Yes, I think I might be able to land a 777 safely in the real world as I've done so many times in a Level-D simulator, and although not 100% accurate to the real thing, the difference becomes apparent from about 100 feet above the ground when the sense of speed kicks in.

 

So I guess what I'm saying is I'd be fine to about 100 feet then I'd probably panic and over-rotate on the flare causing the plane to level off, the speed to drop way below vref, stall and hit the deck really hard causing the gear to collapse rip off an engine or two leading to a fire ball and loss of life!

 

So yeah I reckon I could do it

In 1993 and 1994 I spent 6 hours flying the B737 300/500 simulator at the "Lufthansa Verkehrsfliegerschule" in Bremen/Germany. My only aeronautical experience were many Amiga-FS-hours (1993) and some 20 hours of C172 PPL training (1994):

It is possible to fly and land such an aircraft (without A/P but in VMC) as long as you know your speeds and flap configurations. The first 4 hours on the B737 sim I used the A/T (as it was still too busy for me to handle also the thrust manually), but the last two hours it went quite fine even with manual thrust.

So in my opinion: someone who knows the systems on a "PMDG-like" plane by heart, sould be able to "handfly" (take off, level and land) a 737 in VMC. A/T, A/P (and Autoland) should be used in IMC though, unless you are "a hell of an IFR-PRO" already. 

 

As I mentioned already in another thread:

Last week I had the possibility to test the Oculus Rift (V1). One of the major impressions I had was the missing feeling of accelerations. The environment created by the virtual headset is so immersive, that your mind misses instantaneously the accelerations/decelerations corresponding to the visual input...

 

So, back on topic, the "ease of flying the real thing" is partly due to the existence of corresponding accelerations to the visual impressions. This makes flying a Level-D sim (and its "RW counterparts") easier than on the static PC-SIM installation. But with one exception: in IMC it is the other way around. Here the presence of "misleading" acceleration reception is part of the learning curve which is actually untrainable in front of a PC screen (and even in a 3D environment like a virtual headset).

 

Greetings,

Claus

 

Edit: I just saw that this thread is inside the T7 forum. The "surprising element" of the "heavies" is their latency. Also difficult to experience in front of a PC-screen...

Edited May 25, 201412 yr by vr-pilot

In 1993 and 1994 I spent 6 hours flying the B737 300/500 simulator at the "Lufthansa Verkehrsfliegerschule" in Bremen/Germany. My only aeronautical experience were many Amiga-FS-hours (1993) and some 20 hours of C172 PPL training (1994):

It is possible to fly and land such an aircraft (without A/P but in VMC) as long as you know your speeds and flap configurations. The first 4 hours on the B737 sim I used the A/T (as it was still too busy for me to handle also the thrust manually), but the last two hours it went quite fine even with manual thrust.

So in my opinion: someone who knows the systems on a "PMDG-like" plane by heart, sould be able to "handfly" (take off, level and land) a 737 in VMC. A/T, A/P (and Autoland) should be used in IMC though, unless you are "a hell of an IFR-PRO" already. 

 

As I mentioned already in another thread:

Last week I had the possibility to test the Oculus Rift (V1). One of the major impressions I had was the missing feeling of accelerations. The environment created by the virtual headset is so immersive, that your mind misses instantaneously the accelerations/decelerations corresponding to the visual input...

 

So, back on topic, the "ease of flying the real thing" is partly due to the existence of corresponding accelerations to the visual impressions. This makes flying a Level-D sim (and its "RW counterparts") easier than on the static PC-SIM installation. But with one exception: in IMC it is the other way around. Here the presence of "misleading" acceleration reception is part of the learning curve which is actually untrainable in front of a PC screen (and even in a 3D environment like a virtual headset).

 

Greetings,

Claus

 

Edit: I just saw that this thread is inside the T7 forum. The "surprising element" of the "heavies" is their latency. Also difficult to experience in front of a PC-screen...

 

This is an interesting point of view. I, personally, feel like I'd be better off doing a full IFR-type configuration. For example, if we are over the Atlantic Ocean, between New York and London, I wouldn't divert at all. I'd let the plane do its thing, and when landing comes, hopefully do a full CATIII Autoland, because it minimizes room for error (if I understand correctly). I don't expect anything like that to ever happen, but I guess that's my plan if it does.

