Old habits die hard

[777simmer 117]

A few posts back someone asked me why I did not learn on a less complicated aircraft ? my answer to that would be, if you were aware of my previous job, it would go a long way in explaining

That would have been me.

 

I do not know what your previous job was..... I dont see how that has anything to do with starting at the basics either to be honest....but all I meant is that it might be a bit much to try to understand all the systems of a modern airliner and at the same time learning to fly by Instrument flight rules (and procedures).

 

The videos you have been pointed to will probably put you on the right track, but as additional info:

The idea and puropse of an ILS is that you stay clear of obstacles as long as you follow the black lines.

That means both lateral as well as vertical!

 

When you try to follow the vertical path (GS captured) while not yet following the lateral path (loc) then you might fly into terrain.

The fact that there are no obstacles on the ILS inbound course, does not mean there are no obstacles anywhere.....like a mile left or right of the inbound course!

The CDU option "dont allow GS capture before Loc capture" prevents exactly that and that is why some airlines have their 777 setup like that.

 

So what you should do (as you have probably now found out) is stay at a safe altitude untill established on the lateral path (Loc capture). This altitude can be defined by the STAR, or by the ILS intermediate approach altitude (on the ILS chart) or ATC if radar vectored.

Or if you are at a self vectored altitude in FSX:

Since 99% of ILS have 3degrees glide path, all you need to do is multiply your height x 3 and that is your GS intercept point.

That is height mind you.....so you have to substract airport elevation from your altitude to find your height.

flying at 2000ft height: 2x3=6nm......so if you vector yourself closer than 6nm from the runway, then you will have passed that GS intercept point.

flying at 3000ft height: 3x3=9nm....so if you vector yourself closer than 9nm from the runway, again, you have already passed the GS intercept point.

 

Only after Loc capture can you be sure that further descend keeps you at a safe height above obstacles!

This is why many first press LOC...to capture the localizer and then once the LOC is captured they press APP switch to capture the GS as well. As mentioned many times by others you can also press APP straight away if you are at the correct height versus distance.....but you have to have some situational awareness in that case or (if you have the CDU set to "allow GS capture before loc capture") you might run into problems!

[kevinh 409]

Thank you guys. I have looked  at Ralph Freshour''s  Utube channel. Very informative and well structured. I have sent him an email asking him to point  me in the direction to watch the relevant video on the ILS approach . The way I had picked it up from reading books etc, that you picked up the LOC  first and then later on the G/S .  My problem is I 6/10 fail to capture the G/S as I have  always been to high. Most PMDG aircraft will not allow you to pick up the G/S first,.

 

A few posts back someone asked me why I did not learn on a less complicated aircraft ? my answer to that would be, if you were aware of my previous job, it would go a long way in explaining

As a rule of thumb, you need to position yourself about 8-10 miles from the runway threshold at about 2000' AGL. If you intercept the LOC there you will be able to meet the G/S at about 6 nm DME. The higher you are, the further out you need to be. If you have the ILS approach selected in the FMC then you should see the final approach fix waypoint in the LEGS page (usually next but one from the runway waypoint). Aim to be lined up on the LOC before reaching that point. The final approach fix will have an altitude shown for it which is the height you should approach it at.

 

My opinion is that if you can manage the 777 autopilot and systems then it's a great sim to learn things like this on. Using a simpler model won't help as the techiques are no easier and you may well learn bad habits from a less well designed sim.

[dmncnpilot 39]

The very best thing to do is to go through the built in check ride, it's not only fun but you can actually learn a few things. Once you feel like you can read an approach chart, understand it, build it and fly it on a trainer, then you can start flying more complex airplanes.

[patrico 5]

thank you Rob you are right when you say, you fail to understand what a previous job had to  do with it. I just meant my previous state of mind but I would just like to thank  you for your invaluable advice given so far.

[Guest]

Please bear also in mind that there is a huge difference from the reality, in the 777 or whatever other simulation you do not have a F/O.

 

This leads straight to have a large amount of extra workload so do not be hurry to go on the automatic side of the hill above all in the beginning.

 

In addition, the simulation is excellent indeed but it might happen to be different from the reality under certain circumstances, an example ? 

