You all seem to miss the main point as " Bimmercop" has mentioned above, flying the sim and actually flying the actual 737 are two different things so one cant compare one to another. You may think you can land the 737 without any training in the real 737 but actually being up all alone trying to land whilst trying to contend with the visbility and weather conditions are alot different than sitting in front of your pc. And to all those who say they can land the 737 without any problems should apply to the Airline Industry for jobs for Pilots iam sure they be looking for your experince

 

I think that oversimplifies the underlying - and very interesting - question that we are really discussing here. What can modern hi-fidelity home-based flight simulation teach you? (and what does it teach badly, or even counter-productively).

 

The scenario - that we would actually have to land a 737 because both pilots are awol - is not one that anyone in this thread has seriously proposed will actually happen to them any time soon. It's a theoretical question that can be used to consider more useful real-world concepts.

 

In actual fact most of the discussion has actually been pretty interesting and sensible - almost everyone has identified significant problems with converting sim experience to a real-world emergency, and many think they just couldn't land it at all. Zero percent of the posts I've read have suggested that flying the NGX somehow makes you a type-rated ATP.

All the same people have made all the same points several times over, both pro and con, and we're not making any headway.

 

How about a compromise that the difference between nobody flying the 737 and an experienced simmer flying the 737 is the difference between a 0% probability of survival and a 20% probability of survival.

 

Is that still too optimistic?

How about a compromise that the difference between nobody flying the 737 and an experienced simmer flying the 737 is the difference between a 0% probability of survival and a 20% probability of survival.

 

With nobody flying the plane they'll land it from the ground. This was brought up the last time this question came up. Probability of survival over 95%.

 

I suspect the experienced simmer might learn as much as 5% of what he needs to know from the sim in order to do what the OP asked, which was basically, "Can I fly the plane since it's all on autopilot anyway?" which was expanded in his subsequent post.

 

We don't need to worry about a deranged experienced simmer commandeering a 737 for such a flight. Chances are very high that he'll wreck or otherwise damage the plane beyond its ability to take off and fly during the taxi to the takeoff runway... assuming he can convince ground control that he's a real pilot.

 

Once the plane is in the air, he'll be able to hand fly it well enough if necessary. We know that one all too well. Landing it safely is a whole other kettle of fish. "Can I land with the autopilot?" Well, maybe, if conditions are just right. Can you keep it on the runway in a crosswind after you touch down? Can you keep it on the runway even if the wind is dead calm?

 

Just asking the question indicates a lack of judgement that precludes ever getting into the cockpit. I'm not sure I'd let the OP borrow my car, much less fly an airplane.

 

Could *I* land a Cessna 172 from the right seat if the pilot was incapacitated? I'd give it my best shot. Could I do it in gusty crosswinds with turbulence? Remember, from that seat I couldn't see the airspeed indicator, unlike in the sim. I could only hope that my "controlled crash" would be better than an uncontrolled one into trees.

 

Hook

I think that oversimplifies the underlying - and very interesting - question that we are really discussing here. What can modern hi-fidelity home-based flight simulation teach you? (and what does it teach badly, or even counter-productively).

 

The scenario - that we would actually have to land a 737 because both pilots are awol - is not one that anyone in this thread has seriously proposed will actually happen to them any time soon. It's a theoretical question that can be used to consider more useful real-world concepts.

 

In actual fact most of the discussion has actually been pretty interesting and sensible - almost everyone has identified significant problems with converting sim experience to a real-world emergency, and many think they just couldn't land it at all. Zero percent of the posts I've read have suggested that flying the NGX somehow makes you a type-rated ATP.

 

I think it is the 'land' part of the question that causes most of the problems in these debates.

