Very good PMDG landing video

[WR269 367]

Noticed this, a really well put together video using voice control, on the approach to rwy 34 at YMML (I personally detest that approach, can never get it right)

 

http://youtu.be/MFGc1UaOq1M

[3-2-1-Now 126]

I'll have to give that approach a shot.

 

Great view from the cockpit and not from outside like most videos, and no nasty music either!

 

Best regards,

Robin.

[WR269 367]

LOL...yes, no music on this one.

 

Give the approach a try...the Lizzie5V STAR for rwy 34 has a visual component...you follow the STAR to overhead rwy 26 at YMEN and then make a visual turn to rwy 34 at YMML

[Rations 102]

The voice of the MD-11 callouts is the flattest and most boring ever. I wonder whether the base sound is from a human, or whether it is purely machine generated. It is interesting that they used a female voice instead of the traditional male voice, especially in such an automated way.

[Taipan 30]

Thanks for posting Will

 

On a side note - my spoilers deployed this time

[SE-KMG 2]

The voice of the MD-11 callouts is the flattest and most boring ever. I wonder whether the base sound is from a human, or whether it is purely machine generated. It is interesting that they used a female voice instead of the traditional male voice, especially in such an automated way.

 

 

 

Early human factors research in aircraft and other domains indicated that female voices were more authoritative to male pilots and crew members and were more likely to get their attention. Much of this research was based on pilot experiences, particularly in combat situations, where the pilots were being guided by female air traffic controllers. They reported being able to most easily pick out the female voice from amid the flurry of radio chatter.

More recent research, however, carried out since more females have begun working in aviation as pilots and air traffic controllers, indicates that the previous hypothesis may be unreliable. General human factors wisdom now indicates largely that, either due to current culture or changing attitudes, an automated female voice is no more or less effective than the male voice.

 

Source: Wikipedia

[Taipan 30]

yep, thats I TRIED TO USE A PROFANITY HERE - AREN'T I STUPID!ing betty... maybe the fighter pilots werent married and were very keen for female company, then pilots that are married these days learnt at home to "tune out" the female voices

 

make that "female dog-ing" betty lol

[Rations 102]

Early human factors research in aircraft and other domains indicated that female voices were more authoritative to male pilots and crew members and were more likely to get their attention. Much of this research was based on pilot experiences, particularly in combat situations, where the pilots were being guided by female air traffic controllers. They reported being able to most easily pick out the female voice from amid the flurry of radio chatter.

More recent research, however, carried out since more females have begun working in aviation as pilots and air traffic controllers, indicates that the previous hypothesis may be unreliable. General human factors wisdom now indicates largely that, either due to current culture or changing attitudes, an automated female voice is no more or less effective than the male voice.

 

I did read about this, but it still seemed interesting. Regardless, the mundane voice of the MD-11 autopilot certainly grabs one's attention.

 

I can see the similarity between the voice of the autopilot and the voice of the person in the video you posted. However, her recordings probably went through some autotune of some sort, as they don't sound as flat in the video as they do in the cockpit.

[3-2-1-Now 126]

The removal of intonation is deliberate. It eliminates any meaning (alarm, distress, or conversely, happiness or joy) from the spoken words, leaving only the dictionary definition of the words spoken ("fire" for example). It is factual whilst leaving out the emotion, and doesn't add to the stress already being encountered.

 

The research into female, male and even kids voices is very interesting. Not widely published is the trialling of using the voices of the kids of pilots in alerts, but this was quickly dismissed as it was deemed unethical, as well as unpractical. The aim of the alerts is to get a resolution as quickly as possible with least stress and mistakes. Stress leads to mistakes, which leads to more stress, destruction of concentration, and ultimately disaster.

 

The use of a female voice has been shown to reduce stress in men and heighten attention to a task. It's not the macho side that it appeals to but is actually seen as a "mother figure" helping to resolve what is usually a crisis at that point (fire, failure, missile alert).

 

It must be looked at in the context of military personnel, as this was the target audience. Based on this research however, MD carried it over to their commercial jets.

 

IMHO MD has the most intuitive and best aural alerting system in existence. No-nonsense, clear alerts that SPEAK the problem. No looking for lights trying to figure out if it is a takeoff config alert or pressurization problem. Though Boeing took over MD, they never made use of the alerting system, which IMHO is completely unforgivable in the shadow of the Helios crash.

 

Best regards,

Robin.

[Rations 102]

If all vocal intonation (not to be confused with musical intonation) is removed, I would imagine that the effect of having one gender over the other would also be minimized. I especially do not think that the "motherly" element is present in these recordings!

 

Regardless, I agree that this style is probably the most effective for commercial aviation purposes. It is hard to ignore such a uniquely boring voice. I like the standard English of the Airbus call outs, but the recording quality seems to be slightly poor. Even from watching numerous videos, there were still some call outs that I was unable to determine confidently. I even misunderstood a few.

 

Vocally, my favorite call out voice is that of the PMDG B747. It is clear and exact, but still possesses somewhat of a human element in it. The newer Boeing callouts sound too human to me.

[3-2-1-Now 126]

The later Airbus have better systems. There are some videos around of the earlier version, and it sounds awful!

 

You can still tell the gender - the Airbus uses a distinctly male voice, whilst MD uses a female.

 

The newer Boeing callouts sound too human to me.

Interesting... got an example?

 

Best regards,

Robin.

[Rations 102]

You can definitely still determine the gender, but if there really isn't any emotion (motherly element), I wouldn't prefer one gender over the other.

 

I shouldn't have said "newer" Boeing call outs. I just assumed that the ones in real-world videos were the newer versions of those featured in PMDG aircraft.

 

Here's one of many cockpit landing videos on YouTube:

Especially on the 50 . . . 40 . . . 30 . . ., the voice sounds a little too full and warm to me. It's difficult to describe. I just like the voice of the PMDG B747, with its slight grittiness and texture, better.

[3-2-1-Now 126]

Hmm - is it definitely new and just just the standard of recording?

 

Best regards,

Robin.

[Rations 102]

As I mentioned previously, I do not know whether the call outs heard in real-life videos are new or not. I prefer the call outs of major manufacturers in the following order:

1. PMDG Boeing

2. Airbus

3. McDonnell Douglas

4. Real Boeing

[3-2-1-Now 126]

I think it is the recording quality. Some videos are just awful, whilst others are good (like that one).

 

I like the MD aural alerting system in general, so that is #1 for me, but Boeing/Airbus are fine in terms of the spoken altitude calls.

 

Best regards,

Robin.