Autothrottle on Manual Landing

[777simmer 117]

I'm getting the feeling that a lot of people think being a pilot means sitting up front and getting a pretty view, while making sure the plane is doing what it's supposed to.  It's quite the opposite, really.  We're up there to be able step in when things go wrong.  Often, that requires taking direct control of the aircraft.

Very true, and that brings us right back to whether or not one should disconnect the AT during manual landings.

Of course you want that AT engaged under unfavourable conditions (fatigue, bad weather, etc).

But if you dont disengage that thing from time to time and practice, how do you expect to take over and accurately fly the aircraft when systems have failed?

By not manually flying (AP and AT off) that efficient cockpit scan you have developed over the years will go the drain faster then you think!

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

By not manually flying (AP and AT off) that efficient cockpit scan you have developed over the years will go the drain faster then you think!

 

Exactly.  While I was current (it lapsed at the end of last month and I just haven't gone back up for my BFR yet), I would sit right for a lot of my buddies trying to get their instrument currency back.  For many of them, they hadn't flown on instruments alone for so long that their scans must've been pretty rough.  Though I'll give one somewhat the benefit of the doubt because he had a DG that precessed terribly, I was always on them about something.  One got so lost in flying an approach that my "RPM" call was missed twice, and I ended up pulling the throttle myself.

 

...and this is why you have to fly so many approaches in a certain amount of time to maintain currency.

 

The very fact that the FAA released a formal statement to foreign carriers suggesting the use of the RNAV approach to SFO after the last incident really only underscores the issue that people are becoming all too dependent on automation.

[3-2-1-Now 126]

@Robin:

 

If I had a nickle for every time I read something completely inefficient and illogical in SOPs... Well, I wouldn't be able to buy the 777 the way it's priced now, but I'd come close to the Suspected Price ;-)

 

:lol:

 

My personal opinion: if you're going to fly it manually, go all the way. There have been incidents where the pilot was manually flying, and AT was engaged, but for some reason the AT system either went to IDLE or HOLD mode. Needless to say, no-one was operating the power until they realized the speed was coming back too far.

 

Automation makes pilots lazy (and I'm not trying to be provocative with that statement). If you become reliant on something being there, when it is suddenly not available, you can get into big problems (AF447 for example - the crew really believed you could not stall the aircraft, hence the action of TOGA and full aft side-stick - because that is what they had been taught for an aircraft operating normally. There was a gross mis-understanding of ABNORMAL operation which led to the crash).

 

Best regards,

Robin.

[Driverab330 74]

 Automation makes pilots lazy (and I'm not trying to be provocative with that statement). If you become reliant on something being there, when it is suddenly not available, you can get into big problems

That is very true especially to pilots who regularly flies long haul routes on the 773ER. Fortunately for the airline I know, they provide pilots with extra simulator section just for practicing manual handling, and pilots are required to demonstrate an manual thrust non precision engine out approach at least once a year during the Proficient Check in the sim to renew their aircraft and instrument rating.

 

And most of the guys I know regularly flies a manual thrust approach just because it is fun.

 

Comparing to the A/T system on the A330 the 777 system reacts much faster and much more accurate during the approach with gusty wind. If you are using manual thrust on the 777 there's a magenta thrust target you can follow on the engine instrument display ( I must admit its much easier to fly by just scanning the speed tape than chasing the magenta target )

 

The AF447 accident is an alarming reminder that we shall never forget the basic Power + Attitude = Performance ( airpseed ) . Like most modern airliners in the cruise if you keep the attitude at around 2.5 deg up with thrust setting to around 80-90% N1 ( depends on aircraft ) you will be doing alright.

 

To fly an accurate ILS approach, if one and fly a very accurate pitch and power setting with a little of bit of anticipation on the wind and the aircraft inertia, you will find the FD follows you all the way down.

 

Just my humble opinion.

 

Cheers : D

mike

[FLEX1978 373]

Well I agree with everyone's sentiments regarding automation, fortunately automation dependency is now a well discussed topic in aviation circles.

 

Regarding AF447, I don't believe for second that they didnt think the A330 could be stalled, they just didnt realise the aircraft was stalled. The crew knew they we're in alternate law, in fact they had become so preoccupied with roll being in direct that proper attention to the initial pitch reaction was ignored until it became extreme.

 

Anyway, don't want to thread drift, but ask yourself how many crew hand fly in cruise at night in normal law? And only a few have flown in crz in alternate law due to a failure. AF447 was a combination of over controlling, somatogravic illusion and a lack of basic airmanship.

[Driverab330 74]

Unfortunately, unless the cruising level is below FL290 or above FL410, due to regulatory requirement the use of autopilot is madatory in RVSM airspace. If I remember correctly the rule says you can manually fly during climb or descend but not level flight due to reduced vertical separation. People do manual climb and descend but pilots have to use AP after level and the airplane is in trim for level flight.