 

Landing a real plane, whatever it may be, takes real world training. It is the one thing nobody is going to learn from a simulator. This is why you have much polarization on this topic with RW pilots thinking 'are these guys completely nuts' and the sim experience guys thinking 'why can't I do it for real?'. Landing a plane is an enormous challenge, changing from one type of aircraft to another usually involves some time with instructors to get it right. (it can be as little as an hour or less, it could be 5 or more) the idea someone could land a plane with no training takes away all the hard work put in by real world pilots to actually learn how to do it and re-learn how to do it in different aircraft. A wise pilot will even take further instruction for swapping between left and right seat.

 

I for example would be prone to flying an airliner straight into the ground. One reason being the viewpoint, I'm use to sitting lower when on the ground from small aircraft. In the reverse I have seen airline pilots returning to GA after long breaks flare at 50 ft above the runway. (Not all, you will always get one that does it with no problems, but you can be sure they are with an instructor to make sure they have no issues!). I know a Halifax pilot who later trained for GA, the one thing he struggled with was the flare and landing..

 

Sims don't provide any form of depth perception whatsoever, which is what is needed to judge height above the ground, so this issue simply cannot be overcome flying simulators. It is impossible. You may pull off a smooth landing in a sim, but all the points I raised above regarding the RW environment are amplified a thousand times during approach and landing. In the real world you are in moving air, you are managing energy, 5 kts too slow, smoking hole, 5 kts too fast expect to float the entire length of the runway and make a smoking hole at the other end. Of course vertical speed is also a factor. Add to this that each landing is entirely different and calls on the pilot to use judgement, ability and split second reactions such as knowing exactly how and when to make corrections and when to bin it and go around and one cannot hope to learn this skill from simulation alone.

 

Just about everything else in flying though, can be learnt and practiced on a home PC sim (with the right approach) which makes them truly superb.

 

So I could ask myself, could I land a 737, sure I could, I would have to complete some more exams and do plenty of training though, I'm sure a good sim model would help a lot with that.

 

Could I land a real one by just practicing on the sim? If I believed that I would be quite happy if someone took away my licence to fly..

With nobody flying the plane they'll land it from the ground. This was brought up the last time this question came up. Probability of survival over 95%

I see that you brought it up earlier. They couldn't do it with the Helios Airways Flight 522 so is this something only in the newer variants?

I am amazed at the sheer volume of posts on this recurrent topic. This appears to be a monumentally difficult task with very poor odds for a successful outcome for a person who never flew anything other than the NGX simulator in FSX. RL pilots who have flown larger planes might do marginally better. I am just positive the 737 in RL would feel be a beast in the air, and much less nimble and responsive than we would expect. Unforgiving of approaching too fast or descending too steeply. The word "Lumbering Giant" comes to mind. I think an all-sim pilot would oversteer, over-compensate, and generally make a mess of things, even under the best of flight conditions. Throw in adversity and the picture gets darker and darker.

I bet that any simmer thrown into a real full motion simulator with no help "AT ALL" ("It's all yours, get on with it") would probably crash the a/c. Simply knowing how to progamme the FMC is not flying!!!!! Let's assume this: Both pilots are incapacitated. The co-pilot had a seizure whilst programming the fmc and pressed all the wrong buttons. Henceforth everything is garbage! You're on your own. What are your safe margins? The a/c seems full so your flap speeds and Vat will be high, but by how much? You don't want to stall the a/c at 100ft (or at any height)!!!!

A simmer who isn't a pilot would not know how the a/c feels at low speeds especially approaching an incipent stall. Over-correction is guaranteed. "Oops sorry, we're in a spin." Can you recover from that? Assuming you have the height of course!

You have, by sheer luck managed to get in contact with ATC (Did you declare a correct MAYDAY message?) They are guiding you to the nearest airport but it only has a 6,000ft rwy. Need I continue???

All the real 747 pilots that I know have told me that a proper full flight sim (the ones on hydraulic rams that rattle, shake and throw you around) does have quite a realistic feel in terms of interacting with all the control surfaces. Also it has been said that if anything these machines are slightly over-sensitive and that handling the actual aircraft is very slightly easier and if anything a tiny bit more forgiving. So if you can get an hour on one of these, and can handle that, and land in challenging situations, then you can probably handle the real thing!

