AF447 Vanity Fair article

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

It appears many here are stuck in a 30 year old paradigm to explain human performance.

Bingo!

 

[RDoug]

Flying an airplane isn't all that difficult. Sorry to bruise everyone's ego, but I can train just about anybody with an IQ over 80 to fly an airplane.

My dad, a 24-year USAF pilot who spent most of his career in the KC-135, would vehemently disagree with that contention. He once had on his crew a copilot with no skills whatsoever, and no ability to learn. Indeed, this same copilot took instruction in sailplanes and the instructor pulled him aside after several lessons and told him, "Some people just aren't meant to fly. You are one of those." The instructor darned near keeled over when dad's copilot informed him that he was a right-seater in a KC-235.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

My dad, a 24-year USAF pilot who spent most of his career in the KC-135, would vehemently disagree with that contention.

I can live with knowing that I disagree with someone I've never met and never will meet.

 

[RDoug]

I'm by no means an expert. All my aviation experience is in ATC. That being said, I have to shake my head at a design that has a totally different CHI (computer-human interface) during degraded service versus normal operation. That's the one time in my book in which you would never want a different CHI. It's just setting up a pilot for failure during an already difficult, potentially emergency situation. And reading this entire thread, it appears to this novice that's precisely what happened in the case of AF447.

Yeah, the pilots screwed up, but if they had help screwing up because of bad CHI then ultimately there's something wrong with the CHI on that design that needs to be addressed. This whole thing reminds me of the Glock debate — Glock fanboys are always yelling "Operator error" every time someone (including professionals such as law enforcement officers) have a negligent discharge with statements such as, "He should have kept his finger off the trigger." But if there are an inordinate number of negligent discharges (and police department statistics prove that there are with the Glock) then at some point you have to start looking at the design that precipitates human error so easily.

I've had my uninformed say, so I'll now go back to lurking. Have fun, y'all.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Well said, and the Glock example is quite fitting.

 

[🦈💜]

In your driver example I think it's possible they may not have understood what "median" means. American's and math.

Good thing we're good at English!

... oh.

-Fox

 

[jynxyjoe]

Good thing we're good at English!

... oh.

-Fox

Did I goof up some grammar in that ost? If so I apologize, I never should have been allowed to pass 5th grade.

 

[wheelsup]

Did I goof up some grammar in that ost? If so I apologize, I never should have been allowed to pass 5th grade.

I think it was the '

 

[jynxyjoe]

I think it was the '

Help me Obiwan @darrenf you're my only hope- help me Obiwan @darrenf you're my only hope- *replay*

 

[BobDDuck]

What is it about the 121 world that breeds this kind of belief?

By definition, day visual approaches and landings are the most basic, core skill learned and practiced from literally day one as a pilot.

I've been a professional pilot for going on 20 years, and at no time during that experience -- ever -- was a "beautiful day VFR approach" anywhere NEAR remotely being even in the same neighborhood as "the most difficult maneuver to fly". In fact, it has always been quite the opposite.

I seriously, honestly, really, all bravado aside, do not grasp where you guys are coming from when you say stuff like this. This is the same line trotted out when first discussing the findings in the SFO crash. I didn't get it then, and I don't get it now. To me, this is like saying "the sky is red", and it is said with such seriousness and conviction I have to think that you guys really believe it.

What is it about 121 flying that creates a culture where this is true in both belief and practice?

Sorry to go back a few pages... side effect of being several time zones behind the rest of the civilized world.

Hacker, the issue is that in the military you guys train the hell out of pattern work. I flew to Kona 3 time on Wednesday and the same P3 was there the whole time doing practice approaches to a few turns in the pattern and then back out to radar again. For several hours. Over and over and over. Same thing happens with C17s and the F22s and the KC135s and KC10s out here. I used to watch Harriers and KC135s do hours of pattern work at Willie when I was instructing there. Over and over and over.

You know how many visual approaches (from a downwind) I've done in the plane that I just hit 1000 hours in? Two. That's it. I've done a whole bunch of "base to final" sorts, but keep in mind too, I'm in an operation that does way more visual flying than almost any other 121 airline out there. We (121) just don't ever practice (in the sim and nobody in 121 is doing in aircraft training now) visual approaches. That's why, when we get them for real, even if we have thousands of hours of 172 time in the pattern to fall back on, it's a much harder maneuver than a straight in ILS, for us.