 

 

I wouldn't divert at all. I'd let the plane do its thing

+2

 

That's right. The good thing about being a simmer is at least you know that if pilots of an airplane are incapacitated the plane is not going to suddenly fall down from the sky ( which is what most of the people who have no idea of aviation think ).

 

So if you go to the cockpit, you see the A/P armed , you know the plane is on course and you let the plane do its thing while you go through the charts/EFB to familiarize yourself with the approach and  to stand a better chance of success at landing..

 

 

Maybe a little off the runway, damaging the engines or the wings, but in the end if it saves 200+ people it's worth it.

 

Missing the runway, even a tiny bit, can spell disaster if you have a decent amount of speed.  There was a United flight ages ago where one of the trucks got torqued - either by hitting the ground too hard, or touching slightly off the runway - and it cartwheeled the aircraft.  It was still considered relatively amazing simply because some survived after a loss of all three HYD systems, and subsequently control surfaces, but don't be tricked into thinking that a plane is just going to skate across grass and come out unharmed.

 

I have always found these kind of topics fairly pointless..  Take a pick of any of these accidents and ask yourself if you would have done any better with zero experience on anything bigger than a paper aeroplane 

 

 

 

2012[edit]

• April 2 – UTair Flight 120, an ATR-72, crashes shortly after takeoff from Roshchino International Airport, Tyumen, Russia, killing 31 of the 43 passengers and crew on board.
• April 20 – Bhoja Air Flight 213, a Boeing 737, crashes near Chaklala airbase, Rawalpindi, Pakistan in bad weather, killing all 127 people on board.
• May 9 – In the Mount Salak Sukhoi Superjet 100 crash, a Sukhoi Superjet 100 crashes into Mount Salak, Indonesia on an exhibition flight, killing all 45 passengers and crew on board.
• May 14 – In the Agni Air Flight CHT, a Dornier Do 228 crashes near Jomsom Airport, Nepal during a go-around; of the 21 on board, 6 survive.
• June 2 – Allied Air Flight 111, a Boeing 727, overruns the runway on landing at Kotoka International Airport, Accra, Ghana and crashes through a fence; the aircraft then hits a bus on a nearby road; all four crew survive but twelve are killed on the ground.
• June 3 – Dana Air Flight 992, a McDonnell Douglas MD-83 carrying 146 passengers and 7 crew members crashes in a suburb of Lagos, Nigeria on approach to Murtala Muhammed International Airport, killing all on board and 10 more people on the ground.
• June 29 – Six people attempt to hijack Tianjin Airlines Flight 7554, an Embraer E-190, 10 minutes after takeoff; passengers and crew are able to restrain the hijackers until the aircraft makes an emergency landing; of the 101 on board, 2 hijackers die and 2 more hijackers and 11 passengers and crew are injured; this is China's first serious hijacking attempt since 1990.
• September 12 – Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky Air Flight 251, an Antonov An-28, crashes in Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia, killing 10 of the 14 passengers and crew on board.
• September 28 – Sita Air Flight 601, a Dornier Do 228, crashes on the bank of the Manohara River, Kathmandu, Nepal after a bird strike, killing all 19 on board.
• October 7 – FlyMontserrat Flight 107, a Britten-Norman Islander, crashes after takeoff from V.C. Bird International Airport, Antigua and Barbuda; of the four on board, only one survives.
• November 30 – In the 2012 Aéro-Service Ilyushin Il-76T crash, an Ilyushin Il-76T freighter crashes short of runway threshold on approach to Maya-Maya Airport, Brazzaville, Republic of Congo, in bad weather, killing all 6 aboard, 26 on the ground, and injuring 14.
• December 25 – Air Bagan Flight 11, a Fokker 100, crash-lands on a road near Heho Airport, Myanmar, killing one on board, one on the ground and injuring 11.
• December 29 – Red Wings Airlines Flight 9268, a Tupolev Tu-204 on a repositioning flight, overruns the runway on landing at Moscow's Vnukovo International Airport, then breaks apart and catches fire; five of the eight crew on board are killed in the first fatal accident involving the Tu-204.

