When the automation fails and pilots have to take command they better be ready to fly manually in any situation and any airline that encourages autopilot usage whenever possible may erode those skills especially if their only chance to practice this is during their annual sim check.

When the automation fails and pilots have to take command they better be ready to fly manually in any situation and any airline that encourages autopilot usage whenever possible may erode those skills especially if their only chance to practice this is during their annual sim check.

 

And this is exactly why I say the subject runs very deep.  Management do encourage a high level of automation for the reasons I stated above (Mainly workload) It doesn't mean sit back and watch the automation do it's magic. 

 

It's kinda funny, a little while back someone on the 777 forum posted a legitimate error with the engine out logic on the PMDG T7.  

 

The A/P wouldn't engage at low altitude, in simmer style everyone berated him 'Why are you trying to engage the A/P in that situation!?'  He was correct, in the event of an engine failure on departure you get on the automatics ASAP if available, no time to mess around showing of your hand flying skills... Leave that for your sim check.

 

Anyone who is in the left or fight seat of a commercial airliner should already be confident in their ability. They should already have a huge amount of experience.   Unfortunately modern aviation is breeding P2F kids with money, 200 hours and straight to the right seat on a 60T+ airliner.

 

Funnily enough it reminds me  a little of flight sim,  most people want to get straight onto the big shiny jets yet have no idea how to manually fly a hold

What does P2F stand for?

Pay 2 Fly..  If you have the money and want to fly airliners you can pay an airline to train you and gain hours.  Not the same as a Cadet scheme and paying for your training.   So basically go from never flying an aircraft to flying large jets out of Heathrow

 

To give you the other end of the spectrum - An old friend of mine got his PPL at 18, then obtained his twin engine rating, worked as an instructor and did bush flying in Africa.  Eventually got right seat & then left seat on the ATR and flew for 10 years, moved to the A320 right seat and now fly's the 777 right seat out here in the middle east.

 

compared to a P2F I know for sure who has the better hand flying skills and confidence.

 

Regards

 

 

Funnily enough it reminds me  a little of flight sim,  most people want to get straight onto the big shiny jets yet have no idea how to manually fly a hold

 

Kills me.  It's readily apparent on VATSIM, too.  My faves are the clear newbies logging in with RW PILOT (because they've flown a Cessna maybe once or twice RW, or are a PPL with not a single clue as to how to fly IFR) in their comments, with a 744, at some airport that nobody would ever fly a 744 into (like DCA).

Hello All,  This has been the most constructive and interesting Posts for a long time and I wish it could continue, it makes a big difference to come into the Forum and read a Post with some real meaning.

Two doors down from me in my Bahrain residence lives a Gulf Air A330/320 F/O. Last time we had a beer he mentioned he likes to disconnect A/THR & A/P at TOD and hand fly the entire descent & approach.

I wonder if flying an Airbus (with a fully functional FBW) can actually be called "hand flying". To me it is more a remote controlled combination of A/P and A/T.

Flying e.g. a B737 from TOD to LDG all the way manually is more of "real handflying" to me.

Unfortunately Airbus' philosophy of "perfect machines" and "imperfect humans" led to lower workload on one hand, but on the other hand it was the dawn of "hand flying skills disbelieve".

This led to "gear up, flaps up, sports page" and all the (known) side effects...

 

Greetings,

Claus

Well this guy hand flew the 777 down from 8000 feet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC49xRAG5qs

 

 

To give you the other end of the spectrum - An old friend of mine got his PPL at 18, then obtained his twin engine rating, worked as an instructor and did bush flying in Africa.  Eventually got right seat & then left seat on the ATR and flew for 10 years, moved to the A320 right seat and now fly's the 777 right seat out here in the middle east.

 

In Canada the road is the same. I did my ppl/cpl Multi and IFR. I now work for a company in northern canada/ will likely be there for the next 2-3 years. Build time and get my ATPL and get out. Onto bigger and better things......eventually. 

 

This system does produce some grade A pilots though. A lot of hand flying for most small airliners or commuter props. 

 

I just had a sim evaluation today in a metroliner simulator where the training guy made me do a steep turn at 45 degrees angle of bank then 30 degrees, switching between the two every 90 degrees on the compass, while trying to figure out a 35 degree intercept angle to a 250 bearing on an NDB from my current position and he wanted me to roll out on my intercept angle...... 