 

[Dugie8]

Sorry to go back a few pages... side effect of being several time zones behind the rest of the civilized world.

Hacker, the issue is that in the military you guys train the hell out of pattern work. I flew to Kona 3 time on Wednesday and the same P3 was there the whole time doing practice approaches to a few turns in the pattern and then back out to radar again. For several hours. Over and over and over. Same thing happens with C17s and the F22s and the KC135s and KC10s out here. I used to watch Harriers and KC135s do hours of pattern work at Willie when I was instructing there. Over and over and over.

You know how many visual approaches (from a downwind) I've done in the plane that I just hit 1000 hours in? Two. That's it. I've done a whole bunch of "base to final" sorts, but keep in mind too, I'm in an operation that does way more visual flying than almost any other 121 airline out there. We (121) just don't ever practice (in the sim and nobody in 121 is doing in aircraft training now) visual approaches. That's why, when we get them for real, even if we have thousands of hours of 172 time in the pattern to fall back on, it's a much harder maneuver than a straight in ILS, for us.

I'm gonna pile on @Hacker15e here as well.

I could fly the snot out of any instrument procedure when I got to Piedmont. Flying a purely visual approach was my nemesis. I did it for a few hours at UND and did some instructing watching guys to patters but after the first semester and a half it was almost all approaches, most of those to the published missed and a hold. Visual approaches are a taboo for some reason and god help you if you actually fly a 3 degree slope over the edge of the runway in a single engine piston.

 

[Bumblebee]

the joke at OO is

Do you know what the scariest phrase is to a new FO?

CLEARED FOR THE VISUAL!!! Muahahahah

I could fly the snot out of any instrument procedure when I got to Piedmont. Flying a purely visual approach was my nemesis. .

 

[jynxyjoe]

the joke at OO is

Do you know what the scariest phrase is to a new FO?

CLEARED FOR THE VISUAL!!! Muahahahah

It certainly can be. With good training and a FO ready to learn it can be a quick phase to grow out of.

 

[Bumblebee]

sure, and we did them at OO quite often. with 4-8 legs per day, we were getting 2-4 approaches to land each...a bit more opportunity than transoceanic crews.

 

[MikeD]

I watched a Delta 747 the other day enter the traffic pattern on the 45 at an uncontrolled field that has no instrument approaches, fly a downwind/base/final visually, and land successfully. And with all the correct radio transmissions too. Was i watching some kind of emergency procedure being accomplished?

 

[Bumblebee]

I watched a Delta 747 the other day enter the traffic pattern on the 45 at an uncontrolled field that has no instrument approaches, fly a downwind/base/final visually, and land successfully. And with all the correct radio transmissions too. Was i watching some kind of emergency procedure being accomplished?

just professional aviators at work.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I watched a Delta 747 the other day enter the traffic pattern on the 45 at an uncontrolled field that has no instrument approaches, fly a downwind/base/final visually, and land successfully. And with all the correct radio transmissions too. Was i watching some kind of emergency procedure being accomplished?

Emergency? No. Unusual day at the office? Definitely.

 

[MikeD]

Emergency? No. Unusual day at the office? Definitely.

just professional aviators at work.

They did it well. Almost like they do it all the time. Was cool to watch, too, due to the unusual nature. Sad that it was likely the plane's last landing...

 

[Boris Badenov]

Emergency? No. Unusual day at the office? Definitely.

So much so that, had they scratched paint, it'd be time to sue Boeing for their failure to implement appropriate autoland technology. You're going to excuse us all out of jobs. Plus (imho) kill a lot of people and break some airplanes. If you're afraid of a visual approach, you should go make a lot of money doing something else. Hey, wait a minute...

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

They did it well. Almost like they do it all the time. Was cool to watch, too, due to the unusual nature. Sad that it was likely the plane's last landing...

The aircraft aren't usable again after a hand flown visual approach.

That said... RIP to the 3 whales. There will be one more heading out your way later this month.