the Airbus really that magic you only have to fly two approaches manually per year to be ‘top notch’ ?

I find that extremely difficult to believe

Only flown Boeing and Douglas but I didn’t know a single pilot who could claim that credibly