About one short sector a month depending on crew workload
and whether I'm in the mood. Also I fly the omnis while letting
the kid keep the magenta on his side.

What a pile of macho horse sheet...

If you all all hand fly so much how do you eat your doughnuts?

Why do I wade through pages of this utter diatribe..

Sabenaboy says We probably come from different generations and types of flying. I started flying single engine single pilot freight many years ago. No F/D, no GPS, no AP, and NO MAGENTA LINE. My F/Os will disagree with you about your statement regarding exaggerations. If the weather is poor than I will have my low time F/O use the F/Ds for departures and arrivals. At least my F/Os understand the true meaning of situational awareness, and not only to terrain, but to what the aircraft is doing.:ok:

When I said I thought you were exaggerating, that did not mean I didn't believe you. I tried to say that, unless you're not flying a "modern" plane, you're exaggerating when you decide not to use the automatics when there's a good reason to. Don't get me wrong: If you look at my previous posts you can see that I still do A LOT of basic flying in my A320 with everything switched off (except the engines :\ ) and that I am a fierce defender of airline pilots having to maintain basic flying skills by taking the automation out whenever the conditions permit. The question is: What are you going to decide if the metar says that both cloud-base and visibility are very close to the minima for your Cat I ils approach? I'm sure that you and myself and all of our F/O's are ABLE to fly to the minima with the "needles centered" without F/D and without A/thr. (Our training manager joked that he would ask Airbus for a discount if we ordered our next A320's without F/D installed) I would think it's wiser to keep at least the F/D on in such conditions. Chances are that will not happen more then once or twice/year.

I think that every pilot should fly manually (A/P, F/D and A/Thr off) very regularly when there's no reason not to, but I also think that when there is a good reason to use the automatics a wise pilot should do so.

I fully agree that autoflight systems are installed to reduce the workload for the crew and NOT because the crew can't fly without, but I really do not feel the need to prove that on the line with a full load of pax in marginal conditions even if I'm 100% sure that I CAN!

sabenaboy: >"You could even say that you should change your job if you're not comfortable HAND-FLYING that plane. I'll say it again: they're all big Cessna's."

No way. :ugh: A Cessna's (152, 172, 182) engine doesn't take 8-10 sec to respond to a power demand.

Agree with your other stuff.

sabenaboy: >"I still do A LOT of basic flying in my A320 with everything switched off (except the engines http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...ies/wibble.gif )"

Switched off? Do you pull some breakers to force your A320 into Direct Law (otherwise it's hardly basic flying)?

If so, I expect you need to avoid telling the regulators about it - or your management. I suspect they just might be spooked ...:rolleyes:

Come on - that's a little bit over-combative. In layman's terms handflying is still handflying whether what's between you and the flight surfaces consists of braided cable, an electronic FBW system or anything inbetween.

On my first ever line flight on B737 EFIS,
The Line- trainer told me to fly raw data, full rose ( so no map) to cruising level, and then again disconnect all at TOD to touchdown...
It made me getting a feeling for the aircraft very easily,and only once comfortable with the BASIC of the aircraft should you progress to autoflight modes and its tricks and pittfalls.

I fly raw data as much as possible when fatigue, traffic and weather allows me to, and urge my FO's to do the same.

Ps. Sabena has always been recognised as a reference in Safety and Crew proficiency:ok: isnt't it Sabenaboy:} Now for Sobelair...These were the cowboys:E:ok:

Does automation save fuel?
 

Using automation saves fuel!? NO, I disagree! (I already gave an example in this post)

Let me give you an other example that happened to me just a few days ago:
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/7538/gozn.jpg

I was approaching CFU from the NNE. At aprox. 200 NM out we realised that the B737 20 NM ahead of us was also going to CFU. (The 737 was from a well known LCC with HQ in Ireland) And even though we were flying CI 10 in our A320 , we were catching up on him. We asked for his speed via ATC. We reduced from 270 to 260 kts when he replied his speed was 265 kts.