 

Anyways, that's why I love Flight sim, because I can hand fly in cruise in raw data without having to worry about the breaking the rule. : D

[Fabo 213]

 

 

If I remember correctly the rule says you can manually fly during climb or descend but not level flight due to reduced vertical separation. People do manual climb and descend but pilots have to use AP after level and the airplane is in trim for level flight.

 

AFAIK the rule states that AP must be available, not that it must be used.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Here's the FAA version (though this may not be all of the requirements - I didn't look at length because I'm at work):

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=74bdefab9dbe8ba629bbfbb530c20e6d&rgn=div9&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.3.10.13.9.3.32&idno=14

[FLEX1978 373]

AFAIK the rule states that AP must be available, not that it must be used.

Peter is correct, airline SOP dictates if you can hand fly or not.

[Driverab330 74]

I know, I used to think the exactly the same until I read the one of the issue of the Airbus safety magazine which had a state of "the use of the AP in RVSM is mandatory" and the RVSM ops in the Aerad a while ago. So I try to find some regulatory info. But of course this can vary from country to country..

 

Here is the UK CAA publication I found http://www.alantyson.com/aics/4Y125.PDF if you scroll to inflight procedure 5.2.3.2 you will see "one of the auto altitude control should be operative and engaged throughout the cruise ...." Of course one can argue that it didn't say its a MUST. So I guess its a gray the pilot still can decide whether he would hand fly it at cruise or not. But again I could be wrong.

 

Anyways, I think this thread had drift far enough. Just hope that the PMDG 777 can come out sooner.

 

Cheers

Mike

[hmsdreadnought 12]

The company differences are profound.  I have a friend who is a first officer on Alaska, but broke into the majors with Continental.  Her comment was that both airlines fly the NG quite differently. 

 

I had the pleasure and good fortune to end up in the T7 simulator at United at the AVSIM Conference all those many moons ago and got to shoot three approaches in the left hand seat, and two in the right.   The procedure the check ride pilot used, and confirmed as being SOP at United then, was to use AT all the way to the threshold, then retard the throttles to idle, which if I remember correctly, brought the engines to idle thrust for touch down.  I don't remember if the AT was disconnected by that, however, but you rode the AT pretty much to the numbers. 

 

United also taught a crosswind technique which was to crab into the wind, then transition to wing low several hundred feet up - the check ride pilot said the plane misbehaves when you uncrab it in level flight at that speed and altitude. 

 

What is complicated in the sim world is that hardware can conflict with the sim's throttle commands.  I have never managed to get my Warthog to work with complete satisfaction with the NGX AT.   It would be nice if PMDG had found a way around this - but given how many different throttles here are out there, I won't be surprised if it still does not work 100%....

 

Colin Ware

Seattle

[nawarren 83]

Hi all,

 

I was under the impression that autopilot was mandatory in RVSM airspace, due to being more accurate than a human, therefore creating less risk of a TCAS TA/RA. Could be wrong though. (wouldn't be the first time!)

 

Cheers

 

Neil

[777simmer 117]

It is mandatory and must be engaged as far as I know.

Or at least,mthat is how I interpreted it last time I read through the RVSM chapter.

 

Also I would find it a bit silly, if an AP would be required but does not have to be engaged.

 

Even if RVSM does not state that it has to be engaged (I will have a look at the text) I am pretty sure it is meant that way.

And if not, you would be one silly (real life) pilot to fly RVSM manually.

If you cause any problems by deviating from you altitude (TCAS) you have now delibirately caused a problem and you are going to have to explain that.

I for sure would not want to be the one discussing with regulatory agencies and my companies chief pilot (or worse, the judge) that although an AP must be on board and it must work, I choose not to use it because a grey area in the text gives me that wiggle room!

[777simmer 117]

I just had a look at Kyles link.

 

There is two things to RVSM approval.

1) the aircraft has to be equipped properly (AP required) and maintained properly

2) The operater has to show to the authority that proper procedures have been established (SOP) to operate in RVSM airspace.

 

I am pretty sure AP engaged will be one of those required SOPs.

I know, I used to think the exactly the same until I read the one of the issue of the Airbus safety magazine which had a state of "the use of the AP in RVSM is mandatory" and the RVSM ops in the Aerad a while ago. So I try to find some regulatory info. But of course this can vary from country to country..

Here is the UK CAA publication I found http://www.alantyson.com/aics/4Y125.PDF if you scroll to inflight procedure 5.2.3.2 you will see "one of the auto altitude control should be operative and engaged throughout the cruise ...." Of course one can argue that it didn't say its a MUST. So I guess its a gray the pilot still can decide whether he would hand fly it at cruise or not. But again I could be wrong.

Anyways, I think this thread had drift far enough. Just hope that the PMDG 777 can come out sooner.

Cheers

Mike

Yes point 5.2.3.2 clearly states it should be engaged unless required due to turbulences/re trimming/ etc but should be left disengaged to as short a period as possible.

 

I dont think you can argue with that.

[machine2035 176]