 

A super interesting stuff is available just on the Tube, if you are precise enough to read all the comments made by real 777 pilots below where they uploaded a video of their job, you will read many questions to them and many super interesting answers by real 777 pilots as well, nothing is better than such a kind of knowledge IMO.

 

You will read that most of the times what plays a big role are the circumstances that lead to a certain procedure and these procedures may be flexible and not rigid as described on the manuals.

 

Remember young Skywalker, the theory usually is quite different from the practice  so do not be afraid to fly the plane and fly it " few miles ahead " !! ALWAYS

 

If you fail some procedure that's not a big deal, the important thing is flying correctly the plane, possibly looking outside the windows, not always necessarily looking at instruments. Old school way......

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

Please bear also in mind that there is a huge difference from the reality, in the 777 or whatever other simulation you do not have a F/O.
 
This leads straight to have a large amount of extra workload so do not be hurry to go on the automatic side of the hill above all in the beginning.

 

This is somewhat of a common sim misconception. The regulatory bodies have requirements for multiple crew members more out of safety concerns for redundancy than because it's "too much work." I need only cite that many King Air operators have approval for single pilot operations, and I'd argue your (legal) work load in a King Air is well above what you'd experience as a single pilot in the 777.

 

So, while I see the argument as valid that you wouldn't be operating single pilot in a 777, the assumption that it is an unreasonable single pilot work load doesn't quite hold true.

 

 

 

A super interesting stuff is available just on the Tube, if you are precise enough to read all the comments made by real 777 pilots below where they uploaded a video of their job, you will read many questions to them and many super interesting answers by real 777 pilots as well, nothing is better than such a kind of knowledge IMO.

 

I'd question the validity of the comments there. It's often difficult to verify the comments and claims there, and you have to wade through all of the other ridiculous comments people post there. Even as someone who has a YouTube channel, I caution people from going there to find information as there is so much poor/false information there.

[FleaJump 7]

Hello Patrico I think a very short flight, that enables you to repeatedly set up for ILS landings, will go a long way towards giving you a better feel for the process.  Below are the FMC waypoints that will inscribe a tear-drop shaped flight path that commences at Las Vegas Mccarran Airport Runway 01, circling over the city and suburbs of Las Vegas, before landing at the same airport on Runway 25L, less than ten minutes after takeoff.

 

This waypoint sequence is cut and pasted from a thread I started in the FS9 forum on the subject of short but eventful flights, and I urge you to try this flight for ILS practice.    Maccarran Airport is at 2067 feet elevation, so flying this short swoop at 200 knots airspeed, with say 4,500 feet set in the MCP altitude window, you will intercept KLAS RW25L 's center-line close enough to capture the localizer and glide slope with minimal altitude corrections.

 

Departing from KLAS RW 01, the 10-minute duration flight is as follows LAS010/8,  LAS015/9,  LAS025/10,  LAS040/10,  LAS050/10,  LAS065/9,  LAS075/8,  LAS080/7,  RW25L   

 

KLAS RW 25L's  ILS heading is 255 degrees, with a frequency 0f 110.75MHz.

 

To further shorten the wait time between ILs practice intercepts, you can use the "colon" key " ; " to save the last couple of minutes of this flight, just as your aircraft starts to bank right unto the runway center line of KLAS RW25L, and then simply hit reset after each successful landing, to hone the skills required at that key moment in time when the localizer is first acquired.

[Guest]

This is somewhat of a common sim misconception. The regulatory bodies have requirements for multiple crew members more out of safety concerns for redundancy than because it's "too much work." I need only cite that many King Air operators have approval for single pilot operations, and I'd argue your (legal) work load in a King Air is well above what you'd experience as a single pilot in the 777.

 

So, while I see the argument as valid that you wouldn't be operating single pilot in a 777, the assumption that it is an unreasonable single pilot work load doesn't quite hold true.

 

 

 

 

I'd question the validity of the comments there. It's often difficult to verify the comments and claims there, and you have to wade through all of the other ridiculous comments people post there. Even as someone who has a YouTube channel, I caution people from going there to find information as there is so much poor/false information there.

 

 

Well, IMO there is no misconception because in the real cockpit a pilot constantly deal and work with an F/O, in the sim you are all alone.

