Flydubai Flight 981

Derg said:
At least they're trying! :)

Still trying to figure out why a FBW aircraft has a trim switch though...
Click to expand...
I don't know, seems like it'd be nice if you ever stooped to hand flying, but then again the bus has that auto trim magic from what I understand and maybe once you try that the trim switch becomes superfluous.
 
Derg said:
It doesn't make any damned sense.

So technically speaking, you could initiate TOGA, the autopilot clicks off and during all the confusion since the plane is trimmed fora particular airspeed, it's technically going to pitch up to maintain that…more or less.
Click to expand...

Agree with you completely.

It makes no sense.
 
Derg said:
It doesn't make any damned sense.

So technically speaking, you could initiate TOGA, the autopilot clicks off and during all the confusion since the plane is trimmed fora particular airspeed, it's technically going to pitch up to maintain that…more or less.
Click to expand...

IIRC, in my whopping ten hours of 737 sim, there is no TLA/thrust compensation on the 737, either.

That said... and forgive me for saying this as the most junior of the most junior... fly the g-d airplane!

Did you read the part in where in sim the AT pilots always do approaches with both channels engaged for the coupled missed, but on the line they only ever use one channel?

-Fox
 
Seggy said:
Do you mean the trim wheel? Or talking about something else?
Click to expand...

Nah, the thingy on the yoke, for example, the 777.

In it's initial design, it wasn't there but the design team at "Snacks R Back" wanted a more conventional setup.
 
Acrofox said:
IIRC, in my whopping ten hours of 737 sim, there is no TLA/thrust compensation on the 737, either.

That said... and forgive me for saying this as the most junior of the most junior... fly the g-d airplane!

Did you read the part in where in sim the AT pilots always do approaches with both channels engaged for the coupled missed, but on the line they only ever use one channel?

-Fox
Click to expand...

Always fly the airplane.

However the ever present threat is knowing what level of automation we're in (or not at all) and it's too often a fatal error.

Hand-flying isn't the answer as that's a whole different chapter in the book of "Murphy's Law". Fully coupled, is another chapter.

It really seems that the road is leading to a good discussion on "Human Factors".
 
Derg said:
It doesn't make any damned sense.

So technically speaking, you could initiate TOGA, the autopilot clicks off and during all the confusion since the plane is trimmed fora particular airspeed, it's technically going to pitch up to maintain that…more or less.
Click to expand...
It's no jet, but the SAAB is the same as the 737 when you press the toga buttons, the ap disconnects. The FD pitches up to 6.4 degrees, but there is no autopilot. You actually have to fly it up to the command bars. But at least you get go around power with the flip of a switch.
 
Acrofox said:
Did you read the part in where in sim the AT pilots always do approaches with both channels engaged for the coupled missed, but on the line they only ever use one channel?

-Fox
Click to expand...
I missed that. Why would you not just do all coupled approaches with both/all(how many in the 737?) channels engaged to make this a non-issue? Going to my extraordinarily short time in the 747, if you have 1 engaged, they all(3) arm when you hit the approach button. If you hit TO/GA with no AP/FD it brings up the FD, and I went back and looked - it makes no meantion of what happens when you hit TO/GA with only 1 AP active on approach(which would not be a normal situation), but in climb and cruise phases it would not turn off the 1 channel, so I don't know why it would on approach.
 
Last edited:
When I was on the 737, you'd only activate the other autopilot when you're doing an autoland. Granted this was back in the… uhhh…. early 2000's and I'm sure the procedure has changed a zillion times.

Same in the 757/767.

In the bus, we couple them both just out of procedure and "Momma says DO IT" so we do it.

We did have some situations at my employer which changed our procedures to visually and verbally verify that the plane is performing as expected during a missed approach/go around in order to mitigate that error across all of our fleets.
 
Derg said:
Always fly the airplane.

However the ever present threat is knowing what level of automation we're in (or not at all) and it's too often a fatal error.
Click to expand...

It's not like that airplane makes an incredibly loud whooping sound on AP disconnect or anything...

I mean, I do totally get what you're saying... and it's probably a product of my inexperience, but I still see it as basically as the first job to know who or what's flying the airplane, and establish that the airplane is following an appropriate path through the air, ideally clearing all obstacles and protuberances of Earth.

Hand-flying isn't the answer as that's a whole different chapter in the book of "Murphy's Law". Fully coupled, is another chapter.
Click to expand...

I am nowhere near above making mistakes or oversights in any regime of automation, and I doubt I'll ever be. I trust that as time goes on, the errors I make will shrink and diminish in severity, but yes, there's always work to be done in trapping errors. IMO, there should be no rush in initial training, and it could/should be twice as long, exposing pilots to far more in the way of unexpected and out-of-the-box scenarios... but like seemingly all areas of human endeavor, when profit motive is introduced everything is stripped down to the bare essentials.

It really seems that the road is leading to a good discussion on "Human Factors".
Click to expand...

Any time a perfectly- (or reasonably-)sound airplane crashes, you can almost always defer to "human factors." I still say the leading "human factor" is the failure to prioritize "fly the airplane or make sure someone or something else is" as #1 on the execution stack.

But again, I acknowledge my inexperience and do not claim to have the answers—I welcome reasoned correction if I'm off-target.

-Fox
 
Derg said:
When I was on the 737, you'd only activate the other autopilot when you're doing an autoland. Granted this was back in the… uhhh…. early 2000's and I'm sure the procedure has changed a zillion times.

Same in the 757/767.

In the bus, we couple them both just out of procedure and "Momma says DO IT" so we do it.

We did have some situations at my employer which changed our procedures to visually and verbally verify that the plane is performing as expected during a missed approach/go around in order to mitigate that error across all of our fleets.
Click to expand...

We do the second autopilot when pressing the APPR pb on an ILS to give added protection from a false FLARE/ THR IDLE mode if a radio altimeter messes up.

The 737 had gremlins with the RAs as well.

The reason why people don't do dual channel approaches in the 737 is because it pretty much had to terminate in an autoland unless you kicked off the A/P before 500 feet. At 500 feet it spun in something like 5 units of nose up trim to assist in a go-around... which things could get sporty if you turned off the AP once the wheel of knee ouchies had done its thing. Yet another part of a really dumb design.
 
I love having training department guys online.

So much more robust than me going "Hell, breezy. We do it because momma says so" :)
 
PeanuckleCRJ said:
The reason why people don't do dual channel approaches in the 737 is because it pretty much had to terminate in an autoland unless you kicked off the A/P before 500 feet. At 500 feet it spun in something like 5 units of nose up trim to assist in a go-around... which things could get sporty if you turned off the AP once the wheel of knee ouchies had done its thing. Yet another part of a really dumb design.
Click to expand...
Okay. By 500 feet if the AP is still on, your intentions should be to autoland. I think that's a touch late to take it and have a normal approach to landing.
 
z987k said:
Okay. By 500 feet if the AP is still on, your intentions should be to autoland. I think that's a touch late to take it and have a normal approach to landing.
Click to expand...

Negatory.

I have kicked the autopilot off much lower to land in windy conditions outside of the auto land limit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top