Hello all!

 

 

I decided to check a few videos on the operation of 777s, 787s, A330s and it all looked so simple. Just push a few buttons, lift off, autopilot, do nothing except checks and then land (once again on autopilot) and checklists are so stripped they only have a few items.

 

It seems that the main basis, press a few buttons, program, follow the magenta line and go. Is this what kids of the magenta line is?

 

I've flown 767s before in my FS9 days and it was simple, easy but also complex. However not as automated as the 777 which get's things boring.

 

After having flown Tu134s, Tu-154s, An24s and 707s I can't but think operating these automated jets is extremely boring and way too easy as you basically have nothing to do. I do want to start long haul flights but there is no Soviet airliner apart from the Il-62 that's capable to do it so maybe it's just me who thinks these plastic tubeliners aren't for real pilots? After all here we have a (real life) saying that Airbus pilots aren't men compared to the Ilyushin one!

 

I don't expect everyone to agree with me, just wanted to see if there's some insight to it.

 

saying that Airbus pilots aren't men compared to the Ilyushin one!

Passengers who are buying tickets aren't paying to have a demonstration of pilots' manliness but to be delivered to destination in comfort, on time and in relative safety. Unfortunately Ilyushin jets fall short of those 3 goals comparing to their western counterparts hence even Aeroflot doesn't have much use for Russian equipment. So if you are proudly displaying "Aeroflot' avatar I suggest you go and convince the management of this iconic airline to buy jets for 'real' pilots, no plastic toys. I flew on IL-62 twice - no thanks, I rather be flown by 'plastic tubeliner' flown by female pilots.

Tell that to the Asiana 777 pilots..

I don't quite think that watching a few videos online qualify's anyone to state that obtaining and 'keeping' a 777/787/744 or A3xx type rating is easy

 

Glass cockpit design is nothing new.  The purpose is to reduce pilot workload, modern day commercial flying does involve more system monitoring due to flight engineer going the way of the Dodo, it is just logical progression.  

 

All modern flight crew must still demonstrate excellent proficiency in hand flying raw data in many different scenarios.

 

Getting bored in flightsim using PMDG jet is nothing like the pressures of real world flying.

 

Regarding the silly argument on what aircraft real men fly    Let's compare CFIT and crash data between these bold Ilyushin pilots and Airbus/Boeing glass cockpit flight crew

Are you talking about real life or the simulator?

 

In real life the goal is to get from A to B in the safest and most efficient manner and automation contributes to that.

Challenging the pilots' manliness is not a goal.

 

Knowing how the automation works and keeping up with it during the flight does take skill.

 

In the sim you can do whatever you like.

If you don't like to watch the automation for 8 hours then don't fly 'long haul' or use time compression.

Modern navigation (which is central to all the glass) is all about getting more planes into more congested airspace in worse weather than previously possible. Greater airspace utilisation, fewer diverts, increasing less holding in the air, improved reliability, more planes through runways... it's all about money.

Passengers who are buying tickets aren't paying to have a demonstration of pilots' manliness but to be delivered to destination in comfort, on time and in relative safety. Unfortunately Ilyushin jets fall short of those 3 goals comparing to their western counterparts hence even Aeroflot doesn't have much use for Russian equipment. So if you are proudly displaying "Aeroflot' avatar I suggest you go and convince the management of this iconic airline to buy jets for 'real' pilots, no plastic toys.

 

I'm talking about the pilots perspective in flight simulation and not the passenger cabin as this is not where I will be during my flights in the simulator.

 

In the realworld a modern aircraft might be more relaxing also for the pilot as he's getting paid for it. But in flight simulator I want a challenge and have something to do. The Ilyushin Il-62M aircraft is comfortable, can arrive in time and has an outstanding safety record. The 3 above problems you mentioned simply depend on the airline's budget and maintenance, along with efficiency.

 

Tell that to the Asiana 777 pilots..

 

It was a very unfortunately accident, but the result of this crash was actually because pilots became too dependant on the automated systems.

 

I don't quite think that watching a few videos online qualify's anyone to state that obtaining and 'keeping' a 777/787/744 or A3xx type rating is easy

 

Glass cockpit design is nothing new.  The purpose is to reduce pilot workload, modern day commercial flying does involve more system monitoring due to flight engineer going the way of the Dodo, it is just logical progression.  

 

All modern flight crew must still demonstrate excellent proficiency in hand flying raw data in many different scenarios.