 

I know there are addons like I guess FSCrew but that's not a matter of turning the engines on or moving the flap stuff, having an F/O means having a second human brain qualified for flying a jet.

Not to mention when you have also a Boeing Engineer sitting behind, you'll have some boredom moments you will never forget ! 

 

That's a completely different experience.

 

 

Regarding the knowledge stuff, I forgot to say that this forum and the PMDG products are also the most valuable source of professional knowledge in the world and you are right, in the Tube you find many fake infos yes, but when a real 777 captain post a video of one of his real landing into rainy weather and he himself answers a lot of passionate question in the comments below the posted video, well, that's IMO one of the most valuable source of infos as well because it adds the " practice " point of view to the " theory " point of view coming from manuals.

 

That's amazing to learn how professionals work.

 

Then, I also like to watch many times the " May Day Air Disaster " episodes, based on real facts, that's also a good knowledge source !

[777simmer 117]

So, while I see the argument as valid that you wouldn't be operating single pilot in a 777, the assumption that it is an unreasonable single pilot work load doesn't quite hold true.

I have to step in here ofcourse!

 

The one thing you and most everybody else here are forgetting is......non normal operations.

(I know you were talking about normal ops)

 

In my opinion, one of the main reasons that there are two of us in the front is that when things go wrong it quickly becomes too much too handle for one brain.....or two hands for that matter!

 

Try flying the aircraft, doing memory items, talking to ATC, programming the FMC, reading and doing non normal checklists, EFB calculation for max landing weight with those failures and the runway condition (ice/snow?), overweight landing or fuel dumping checklist, adhering to rules and regulation and limits might require you to look things up in company specific QRH tables, talking to your company (engineering for example), talking to the purser so he/she can prepare the cabin for an emergency landing, talking to the pax....oh and stay calm and organized off course!

 

 

A two man operation is actually a lot more complicated than many think.

It helps to not be alone.....but without the SOPs we have today and without some CRM training it can become a hindrance to have a college that you have to order things.

 

For example during manual flight the "pilot flying" has to order the "pilot not flying" what buttons to press on the MCP panel.

Do you really know how every button is called and how you order that to your college so that there is absolutely no doubt as to what you mean?

I am telling you, it is much easier to just press a sequence of buttons than to order them!

 

"engage heading select, set heading 320, set 3000ft engage vertical speed minus 1000" pfffff much easier to just do it, but that is not how it works in a two man cockpit when the AP is not enaged :-)

[victorlima01 4]

Patrick, I don't know how well versed you are in the basic stuff that private pilots learn in their first weeks of ground school regarding rules and regulations. But it might be worthwhile to buy a few books on these subject matters and entry-level texts on IFR flying as well. I know nowadays simmers seem to think that things are as simple as following the magenta line down to 2000 agl and arming approach. But, like someone stated here, if you learn the basics behind ILS, VOR navigation and other "old-school" stuff you'll get things easier and then all you'll have to worry about is learning to fly an aircraft that experienced captains spend months of intense studying and training to learn as well

 

Rod Machado has some funny entry-level books which could help you. Maybe you've crossed that bridge already, but when I was trying to learn all these things alone 16 years ago without the benefit of these forums it helped a lot. 

 

Anyway that's my two cents. I know a little about your background and I have to say I admire your perseverance greatly! Welcome aboard!

[Guest]

Do you really know how every button is called and how you order that to your college so that there is absolutely no doubt as to what you mean?

I am telling you, it is much easier to just press a sequence of buttons than to order them!

 

 

Pfff... not an issue...before flight just label them with a Dymo and call them :  Joshua, Jimmy, Rebecca, Nivea, Sparrow, David, Raginald etc. etc.  

[scandinavian13 5,192]

The one thing you and most everybody else here are forgetting is......non normal operations.

(I know you were talking about normal ops)

 

I was talking about normal ops, but the comparative aircraft (the King Air) also has chances for non-normal operations while flying as a single pilot, legally. I'd argue that you'd have a lot higher of a workload while in non-normal ops in a King Air single pilot than you would in non-normal ops in a 777 single pilot.