I bet that any simmer thrown into a real full motion simulator with no help "AT ALL" ("It's all yours, get on with it") would probably crash the a/c. Simply knowing how to progamme the FMC is not flying!!!!! Let's assume this: Both pilots are incapacitated. The co-pilot had a seizure whilst programming the fmc and pressed all the wrong buttons. Henceforth everything is garbage! You're on your own. What are your safe margins? The a/c seems full so your flap speeds and Vat will be high, but by how much? You don't want to stall the a/c at 100ft (or at any height)!!!!

A simmer who isn't a pilot would not know how the a/c feels at low speeds especially approaching an incipent stall. Over-correction is guaranteed. "Oops sorry, we're in a spin." Can you recover from that? Assuming you have the height of course!

You have, by sheer luck managed to get in contact with ATC (Did you declare a correct MAYDAY message?) They are guiding you to the nearest airport but it only has a 6,000ft rwy. Need I continue???

 

Well, you can always set up scenario to achieve a given outcome - in this case you've added enough variables to doom the simmer to your preferred outcome - failure. You've had to invent a new type of CDU to get there too - I'm pretty sure the Boeing ones don't seize up if you mash a few random buttons! (Any rw boeing pilots reading this - can you try this out next flight and let us know if you get the BSOD - ta!).

 

It's an NG, you've got an autothrottle, do you stall it and crash in the NGX just because you've got a full plane? If you really had no data, the sim would actually be pretty good training for recognising the increased angle of attack etc as you come in too slow.

 

Contacting ATC is not exactly hard - start transmitting on the frequency it's on, if not I've got a pretty good set of charts on my iphone if that's all we've got! Also pretty confident that I would be just waiting for the chance to deliver that 'Mayday, mayday, mayday' I've been practicing - but also pretty sure the tower will accept your 'incorrect' mayday. "Well, both pilots are gone and we've got - for the first time in aviation history - some kid on the radio saying he's going to land the plane based on his FSX experience...but he didn't call mayday so lets send him to the short field without the ILS...'

 

See, seriously, I think there's a lot of people who are somewhat offended that this landing scenario might actually be possible based on prolonged, somewhat obsessive training with a modern medium-fidelity simulation such as the NGX. Sim is good for systems and NGX training suits the 'rotate, push some buttons, brake' approach that someone mentioned above as an option for flying a modern jet. Those who want this simmer to fail generally change the scenario to take out the automated systems and force some hand-flying (and yes, then the potential for disaster gets much higher).

 

But coming back to your original hypothesis - that a simmer with no flying experience will almost certainly crash a Level D sim if he's left to his own devices. Well, we've got a case study of exactly this scenario earlier in the thread, recorded on video. And the hypothesis is incorrect! Hurrah for science!

Well, you can always set up scenario to achieve a given outcome - in this case you've added enough variables to doom the simmer to your preferred outcome - failure. You've had to invent a new type of CDU to get there too - I'm pretty sure the Boeing ones don't seize up if you mash a few random buttons! (Any rw boeing pilots reading this - can you try this out next flight and let us know if you get the BSOD - ta!).

 

It's an NG, you've got an autothrottle, do you stall it and crash in the NGX just because you've got a full plane? If you really had no data, the sim would actually be pretty good training for recognising the increased angle of attack etc as you come in too slow.

 

Contacting ATC is not exactly hard - start transmitting on the frequency it's on, if not I've got a pretty good set of charts on my iphone if that's all we've got! Also pretty confident that I would be just waiting for the chance to deliver that 'Mayday, mayday, mayday' I've been practicing - but also pretty sure the tower will accept your 'incorrect' mayday. "Well, both pilots are gone and we've got - for the first time in aviation history - some kid on the radio saying he's going to land the plane based on his FSX experience...but he didn't call mayday so lets send him to the short field without the ILS...'

