What sim is this? It's going to be interesting to know how an apporach/landing like this could be screwed up...

 

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2013/07/10/ac-boeing-flight-simulator-tuchman-pkg.cnn.html

 

http://www.california-airways.com/FlightSimulator.html

 

Looks like a custom made AATD from Precision Flight Controls (http://flypfc.com/). PFC training devices run X-Plane 8 or 9 with custom made aircrafts "add-ons". Visuals and textures looks like it's X-Plane to me, indeed.

No doubt the flight crew screwed up, but the CNN video is ridiculous in my opinion. How about that guy try it in a real 777 with real inertia after 10 hours long haul through the night instead of sitting comfortably in a Cessna sim flying FSX with a couple of go flight panels.

 

They didn't fly the full 10 hours, they had relief pilots.

They didn't fly the full 10 hours, they had relief pilots.

I never said they did, that would be illegal. I can safely say you don't know what it is like being a crew member in a heavy jet for 10+ hours, trying to sleep in a small bunk for a few hours then being woken to land at a international airport.

They didn't fly the full 10 hours, they had relief pilots.

Doesn't make a blind bit of difference. I can tell you from experience that relief is almost more tiring than actually flying the airplane, at least when you're in the big chair up front you've something to keep your mind on other than staring blankly at a wall in the wendy house for 4-5 hours of "rest".

 

Regards,

Ró.

 

Edit: Beaten to it...  ^_^

Edited July 12, 201312 yr by Rónán O Cadhain

I never said they did, that would be illegal. I can safely say you don't know what it is like being a crew member in a heavy jet for 10+ hours, trying to sleep in a small bunk for a few hours then being woken to land at a international airport.

 

Airline pilots have been doing this for years and every single day there's a route like this, no excuse...

I was talking to a retired pilot who had a gazillion hours and he had an interesting comment to say.

 

These pilots, one a Training Captain with alot of hours, one a Captain on other type aircrafts and in training for 777 but with alot of hours, sometimes end up in this 10,000 hour syndrome. He saw it more than his fair share. 

 

What happens is that as a training Captain, you know this guy your training for the type rating has made it this far with alot of hours, and if you see problems, you suspect they are not that big a deal as other training Captains have passed him as well. You suspect at this point in his career he knows what he is doing for basic flying skills not to mention flying heavies. But some pilots just "freeze" under intense pressure

 

He mentions this guy froze and made a very elemental pilot mistake- that of everything was going to be ok, without doing something about what was unfolding.- In his opinion. 

 

 

Makes sense to me. Interesting. Although if your a training Captain, and you see airspeed and altitude at very unsafe levels or heading that way very fast, you would either make strong commands to correct it or even just take over. Your going to crash. You do whatever you can to avert it by instinct alone. 

 

Airline pilots have been doing this for years and every single day there's a route like this, no excuse...

Rob's point was that they were flying for the full 10 hours, not just the hours when they were up front.

 

Regards,

Ró.

Oh, I didn't know you were qualified in the T7 as well.

 

Bruno I think he was referring to a stall condition. Pulling the yoke is the last thing you would do.

In fact, nose down and full power to prevent a stall. Too close to the ground on this one though possibly. He lost too much airspeed.

Daniel

 

Funny, I thought most pilots IN NORMAL FLIGHT CONDITIONS learned that adding throttle is not good as long as the plane is not pointing in the right direction but, since the plane was apparently on the verge of stall, adding throttle was probably one of the things to do.

 

 

My point exactly. Thanks for re-emphasizing this.

 

Rgds,

Bruno

Landings always happen in the most inappropriate moment of a flight: at the end.

 

Still three experienced professional pilots should be sufficient for at least one of them to watch the airspeed on final. Especially since all of them had to be aware of their unstable starting-too-high-rather-too-late approach.

 

Still curious to find out about all the contributing factors in this tragedy ...

And Dillon, don't get me wrong. I will say it one last time, they screwed up for sure, airlines have stable approach criteria for a reason. All am trying to say is a number of factors come into play, fatigue, airline culture, automation dependency, a potential lack of understanding of the FMA and exactly what mode the automatics are functioning at.

 

None of that was addressed in the video, only "look I can land a Cessna in flight sim"

 

At the end of the day they botched a visual approach in CAVOK and have to live with the deaths of two of the passengers. Yes, flight crew are crossing the globe longhaul everyday, but if you don't think LH & ULH fatigue is a potential risk you should probably have a chat with with some longhaul crew or at least do a bit of research yourself.

As a passenger I want the pilot on-board the aircraft with me. Reason why is in a life or death situation the pilot's survival instincts will kick in to save his life, and the lives of the passengers and other crew.

 

If the pilot is not on-board and flying remotely, then their is no need for survival instincts, because the pilot will live regardless of the outcome.

 

Not sure I could live with myself if I crashed an aircraft with 300 people on-board that I was flying remotely, The concept is flawed. A good captain goes down with his ship.

 

Flying a military UAV is different because no one is on-board so you are not responsible for the lives of passengers.

 

So if the Pilot is going to continue to be on-board monitoring systems then it is in the best interest of flight safety to keep him well trained in flying, and keep his job as engaging as possible, so they are on the ready when needed.

Whether you like it or not, there are companies working on taking the pilot out of the cockpit.

 

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Single_Pilot_Airliner_208774-1.html

Whether you like it or not, there are companies working on taking the pilot out of the cockpit.

 

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Single_Pilot_Airliner_208774-1.html

 

This will never happen and passengers will never go for it. Here you have 3 guys in the cockpit and still couldn't get it right. Going down to one is not an option when flying passengers as everyone on board has a vestige interest in living.

This will never happen and passengers will never go for it. Here you have 3 guys in the cockpit and still couldn't get it right. Going down to one is not an option when flying passengers as everyone on board has a vestige interest in living.

 

Yup,

 

For a play pilot I have flown an incredible amount in real life, and for many years, several times week. I think I am informed, and knowledgeable better than the average traveler with what is more than a passing interest in the aircraft environment and industry.

 

There is no way I would fly without humans up front, even if there is a greater risk that they might do something, well, human, that eats our lunch. Anyone who ever owned a Peugeot 505 would never trust any kind of technology any where near 100% ever again.

 

Kind regards,

Airline pilots have been doing this for years and every single day there's a route like this, no excuse...

 

Gee, you're a hard man Dillon!

 

 

There is no way I would fly without humans up front

 

Like I said in an earlier post,  I too would not fly in a pilot-less aircraft.  But one day it will be normal too,  and people will look back on these days and think we're nuts to let a human pilot fly people.

 

I'm not flying on the 787 any time soon either.

 

RJ

And Dillon, don't get me wrong. I will say it one last time, they screwed up for sure, airlines have stable approach criteria for a reason. All am trying to say is a number of factors come into play, fatigue, airline culture, automation dependency, a potential lack of understanding of the FMA and exactly what mode the automatics are functioning at.

 

None of that was addressed in the video, only "look I can land a Cessna in flight sim"

 

At the end of the day they botched a visual approach in CAVOK and have to live with the deaths of two of the passengers. Yes, flight crew are crossing the globe longhaul everyday, but if you don't think LH & ULH fatigue is a potential risk you should probably have a chat with with some longhaul crew or at least do a bit of research yourself.

.

 

On short final in VMC there is only one piece of information you look at inside the cockpit. Airspeed. Period. Nothing else. Your eyes are mainly outside looking at the lateral and vertical cues, and airspeed. Cessna or 747, all the same. Who knows what these guys were looking at