 

Again, I'd stress that the decision here isn't based so much on the face value workload (normal or non-normal). It's based on redundancy versus effective impact. Everyone says that the FARs are written in blood, and here, I'd argue that it's rather true. Going back to the King Air example, the King Air is certified to be legally flown by a single pilot. The limitation here is that it is only operated in such a fashion when privately operated, or flown without passengers (ferrying, repositioning, and so on). Now, the workload between those operations is the same as it's the same aircraft. The difference here is the risk exposure to passengers should that workload ever get too high (even with the "private operation" exemption, remember that private operators are usually in the business of keeping seat numbers low, whereas airlines are usually in the business of keeping seat numbers high - one needs only look at the executive layout of a King Air, versus a charter/airline layout).

 

In other words, it's not a workload change between privately operated, or flown without passengers. It's that, comparatively, there are likely fewer passengers who might be lost if the pilot can't live up to the demands of the workload in a non-normal situation. It's a rather unfortunate thing to think about, but it's something you're forced to think about when you look at situations like this. The same goes for the "lower" pilot licenses like Recreational Pilots. A Rec Pilot can fly a 172, but is limited to one passenger. A PPL could - in theory - have three passengers in a 172 (reality v theory here in that weight is a concern with three passengers). It's the same plane and same workload. The issue here, again, is risk exposure to the passengers.

 

Well, IMO there is no misconception because in the real cockpit a pilot constantly deal and work with an F/O, in the sim you are all alone.

 

I'm arguing a fine line here, and I understand that it's a very awkward one.

 

I fully agree that it doesn't feel realistic in the sense that you don't have a first officer as you would in the real aircraft. I can completely understand that viewpoint, and I'd honestly love to be able to use this plane with another human to add to the experience and make it feel more real.

 

I'm simply addressing the misconception that it's purely a workload metric. If anyone thinks that the requirement is based purely on workload, load up in the C172 (better if it's the A2A version) in hard IFR and fly the steam gauges (yeah, I saw you reaching for the GPS popup)...and that's not even that bad, and still normal ops. Now, take the Flight1 King Air, RealAir Duke, or a similarly fast multi, eject an engine, and do so in said hard IFR. Every aircraft I've mentioned so far is certed for single pilot operations.

 

Now, get into the 777 and eject and engine, and land in hard IFR. You barely even notice it, and a good number of the system reconfig is either done for you, or walked through for you on the ECL.

[Guest]

You can always copy and paste your post thoughts and send them to Boeing, maybe they will agree with you....  :rolleyes:

[scandinavian13 5,192]

You can always copy and paste your post thoughts and send them to Boeing, maybe they will agree with you....  :rolleyes:

 

Last I checked, it was the FAA who makes the legal calls on crew requirements.

 

Also, Boeing probably wouldn't publicly agree with the idea of dropping to a single crew member. I doubt ALPA would take too kindly to that, given the stir dropping from 2 to 3 caused. Moreover, I'm not advocating that change. I'm simply making a statement of fact here: the call is not directly one of workload. Workload is factual and straightforward. If you'd like, you could give it a metric of tasks that one must accomplish in an average flight. Even as a single pilot in a 777, you accomplish fewer tasks than one would as a single pilot in a King Air. This is a fact. This can be backed up by numerical data.

 

The King Air was designed to be operated as a two-pilot aircraft. Operators sought the help of Beech and the FAA to certify that aircraft for a single pilot. If operators of the 777 and Boeing teamed together to get that done (unlikely for both economic and highly political reasons), I'm sure that it could easily be done. It's been done before, however, on the decision to go from three to two crew members.

 

 

 

Again, I'm not advocating a change, and I'm not saying one crew member is at all realistic. I'm simply saying that the reason we have two people up there isn't simply "because it's too hard for one person." It's a safety issue. Two crew members increases safety, particularly in a non-normal situation. As the number of passengers increases, this becomes more of a concern.

 

Honestly, if I were flying on a hard IFR day in a 172, I'd prefer to have another pilot with me to help spread the work load and increase safety. The FAA doesn't require it, though, and the metric that they allow it isn't based on a metric of work load. Again: fact.

[777simmer 117]

Pfff... not an issue...before flight just label them with a Dymo and call them :  Joshua, Jimmy, Rebecca, Nivea, Sparrow, David, Raginald etc. etc.  

Like that :-)....from now on , when I want my college to hit the AP switch, I will order "Engage Natascha" :-)