 

See, seriously, I think there's a lot of people who are somewhat offended that this landing scenario might actually be possible based on prolonged, somewhat obsessive training with a modern medium-fidelity simulation such as the NGX. Sim is good for systems and NGX training suits the 'rotate, push some buttons, brake' approach that someone mentioned above as an option for flying a modern jet. Those who want this simmer to fail generally change the scenario to take out the automated systems and force some hand-flying (and yes, then the potential for disaster gets much higher).

 

But coming back to your original hypothesis - that a simmer with no flying experience will almost certainly crash a Level D sim if he's left to his own devices. Well, we've got a case study of exactly this scenario earlier in the thread, recorded on video. And the hypothesis is incorrect! Hurrah for science!

 

 

I don't think there is anyone offended that the landing scenario might actually be possible.

 

Because anyone who is saying it is not, knows why it is not.

 

So taking one tiny point,

 

What is the correct Mayday call?

 

And why is it important that one makes a very good effort to make sure it is correct?

 

And when do you make it?

 

This is one of a thousand tasks one needs to get right in any emergency situation which in my opinion only goes to illustrate just how out of depth the average simulation pilot would be in this situation.

 

OK if you mess up a little bit with the call ATC will ask for what you missed, but if you don't know they basic structure of the call, calling just Mayday, Mayday, Mayday is not getting you anywhere and time just got wasted.

 

I do not think either in the real world that ATC would expect you to fly in using automated systems, you will be pressing that little red button and hand flying it down.

 

That is simply because to rely on automated systems is not easier at all. One needs even more training and experience than for hand flying to safely monitor automated systems during an approach... it really is not some easy option, like it is in FSX.

 

But some of us will know that already. I've a Masters degree in Aerospace Engineering as well as the PPL, so I know just a little bit about automated aircraft systems, how they operate and how they are operated..

While almost anything you can imagine might be possible under a given set of circumstances, we can only hope that this fantasy remains just so. Any individual, regardless of their total flight time on their home PC is ill-equipped to handle the myriad variables that are part and parcel of flight in the real world, a place where mistakes are not solved by pressing the 'reboot' key- but often result in catastrophic loss of life. The NTSB stats prove that many of the worst air disasters were caused by "pilot error". One shudders at the thought of a person who may never have flown ANY A/C in the R/W trying to fly something the size of a 737, no matter how gingerly they handled the control input surfaces.

 

I don't deny that a few people might step into a LEVEL D and 'actually land the plane', I only assert that the adrenaline rush of trying to save a REAL A/C with REAL passengers in a disaster scenario is simply too steep a mountain for a person who moments before was immersed in watching a movie or taking a nap...and now has 200 souls looking to him/her to save them.

 

It's extremely unlikely to ever happen - not to mention the sheer inertia that would ensue as the cabin crew tried to 'decide' if Passenger X was a suitable substitute to entrust the A/C and PAX to in the emergency. My bet is the plane might crash before they could make up their minds. Of course if the plane was on full autopilot with all systems operational in level flight with plenty of fuel onboard, things might look up a bit.

 

I think the flight sim community might hope our NSX flight hours would be sufficient with a little help from both ground-based pilots (via radio) and the big guy upstairs (God). Miracles can and do happen... so it's "possible but not likely" in my view, that the fantasy scenario presented here might end well. God willing we'll never find out.

 

While we're on the subject, one wonders whether the airlines have considered training cabin crew members to handle this scenario themselves? If not, why not? For their own sakes, if for no one else's, one would think the crew members would want to know at least the rudiments of taking control of the airplane in this situation. They could even have some SIM time on the level D? Then one considers the Air Marshals. If one is aboard, is he/she qualified to land the plane in an all-out emergency? If not, why not?

 

I know the pilot's union will want to weigh in on "faux" pilots - but it seems logical, no?

While we're on the subject, one wonders whether the airlines have considered training cabin crew members to handle this scenario themselves? If not, why not? For their own sakes, if for no one else's, one would think the crew members would want to know at least the rudiments of taking control of the airplane in this situation. They could even have some SIM time on the level D? Then one considers the Air Marshals. If one is aboard, is he/she qualified to land the plane in an all-out emergency? If not, why not?

