|
Just to clarify
My current type is 757, and with both 2 and 300 series, different flap settings and improved climb, 10 degrees has been agreed as the best target pitch attitude. Regards GBD (came off the bus for LHS) |
after enduring this thread, I now have a good idea what the pilots were doing on their laptops when they overshot MINN by 300nm....
posting HERE! :D |
CATII & III approaches, when everything is working, are not difficult and only require a high level of monitoring, however, failures during the take-off roll, using the black and white Barber's Pole, can be interesting, as can the go around from a very low height. Not all companies are the same but, in my last employer, to maintain currency, there would be one no problems approach and landing and all the others would have failures of one sort or another fed in.
|
para..
Concur.. A 'balked landing' assumes 50' above threshold go around....if one is practiced in these regards, CAT III is not a problem... |
Now you mention
What is easier? a multiple AP coupled balked landing or a hand flown balked landing? See what i mean? Hand flying proficiency should be regularly checked, just the same as low visibility approaches. SImulator training is one requirement, and you can use it to rehearse all kind of scenarios and faults. But another requirement is to carry out a number of autolands in real revenue fllights. Why do regulations not require a number of hand flown ILS or even NPAs every six months in order to make sure that the flight crews remain proficient at hand flying? A hand flown ILS in a sim is not real. Wind is not real, feeling is not real. And you do only one, maybe zero, every six months. That is not good. PD _FlighpathOBN. looks like you are more interested in this thread than you think... |
The requirement to make 2 real autolands per month vanished for us around 8 or so years ago, since then we do not need to do any autolands or cat III approaches on the line, every six month in the simulator is enough.
And indeed the regulations require that we do a hand flown (FD allowed) ILS and at least one NPA using normal SOPs every six month, or each simulator event. |
Does anybody know what British Airways' OM says about the use (or not) of automation?
Every A/C (not pilot) in our fleet has to do 2 autolands/month for the A/C to stay CAT IIIB approved. the regulations require that we do a hand flown (FD allowed) ILS and at least one NPA using normal SOPs every six month, or each simulator event. Luckily Denti's outfit appears to be smarter than the regulator. :p |
BA I believe do a monitored approach on every leg. Basically the other guy will take over at minimums and land. FO or Capt. I also here that they can only disconnect the autopilot when fully configured and fully established.
This is one of the reasons why I was hesitant to take a job with them! Then again, I suppose I could have configured at 50 miles out and flew it then? hahaha I could be wrong, but maybe a Nigel could correct me on this? Anyone else also hear about Cathay? They have now forbidden it and every landing is (wait for it)..... AUTOLAND only!!! What a disgrace. |
At our airline we have a very unusual way of conducting 'manual flight'.
PF assumes the role of 'autopilot', so even though he is flying the aircraft, PNF decides when flap will be selectecd, puts the gear down when he wants, and so on. It very much discourages hand flying. That is the effect that it has in real life. Whether that is the intended effect, I know not. On the rare ocassion that an FO "hand flies", expect a less than jerk-free ride. |
Please tell me you're joking!
Originally Posted by BarbiesBoyfriend
At our airline we have a very unusual way of conducting 'manual flight'.
PF assumes the role of 'autopilot', so even though he is flying the aircraft, PNF decides when flap will be selectecd, puts the gear down when he wants, and so on. You must be kidding, right? |
Sabenaboy. I wish I were.
|
You can manually fly when ever you want at Cathay, autoland rumor is absolute crap. Autopilot is recommended in high workload situations and obviously during low vis approaches.
|
Anyone else also hear about Cathay? They have now forbidden it and every landing is (wait for it)..... AUTOLAND only!!! Common sense dictates that what you've heard is nonsense |
Mrs-rodge
Your info about BA is wrong as well. Autopilot can be disconnected whenever you like and landing pilot can take over when visual not necessarily at minimums. There is also no requirement to do real autolands regularly any more. The sim every 6 months is sufficient. Cheers |
Solitaire, would you care to tell us more about BA's policy? From what I've heard hand flying raw data is highly unusual at BA. Disconnecting A/P (but keeping F/D + A/T on) somewhere on final would be the norm? Does that sound more correct?
|
In my outfit, we fly two diffrent 'types' with totally diffrent roles, Regional and Medium haul to be precise. For the Regional guys the rules of engagement are simple, ' do what you like' i.e Hand-fly, Auto-fly, whichever.. The OM, though not strictly, does suggest a "Judicious use of automation to reduce crew workload". But because we fly to a combination of Apts doing ILS,VOR, NDB/or Visual in one single hop !! (Yup, you heard it right), Short fields, Narrow rwys, etc. we end up having our share of (manual) fun quite often. But even here some chappies prefer doing even a Visual with the A/P !! To each their own I say..