 

Getting bored in flightsim using PMDG jet is nothing like the pressures of real world flying.

 

Regarding the silly argument on what aircraft real men fly    Let's compare CFIT and crash data between these bold Ilyushin pilots and Airbus/Boeing glass cockpit flight crew

 

Again I was speaking strictly for flight simulator and not the real world. The Ilyushin sentence as the only one that applies for the reality and is mostly used as a joke and for proudness.

 

Obviously keeping a flight pilots license in reality whether it is for Douglas 3s or DC9s or Dreamliners will be hard no matter what and several tests are done along with several doctors checking you out a year. At least in the case of Aeroflot in the 90s when I had a very close affiliation to it's operations. It was not easy and had nothing to do with the plane. Fly an Ilyushin 62 or an Airbus 310, same story. Just don't let your kids in the cockpit!!

 

The soviet airliners do have a bad reputation amongst western "flight experts", however they are not much different from the record of the 707s, 727s  and DC9s also from that time and in fact even safer than the former. Main cause of crashes were either maintenance, pilot error or weather.

ah... in the sim. Well that's a different story. ;-)

This is something I've often wondered about. Many simmers want to fly "As real as it gets" but what happens when the reality is that planes have become so automated that pilots essentially become passengers except in emergencys.

 

Will everyone default to "Historical" or "Golden age" flight simming?

This is something I've often wondered about. Many simmers want to fly "As real as it gets" but what happens when the reality is that planes have become so automated that pilots essentially become passengers except in emergencys.

 

Will everyone default to "Historical" or "Golden age" flight simming?

That's a good one, a 777 and 787 is already making you a bit of a passenger. Never mind then the 797 and 390 comes out with only an on/off button to press.

I sometimes think that us simmers who take the time to properly learn to fly complex airliners like the PMDG's are still really only seeing the tip of the iceberg. There is still only so much that we can do in our limited PC environment especially considering that we still probably aren't following exact procedures and skipping many other routine tasks including exterior inspections, maintenance logs, position reports during cruise, regular fuel cross checks, keeping an eye on weather etc. I'm sure pilots don't just sit around and twiddle their thumbs or talk about wives/kids during cruise.

 

There's also the fact that we sit here and fly these aircraft ourselves. In the real world you would never do this and would have to learn crew co-ordination skills by working with other pilots etc. The airspaces themselves would also be much busier (even busier than most events on VATSIM or IVAO) requiring you to frequently divert from the 'magenta line' or even go into holding patterns (I wonder how many of us ever use that function in the FMC) and this is where you fuel planning actually becomes critical.

I sometimes think that us simmers who take the time to properly learn to fly complex airliners like the PMDG's are still really only seeing the tip of the iceberg. There is still only so much that we can do in our limited PC environment especially considering that we still probably aren't following exact procedures and skipping many other routine tasks including exterior inspections, maintenance logs, position reports during cruise, regular fuel cross checks, keeping an eye on weather etc. I'm sure pilots don't just sit around and twiddle their thumbs or talk about wives/kids during cruise.

 

There's also the fact that we sit here and fly these aircraft ourselves. In the real world you would never do this and would have to learn crew co-ordination skills by working with other pilots etc. The airspaces themselves would also be much busier (even busier than most events on VATSIM or IVAO) requiring you to frequently divert from the 'magenta line' or even go into holding patterns (I wonder how many of us ever use that function in the FMC) and this is where you fuel planning actually becomes critical.

 

Your sentence is very true and unfortunately also applies to the classic airliners. It's all about how much time you invest in reading the manual and mastering skills to perfection. When learning to master a plane always do it from the manual if you want a 99% perfection because many of the user submitted youtube videos do have errors and mistakes into them. Real flight deck movies might help though but are very boring to the average user to watch.

 

However as for "exterior inspections, maintenance logs, position reports during cruise, regular fuel cross checks, keeping an eye on weather etc.". This is actually simulated on the high end addons and you can perform these rotuine checks except for maintenance logs and the fact that the exterior will never look wrong in flight simulator as our planes will always be fault free from ground.

 

VATSIM is very sparse. Most of my flights are done without a single controller online (even cross European flights surprisingly) and there's nothing we can do about this. It's not as popular as it once was but I still prefer to use it instead of the offline atc programs alternative.

You're not forced to fly  a 777/787/Airbus via the FMC. Tune them VORs and go.

However, that's not 'as real as it gets' - & isn't that the point?

Call it an Emergency.