On being slammed dunked by ATC, the PF had just crossed to the 777 from 747-400's. He had flown the same approach to KSFO plenty of times.

 He was correct, in the event of an engine failure on departure you get on the automatics ASAP if available, no time to mess around showing of your hand flying skills.

 

In FS yes this applies very much so since you are only one person but in the RW you have two pilots who split the duties between flying and the other pilot handling the problem but it gets even better if you have a relief pilot or an off duty pilot hitching a ride in the JS who can assist. Perfect example is AWE 1549 where Sully took controls after starting the APU to get electrical power running again while FO Skiles concentrated on the QRH and on trying to get at least one engine re-started right up to the last minute. CRM at its absolute finest and even right before impact he still asked his FO if he had any last second ideas.

I am not talking about FS,  I am talking about real world.  In the event of an engine failure on take off you engage the A/P if available.  This is taught globally.

 

I don't see the relevance of fight 1549, except as you say a great example of CRM.

 

They had no choice but to fly by hand.  If it was a single engine failure  Sully would have centered the Beta target, trimmed out the dead engine, engaged the A/P and called for ECAM actions to be carried out.   

 

That is SOP... For some reason I thought you flew the A330? Maybe I am mixing you up with someone else.

 

Have a read of FCOM VOL 4  3.02.10

I don't see the relevance of fight 1549, except as you say a great example of CRM.

 

I used them as a great example of high workload being split between both pilots, one pilot is concentrating on flying/navigating the aircraft whether its manually or via AP and the other is dealing with the problem at hand but both are kept in the loop as to what the other guy is doing. 

 

 

 

That is SOP... For some reason I thought you flew the A330? Maybe I am mixing you up with someone else.

 

No I never flew the 330, just going from what I observe and discuss with crews I run into during work. Airbus may have their FCOM's but AFAIK airlines can modify some (but probably not all) of those SOP's as long as its ok with the FAA or whoever has jurisdiction of their airline. in the end the Captain is the final authority on safety and he may deviate from SOP if he feels that such procedures are not in the best interest of safety for his given situation. 

As I've been learning about the sophisticated automation provided by the FMC/MCP/AT from almost takeoff to touchdown in a/c like the 737 NGX, it has occurred to me that there also might be some negatives. For example, how difficult is it for airline flight crews to stay proficient at hand flying the a/c? I understand the crew is constantly making decisions on how and what the FMC/MCP/AT are doing, but it would seem the time with hands on the yoke and throttle is minimal during a typical flight. I know the pilots have to pass proficiency check rides, so do the airlines have programs or requirements for ensuring crews get the "hands on" time they need, e.g., so many hand flown ILS approaches per month or something similar?

Al

 

Actually there is one way to really test your skills and that is raw data ;-)

But in Europe most FO's aren't allowed to fly that way only during proficiency check and or grading, otherwise it's

the Captain who is allowed to fly raw data only...

Some FO's get the chance to fly raw data when the Captain allows it...

 

So you want to test your skills raw data in the sim to and FD off ;-)

 

Have fun gentlemen.

 

Cheers,

In FS yes this applies very much so since you are only one person but in the RW you have two pilots who split the duties between flying and the other pilot handling the problem but it gets even better if you have a relief pilot or an off duty pilot hitching a ride in the JS who can assist. Perfect example is AWE 1549 where Sully took controls after starting the APU to get electrical power running again while FO Skiles concentrated on the QRH and on trying to get at least one engine re-started right up to the last minute. CRM at its absolute finest and even right before impact he still asked his FO if he had any last second ideas.

There is less point in going on automatics in an Airbus since the FBW gives you a highly stabilised flight already. Both pilots may well need to coordinate in working through emergency procedures. The Qantas A380 incident is an example of the workload this can entail. Adding hand flying as well is pointless.

 

Autopilot would have been of no assistance in AWE1549 with both engines effectively out of action. AP modes aren't designed for that. In that case hand flying was the only choice but the FBW assisted greatly.

 

I've watched quite a few hours of sim training and getting the AP on before dealing with an emergency was a consistent feature.

On being slammed dunked by ATC, the PF had just crossed to the 777 from 747-400's. He had flown the same approach to KSFO plenty of times.

Surely the crucial point was that the pilots had plenty of experience but little practice regarding visual approaches without ILS assistance. They may well have hand flown the approach many times before but usually with FD guidance.