On the other hand, the "Bus" drivers are much more restricted, they are 'forbidden' to dis-engage their fancy automation (A/T, FD, A/P..) unless a situation demands it (type of failure, QRH action,etc.):yuk: This I feel is downright absurd and dangerous. If you don't allow a bloke to practise his manual flying skills on his set of wheels , how do you expect him to be profecient when the auto-matics go out the window and the situation warrants every ounce of your skill. Though a lot has been discussed on this forum regarding the importance of hand-flying, automation, a mix of both, etc,etc. nobody can dispute the fact that a Pilot's Flying-Skill is the one he's most proud of, and any lack of it results directly in underconfidence. Its also encouraging to see some carriers allowing/promoting hand-flying even in modern M/H category ac. I've also heard some european carriers mandate a Pilot to fly T/O to 10,000 and 10,000 to landing without any automation to keep their skill levels up especially the ones on FBW ac (twice in 30 consec. days or something). Hope this trend cathes on with others aswell..... Till then, wish you Blue skies and Greasy landings ! :ok: |
Hello,
Flying for a Belgian charter company this is what our OM A says: All pilots shall stay proficient in all 4 company defined levels of automation: - no automation - F/D only - AP with basic modes - LNAV / VNAV Pilots are encouraged to practice their flying skills and there are no restrictions on the use of automation. However, F/D on take-off is recommended with wind shear reported. Ab initio training includes F/D off flying including engine failure on take-off & one engine out approach in CAT I minima. The type rating check-out includes at least one F/D off approach in CAT I weather (a CAA requirement). But it also includes flying LNAV / VNAV approaches. Both should be known perfectly. With this training & OM policy it's really a pleasure to fly (also because the destinations are not busy airports). Imo PM workload is not increased when flying F/D off, it's even reduced as the PM doesn't have to push all those buttons :8 But most importantly, keep having fun! Cheers |
Mrs-rodge
BA I believe do a monitored approach on every leg. Basically the other guy will take over at minimums and land. FO or Capt. I also here that they can only disconnect the autopilot when fully configured and fully established. In BA the pilot flying the approach is certainly allowed to hand fly if conditions permit, and the "Landing pilot" can take control anytime, regardless of configuration, as long as he/she's got the required visual references. Regarding the use of flight directors ( sabenaboy's question) - most leave them on into LHR, a few turn them off on a good day. On "my" fleet there's plenty of opportunity for non-F/D hand flying on the Caribbean sectors. Autolands: Now covered in the recurrent simulator details, no requirement to do any for recency on the aircraft. |
In 11 years and many many flying hours, I have never been in a situation where the autopilot is unable to maintain an acceptable flight path. If you have then I put it to you that you were somewhere you should not have been thus opening further questions. I don't claim to be an excellent pilot, nor will I ever disconnect AP, AT on an approach (whether its IMC or VMC) without the approval of the PNF. As many have already mentioned there is a time and a place to do this. I'm no idiot. Bottom line is though that flying an ILS is a pretty basic flying skill. I would be terribly ashamed if I would not be able to do this. |
I ever disconnect AP, AT on an approach (whether its IMC or VMC) without the approval of the PNF |
In 11 years and many many flying hours, I have never been in a situation where the autopilot is unable to maintain an acceptable flight path. If you have then I put it to you that you were somewhere you should not have been thus opening further questions. On the equally lovely 747-400 I have been on for the last two years, I have already had to disconnect the A/P at least once as it was clearly doing something patently silly. Come to think of it, even on the ultra-modern A321 I flew for seven years, a couple times it went "wonky" leaving no alternative but manual flight (one classic example was the dual FMGC timeout as I recall). The bottom line is, automatics are wonderful and quite reliable (especially on newer airplanes), but sooner or later they will fail/misbehave. As long as the guys/girls on the "sharp end" are the type that use automation as a mere tool, are well aware of the attitude and thrust required for each phase of flight and are comfortable flying manually, it will be a non-event. Automatics are your slave, NOT the other way around. By all means use them, but depend on them at your own peril. :ok: |
The following, I think, are facts:
1- the better you hand fly, the better you understand automation 2- the better you understand automation, the better you can master automation 3- the better you are at hand flying, the safer pilot you are 4- the better you are at automated flying, the safer pilot you are wait, a better order would be 4,3,1 and 2, maybe |
Microburst2002: I couldn't agree more. :ok:
Shifting the debate slightly to one side, perhaps some of you more experienced pilots might be kind enough to suggest a practical approach for inexperienced pilots to improve their handling without letting their inexperience endanger the operation? Putting the query in that way risks an outpouring of scorn from people who see my inexperience as a weapon with which to oust me from my 'shiny jet', but I firmly believe the self-improvement option is the only way ahead in a risk-averse industry. We all know there is a time and a place for 'practising'; so what do you think a 1000hr baby should be doing? MH152 |
Microburst2002 - 2,3, and 4 OK, 1, NO.