The weather was severe cavok with "unlimited" visibility, not a single cloud around and no wind! We were both transferred to CFU radar at about 70 nm out. ATC told the 737 that he was nr 1 for landing and that he could proceed to GAR for the VOR 35 app. We were told we were nr 2 and got vectored to BETAK.

When I go to CFU with such conditions, I would jump on the occasion and ask for a right hand visual to rwy 35 over the water! Prompted by me, ATC asked him if he would be flying the full procedure VOR app or if he was interested in a visual app.

He turned down the visual and opted for the full procedure! :ugh::ugh::ugh:
(he was at FL160 with 50 NM to go to GAR!)
While we were vectored beyond BETAK around the island while being told to reduce speed (already flying 250 below FL100), he flew the whole app at very slow speed. Even when reducing to 180 kts at BETAK, we were only 5 NM behind him on final and landed 2 min later. I strongly suspect he flew the whole approach on the FMGC speed and profile.

Now I can fully understand that a pilot follows the FMGC computed speeds during descend as per SOP, but this pilot could easily have saved 3 minutes, 12 miles and >100 kg of fuel by doing a nice and easy visual app. :ugh:

We, after vacating the rwy had to hold position one extra minute because the mandatory follow me was still busy with the 737. We arrived on blocks 8 mins later and with 200 kgs less fuel then I had hoped to be (If I had received a visual with no delay)!

To me this crew is the equivalent of an 85 yr old lady doing 70 km/h on a German highway!

Perhaps SOMETIMES automation can save fuel, but this crew certainly missed a great opportunity to use some airmanship to save fuel, time and money!

Of course one should have some airmanship before being able to use it! :rolleyes:

Once you find yourself welded to using the FD which after all is only an aid to navigation, and not essential to fly an ILS, then you are a member of the automatics addiction club. You are to be pitied.:{

I am not able to get this arithmetic. Four sectors a day to be proficient to fly a normal approach with auto trim then how many sectors ( Sim Sessions)required with failures and direct law landing? Also pilots fly more accurately than digital autopilots, Automation is waste of time and money, FMCs do not save fuel. Wouldn't my first aircraft the DC3 with jet engine solve all your problems.

Sabenaboy, unless you can state how much extra fuel they used because of the way they flew their approach you're talking nonsense. Yes, it may have caused you to use more fuel (it's a challenge causing your competitors to use a bit extra but it can be done) but then that may be your fault for not doing something about it earlier.

Anyway, that's not what people mean when they say automation flies more efficiently than you do.

Airbus "handflying"
 

DozyWannabe: A320-330-340-380 FBW Normal Law may have the look and feel of basic handflying, but it's very far from it - loads of protections, loads of nonlinearity of control surface response. Have a look at Normal Law specs.

Gegenbeispiel - I'm well aware of Airbus FBW Normal Law augmentations (hell, just have a look at my post history!), but in practical terms it's not really anything more than an evolution of the artificial feel technology that airliners have been using for over half a century.

Obviously, if you lose the augmentations then you'll need to step up your efforts a bit, but in real terms it's not a great deal different than, say, losing hydraulic assist on a B737. That's why they train for these things in the sim!

Certain carriers prohibit visual approaches to some airfields in Europe. Quit taking cheap shots at other pilots without knowing the full story.

Just Wrong.

It is good to see that one or two people here have got the message. Trying to hand fly in a busy TMA with continual flight path variations and frequency changes loads up the PNF unnecessarily and is positively dangerous. R/T gets missed and checks get rushed, both can be fatal.


You are joking aren't you?


Sabenaboy - Pray tell us more about the Ryanair in front of you at Corfu. How many times had the pilot flying been there before? Was it a check ride? Was it a pilot under training? What is the Ryanair SOP for Corfu? You sound rather intolerant.

No, pointless procedures do that.

And maybe not "more accurately", but with "more finesse" for sure, and that's only if they're good.