 

Well, because a few hours in a simulator doesn't make you qualified. The only people qualified are the pilots. So for that to make sense you'd really have to bring two extra pilots on board that sit around waiting just in case the first pair pass out.

i agree that a few hours in a simulator (even a full-motion big-dog "RW" simulator) does not make you 'qualified', but on the other hand, for Sky Marshals, and possibly senior cabin crew members, doesn't it make sense to at least have them partly trained?

 

SOME training is better than absolutely NO training, at least if it came down to 'them or nobody' I'd like my chances of survival more with a person that at least had some CLUE what to do- again, I'm presuming that the cabin crew might be very reluctant to hand control of the plane to a mere 'passenger X', even if that passenger asserted he/she was fully-qualified to fly the airplane.

 

Of course the other scenario no one mentioned was what if you were NOT in a 737? Say you were in an Air Bus? And all your FSX hours were 100% Boeing (like me)- I'd be next to no use in an Air Bus (even though I fly a Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog control pair [Joy/Throttle quadrant] in lieu of a RW Yoke.)

 

To my mind, a smart airline management team would rather have a second-string pilot (cabin crew member) than NO pilot in the event that BOTH 'real' pilots were incapacitated.

 

I know there will be many who object, saying such training in and of itself opens a Pandora's Box from a security point-of-view, but you have to try to weigh the positives and negatives. I think the CHANCE of saving passengers is worth investing in supplemental flight training, even at very rudimentary levels, for cabin crew! I can even envision a 'EMERGENCY CHEAT SHEET' that could appear on the PFD (or EFB) to be used by a cabin crew member. Abbreviated checklists to get the plane into straight/level flight, while giving time from ground support to work through all the steps to reprogram the FMC (as needed) and direct the plane to the closest viable landing location.

 

No solution is perfect- and this is one big reason why the plane has TWO qualified pilots (even more on long-haul flights) on board.

i agree that a few hours in a Simulator (even a full-motion big-dog "RW" simulator) does not make you 'qualified', but on the other hand, for Sky Marshals, and possibly senior cabin crew members, doesn't it make sense to at least have them partly trained? SOME training is better than absolutely NO training, at least if it came down to 'them or nobody' I'd like my chances of survival more with a person that at least had some CLUE what to do- again, I'm presuming that the cabin crew might be very reluctant to hand control of the plane to a mere 'passenger X', even if that passenger asserted he/she was fully-qualified to fly the airplane. Of course the other scenario no one mentioned was what if you were NOT in a 737? Say you were in an Air Bus? And all your FSX hours were 100% Boeing (like me)- I'd be next to no use in an Air Bus (even though I fly a Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog control pair [Joy/Throttle quadrant] in lieu of a RW Yoke.)

 

It doesn't make sense to me. The aircraft is certified to fly with two pilots. Not two pilots and a sky marshall in backup.

 

Of course, in a perfect world everyone should be a pilot

What is the correct Mayday call?

 

May Day, May Day, May Day

This is 'a/c callsign' followed by

May Day, May Day, May Day

'a/c callsign' is at Position (Lat and Long), or distance and bearing from landmark or radio facility

We are/have (describe nature of emergency)

We require (describe nature of assistance needed)

Aboard are (describe number of people, age and condition if relevent)

May Day, May Day, May Day

 

Once call is responded to append Mayday to your callsign

e.g. Speedbird 2578 becomes "Mayday Speedbird 2578"

 

Do not say "Callsign, we are declaring an emergency" instead of Mayday. It doesn't get the correct response from ATC and is often interpreted solely as a Pan call.

For example Pan Pan Pan, this is Speedbird 2578. We require immediate diversion due to a dangerously ill passenger. That's an emergency but NOT a Mayday.

 

Declaring a Mayday gets everybody's attention. It can always be cancelled if the situation is resolved.