2013[edit]

• January 29 – SCAT Airlines Flight 760, a Bombardier CRJ200, crashes in thick fog on approach to Almaty International Airport, Kazakhstan, killing all 16 passengers and 5 crew on board.
• February 13 – South Airlines Flight 8971, an Antonov An-24, crash-lands in dense fog at Donetsk International Airport, Ukraine, killing 5 of 52 people on board.
• April 13 – Lion Air Flight 904, a Boeing 737 carrying 101 passengers and 7 crew members, crashes into the ocean while attempting to land at Ngurah Rai International Airport on the Indonesian resort island of Bali, injuring 46 people.
• April 29 – National Airlines Flight 102, a Boeing 747 freighter, stalls and crashes shortly after takeoff from Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, due to load shifting, killing all seven crew members on board.
• May 16 – Nepal Airlines Flight 555, a de Havilland Canada DHC-6, overruns the runway on landing at Jomsom Airport, Nepal, injuring seven people.
• July 6 – Asiana Airlines Flight 214, a Boeing 777, crashes short of the runway on landing at San Francisco International Airport, killing three of 307 on board and injuring 182. The crash was the first fatal accident involving the Boeing 777.
• July 7 – A de Havilland Canada DHC-3 operated by Rediske Air crashes on approach to Soldotna Airport, Alaska, killing all 10 people on board.
• August 14 – UPS Airlines Flight 1354, an Airbus A300 freighter, crashes short of the runway on approach to Birmingham–Shuttlesworth International Airport, killing the two crew on board.
• October 3 – Associated Aviation Flight 361, an Embraer 120, crashes shortly after takeoff from Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Lagos, killing 15 people on board.
• October 16 – Lao Airlines Flight 301, an ATR-72, crashes shortly before landing at Pakse International Airport under adverse weather conditions, killing all 44 passengers and 5 crew on board.
• November 17 – Tatarstan Airlines Flight 363, a Boeing 737, crashes at Kazan International Airport, Russia during a go-around, killing all 50 people on board.
• November 29 – LAM Mozambique Airlines Flight 470, an Embraer 190, en route from Maputo International Airport, Mozambique to Quatro de Fevereiro Airport, Angola crashes into Bwabwata National Park in northern Namibia, killing all 33 people on board.
•  

 

I may have never flown a 777 but, I for sure wouldn't have let the speed bleed down to 93knts on a clear day while shooting a visual approach I mean that's basic airmanship. In the real thing I tend to fly my approaches a little high and fast since something about landing in the trees doesn't sound very fun and I can get rid of the excess altitude and speed with a little slip once I know I've got the runway made. Anyway I think a simmer would have a better chance to get a badly damaged plane on the ground in particular a simmer that knows the type of plane by heart IE all the systems and emergency procedures then a john doe who's never flown a real plane nor flown in the sim. but if it came down to a choice between a recent PPL and a highly experienced simmer I'd have the PPL fly the plane while the simmer worked with the systems together they may stand a chance of at least saving a few lives.

I would only do it as a absolute last resort to avoid that whole question of "where did you learn this and if some 22 year old guy can learn this, then whats stopping terrorists from learning this?"

 

 

I may have never flown a 777 but, I for sure wouldn't have let the speed bleed down to 93knts on a clear day while shooting a visual approach I mean that's basic airmanship

 

I can't really disagree  I can say the exact same thing from the comfort of my office chair at home.  consider this, the instructor on the flight had 12,387 hours of flying experience of which 3,220 was on the 777.  He had done hundreds of visual approaches and passed multiple sim checks.  The rest of the crew on board had equally impressive heavy jet experience.  

 

I am willing to bet if we could roll back the clock and ask any of the flight crew 'Do you think you could allow the airspeed to bleed down to 93kts?'  I am pretty sure we all know what the answer would be  

Ah, this reminds me of my reoccurring dream!

 

Pilots become incapacitated on a full loaded 747-400, no-one else can fly the plane. Me, a 15 year old with Flight Simulation experience is the plane's only hope. I land the plane successfully at London Heathrow after flying over London. 

 

Back to reality now...

 

Could be possible, chances slim. If there are no failures and the weather is good - some of us could probably do it. If we add failures and poor weather... oh dear.

An ex airline pilot colleague of mine put it best when he said that you don't really know an aircraft until you've flown it on the line for a few years. All of us who study the sims available to us will know the aircraft in question pretty well, but having a few thousand hours in an aircraft is a vastly different level of competence than 'knowing the systems' and being able to convey a virtual load of pax from one place to another.