There are still people out there who will, as a first reaction to any problem, dump the autopilot and start handflying without proper analysis of the problem, the annoucement, "Disconnecting" usually comes a second or so after the buttons are pressed! More than once I have seen the automatics dumped, (on B747-400), when they were actually doing what they were programmed to do, either the FMC had been incorrectly programmed or the MCP had been mishandled - No, automatics are not always right, but, on aircraft such as the B757, 767 and particularly the B747-400, more often than not they are. |
Originally Posted by parabellum
(Post 6522125)
There are still people out there who will, as a first reaction to any problem, dump the autopilot and start handflying without proper analysis of the problem, the annoucement, "Disconnecting" usually comes a second or so after the buttons are pressed!
Not being a pilot myself, I can't say - but most of the correspondence I've received over the years, as well as a considerable amount I've read on here, tends to indicate that modern automation is about as good as it can get, and while it is no substitute for analytical human minds on the flight deck, any assumption that an unexpected change in vertical or horizontal track must be due to a fault in the automatics (as opposed to inadvertent mis-programming) is likely to be mistaken. If you're not happy, then disconnect the FMS routing, but surely using a basic altitude hold while diagnosing the problem should be the next step. If that doesn't have the desired effect, then go hand-flying, but bear in mind that it will consume a lot of effort - possibly more than you anticipate. To be clear, I'm not saying that handflying should be a method of last resort. If it's a good day, your airspace is relatively clear and you feel comfortable, nothing should stop you. However, if and when things head south one should give careful consideration to the increase in workload that handflying will put on the PNF, as well as yourself. |
To be clear, I'm not saying that handflying should be a method of last resort. If it's a good day, your airspace is relatively clear and you feel comfortable, nothing should stop you I honestly don't mean to denigrate your sentiments but I believe you do need to have been a jet transport pilot with both significant hand flying and automatic pilot monitoring experience to understand the subject under discussion. Hand flying these aircraft should be a normal accepted skill whatever the weather conditions. The automatics are there as an aid to navigation in general - they should not be treated as a crutch because of a pilot's lack of competency in pure flying ability. Judging from accident investigation reports pertaining to jet transports it seems the latter is now the norm. |
The automatics are there as an aid to navigation in general As DozyWannabe points out, Kegworth was a classic example of a time when full and proper use of the automatics may have brought about a better outcome. Hand flying these aircraft should be a normal accepted skill whatever the weather conditions. |
1- the better you hand fly the better you understand automation ...the better you may understand automation. which means that if you don't study the books frequently and learn from experience and keep studiying from time to time, you will never fully understand your automation. If you lack hand flying skills (for instance because you hardly have flown a few hours in a cessna, after which you directly came to the jet airliner and only hand flew it a little bit in the sim) automation becomes a "black box". You insert inputs, and outputs are the result, but you don't understand how things work inside the black box. That is, in my opinion, inacceptable from a professional pilot. I sometimes get surprised when fellows with over 2000 hours on a jet demonstrate a very poor understanding of the principles involved in flight and how they have a lot of misconceptions about automation modes. If you come from another jet airliner that you did fly manually frequently, then you will understand easily any automation, as long as the aircraft still has wings and engines. The following, I think, are requisites por a transport pilot: 1- master your automation 2- don't be afraid of hand flying (no AP/FD, no A/THR) I think that regular hand flying practise is good for both |
Originally Posted by Tee Emm
(Post 6522426)
I honestly don't mean to denigrate your sentiments but I believe you do need to have been a jet transport pilot with both significant hand flying and automatic pilot monitoring experience to understand the subject under discussion.
Hand flying these aircraft should be a normal accepted skill whatever the weather conditions. The automatics are there as an aid to navigation in general - they should not be treated as a crutch because of a pilot's lack of competency in pure flying ability. Judging from accident investigation reports pertaining to jet transports it seems the latter is now the norm. Parabellum has done a good job of putting what I wrote more succinctly.