 

To use an example, take car racing sims. You might be able to post a respectable time in any given car racing sim of your choice, but the inherent limitations of a home PC mean it's never going to be the same as actually being in a real car and dealing with the physical loads of a vehicle going around corners etc. This is why current and future generations of young people will continue to learn to drive in real cars, and - sadly - many will lose their lives due to overconfidence, youthful exuberance and in some cases, plain bad luck,

 

Heck, someone could release a knitting simulator and no matter how much I played with it I'd still back my Grannie to do a better job knitting a sweater than I could ever hope to. Why? Because she's been doing it for decades. So-called 'Muscle memory' counts for a lot.

 

Have you got a better chance of landing a 777/737/whatever than someone with no understanding of a modern airliner? Sure. Will you definitely pull it off without damage to the aircraft or injuries to those onboard or on the ground? Maybe, but if the answer is only 'maybe', you'd better hope that someone else on the plane is a deadheading flight crew member or, at worst, a pilot with hundreds of hours of time in at least a twin GA aircraft. I'd rather leave it in their hands and act as a systems adviser in such a dire set of circumstances.

 

These kind of posts come up regularly and are well intentioned, but I think it's best to recognise our hobby for what it is: a detailed and advanced taste of what flying airliners is like, not a substitute for years and years of training and experience.

 

The first simmer to land an airliner safely gets a 5-star meal on me. B)

 

 

Isn't that a bit like 'Independence Day' with the U.S. American President jumping from the Oral Oval Office into a fighter's seat to save the world?

 

Yes but he was an ex-fighter jockey, not a career politician ^_^

An ex airline pilot colleague of mine put it best when he said that you don't really know an aircraft until you've flown it on the line for a few years. All of us who study the sims available to us will know the aircraft in question pretty well, but having a few thousand hours in an aircraft is a vastly different level of competence than 'knowing the systems' and being able to convey a virtual load of pax from one place to another.

 

To use an example, take car racing sims. You might be able to post a respectable time in any given car racing sim of your choice, but the inherent limitations of a home PC mean it's never going to be the same as actually being in a real car and dealing with the physical loads of a vehicle going around corners etc. This is why current and future generations of young people will continue to learn to drive in real cars, and - sadly - many will lose their lives due to overconfidence, youthful exuberance and in some cases, plain bad luck,

 

Heck, someone could release a knitting simulator and no matter how much I played with it I'd still back my Grannie to do a better job knitting a sweater than I could ever hope to. Why? Because she's been doing it for decades. So-called 'Muscle memory' counts for a lot.

 

Have you got a better chance of landing a 777/737/whatever than someone with no understanding of a modern airliner? Sure. Will you definitely pull it off without damage to the aircraft or injuries to those onboard or on the ground? Maybe, but if the answer is only 'maybe', you'd better hope that someone else on the plane is a deadheading flight crew member or, at worst, a pilot with hundreds of hours of time in at least a twin GA aircraft. I'd rather leave it in their hands and act as a systems adviser in such a dire set of circumstances.

 

These kind of posts come up regularly and are well intentioned, but I think it's best to recognise our hobby for what it is: a detailed and advanced taste of what flying airliners is like, not a substitute for years and years of training and experience.

 

The first simmer to land an airliner safely gets a 5-star meal on me. B)

Does that offer apply to people who are both pilots and simmers, In particular ones who will be working for the airlines within the next few years haha  :lol:

I'm waiting for a headline that says "Boeing 777 in distress landed in Atlanta by a 15-year old aviation enthusiast!"

I got a 737NG level D sim down from FL390 and handflew a Cat I ILS my first time in one a few years ago with no help. I left the speedbrake out through the landing though which could have been disastrous in an 800 or 900 due to the increase in deck angle (this was a 700 sim I was in so I barely avoided a tailstrike) - other than that though the guy running the sim said I did a pretty impressive job for someone with no experience in the level D sim or real aircraft.

If FS lacks one thing it is the feeling of speed. When everything seems to be happening at the same time on the speed an actual airliner is going I wouldn't be to sure about it.

That and the thoughts you could actually die from it no thanks. I leave it to the pro's who study and flew it year after year.