Originally Posted by parabellum
(Post 6522606)
more relevant in the days sans Flight Engineer.
|
Originally Posted by DozyWannabe
The troubleshooting role becomes a lot easier to play when you're not trying to manually handle the jet at the same time. Again, I think that parcticing handflying in a troubleshooting situation should definitely be part of recurrent training, but in these modern times that also belongs in the simulator.
Originally Posted by Company's OM
Policy for Use of Automation during Flight Generally, automatic mode should be selected for cruise flight. In abnormal situations, automatic capabilities should be used as much as possible, in order to minimise flight deck workload. If in climb or approach, workload, weather conditions and crew fatigue permit, pilots may fly manually in order to maintain their basic flying skills. No offence intended, so please don't take it as such. I don't know your background (nothing in your profile) but unless you have spent considerable time on an airliner flight deck, an even if you made a good post, you're not in a good position to fully understand the subject. Respectfully, Sabenaboy |
@sabenaboy
My views on the subject are in agreement with yours, and I probably expressed them best here:
Originally Posted by DozyWannabe
(Post 5985826)
I don't know how many times one can repeat that automation was developed as a back-stop to allow flight crew to manage the flight more effectively - *not* as a substitute for airmanship period!
Even Bernard Ziegler in full flow never said "See? the aircraft is flying herself. Now you don't even have to monitor the instruments or maintain the situational awareness!". As far as the technical aspects of hand-flying airliners go, naturally I'm speaking from a position of relative ignorance (but like to think I'm reasonably well-versed in aeronautics, aviation history and accident investigation for a layman), and as such will defer, but as far as the business aspect of the things you are discussing goes - believe me it's not just happening to airlines. I got some positive feedback from a post I made the last time this subject was discussed, which is here: http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/43780...ml#post6183737 The knowledge I have regarding high-level design and specification of modern automatics (particularly as they relate to the A320 and her descendants) came from my Software Engineering/Reliability professor, Peter Mellor - who you'll find deeply involved in many of the discussions on the development of airliner FBW going back to the late 1980s. The A320 story became the introduction to our first-year Software Engineering module - both as an example of how complex, multiply-redundant safety-critical computer systems are designed and specified, and as a cautionary tale - how important it is to make sure that things are done right and how dire the consequences can be if they are not. It reappeared in the final year Software Reliability module, which went more into the detail of how redundancy was designed into the systems and implemented. This discussion doesn't really relate to that a great degree, since for the most part we are talking about modern autopilots (FMS/FMC etc.). I'm willing to stay in the background here, but as an interested observer I hope you don't mind me putting a view forward. |
@DozyWannabe
as an interested observer I hope you don't mind me putting a view forward. |
By all means Dozy.
But you must give the majority of us credit for the fact that we do not hand fly into busy TMA's, we do not hand fly through bad weather/around bad weather, and most probably do not hand fly in IMC. We do not do it because we can't, but for the fact that monitoring becomes a much more important task during these times. Good pilots know how to manage workload as well as many other things, and as such hand fly at appropriate times. I would add though that pilots do not have a good grasp of punctuation or spelling (for pilots add I)! I fly because I love it (bar the night flights!), I loved it since my first AEF flight out of BOH on the Chipmunk, why on earth do I want to manage the whole flight, bar the last 400', via the MCP and FMS. Regards GBD |
Originally Posted by gatbusdriver
(Post 6523642)
But you must give the majority of us credit for the fact that we do not hand fly into busy TMA's, we do not hand fly through bad weather/around bad weather, and most probably do not hand fly in IMC.
We do not do it because we can't, but for the fact that monitoring becomes a much more important task during these times. Good pilots know how to manage workload as well as many other things, and as such hand fly at appropriate times. |
and most probably do not hand fly in IMC. |
and most probably do not hand fly in IMC A few harmless (layered, non convective, no embedded CB's forecast or reported) cloud layers and good visibility below a cloud base of let's say 500' AGL would not necessarily stop me from hand flying raw data down the ILS. With lower cloud base and or low visibility I'll let "James" take care of tracking the ILS. Even though I've hand flown the A320 simulator without F/D along the ILS, to a full stop with 25' ceiling and 100m vis, doesn't mean I'd ever want to do that in the real a/c! :) |
From what I've heard hand flying raw data is highly unusual at BA. Disconnecting A/P (but keeping F/D + A/T on) somewhere on final would be the norm? Does that sound more correct? I can only speak for longhaul but why anyone would want to practise raw data flying after a 8-12 hour overnight sector defeats me. :confused::confused: Such flying can be practised on Caribbean visual approaches if one is desperate. And on my fleet the A/T is always on. |
Just thought the last minute in this episode of ACI was worth a mention, I suppose any awareness the public gains into this can only be good.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:05. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.