Boring sorta buys Embraer

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

If the person j was flying with wanted to “talk” because I was hand-flying the airplane, I’d say “cool story, bro.”

If they insisted, I’d say “If it matters that much to you, then you have the flight controls.”

Fortunately, I fly with good pilots and good
people, and so it hasn’t ever been an issue.

-Fox

I don’t think the chief would back you up on this one. The captain isn’t demanding anything against the regs. You just don’t particularly care for his style. Such is life as an FO.

 

[🦈💜]

I don’t think the chief would back you up on this one. The captain isn’t demanding anything against the regs. You just don’t particularly care for his style. Such is life as an FO.

So I started writing a long post in response to this, but I realized that every conversation here becomes stylized posturing and dogma from every side, including mine, and there's really no point in it. I could write out my most heartfelt, moderate explanation of something, and it would just serve as a basis for argument.

Long story short, I'm more moderate on this point than I can easily express. I'm flexible, and I adapt. If I don't like someone's "style," I just won't fly with them. I especially am not confrontational in flight unless it's a serious and blatant safety issue that demands an immediate change.

That said, if I'm PF, let me be PF. The captain and I are equally-qualified, and I often have more experience in the airplane than the CA... so leave me alone and let me do my job, as long as it's a conservative approach, within the confines of SOP and consistent with safety. I'll happily discuss the matter, in neutral terms, outside of sterile. I'm not confrontational, and I do adapt to the style of the person I'm flying with.

With that said, 98% of people I fly with are on the same page in this regard, so meta-arguing the other 2% here on a forum will just lead to posturing and all of us positioning ourselves in arguments that we wouldn't actually ever intend. I'll end up coming off as a "Don't tell me what to do!" n'er-do-well, and the other side will come off as an authoritarian "Captain is god" type.

If I flew at a "captain is god" airline, or one where captains took it upon themselves to chew out FOs on subjects that amount to their personal preferences, I wouldn't stay. That's not good CRM, and that attitude and ego has no place. But I doubt people here are legitimately espousing that, despite the sharp points.

-Fox

 

[Box hauler]

So I started writing a long post in response to this, but I realized that every conversation here becomes stylized posturing and dogma from every side, including mine, and there's really no point in it. I could write out my most heartfelt, moderate explanation of something, and it would just serve as a basis for argument.

Long story short, I'm more moderate on this point than I can easily express. I'm flexible, and I adapt. If I don't like someone's "style," I just won't fly with them. I especially am not confrontational in flight unless it's a serious and blatant safety issue that demands an immediate change.

That said, if I'm PF, let me be PF. The captain and I are equally-qualified, and I often have more experience in the airplane than the CA... so leave me alone and let me do my job, as long as it's a conservative approach, within the confines of SOP and consistent with safety. I'll happily discuss the matter, in neutral terms, outside of sterile. I'm not confrontational, and I do adapt to the style of the person I'm flying with.

With that said, 98% of people I fly with are on the same page in this regard, so meta-arguing the other 2% here on a forum will just lead to posturing and all of us positioning ourselves in arguments that we wouldn't actually ever intend. I'll end up coming off as a "Don't tell me what to do!" n'er-do-well, and the other side will come off as an authoritarian "Captain is god" type.

If I flew at a "captain is god" airline, or one where captains took it upon themselves to chew out FOs on subjects that amount to their personal preferences, I wouldn't stay. That's not good CRM, and that attitude and ego has no place. But I doubt people here are legitimately espousing that, despite the sharp points.

So I started writing a long post in response to this, but I realized that every conversation here becomes stylized posturing and dogma from every side, including mine, and there's really no point in it. I could write out my most heartfelt, moderate explanation of something, and it would just serve as a basis for argument.

Long story short, I'm more moderate on this point than I can easily express. I'm flexible, and I adapt. If I don't like someone's "style," I just won't fly with them. I especially am not confrontational in flight unless it's a serious and blatant safety issue that demands an immediate change.

That said, if I'm PF, let me be PF. The captain and I are equally-qualified, and I often have more experience in the airplane than the CA... so leave me alone and let me do my job, as long as it's a conservative approach, within the confines of SOP and consistent with safety. I'll happily discuss the matter, in neutral terms, outside of sterile. I'm not confrontational, and I do adapt to the style of the person I'm flying with.

With that said, 98% of people I fly with are on the same page in this regard, so meta-arguing the other 2% here on a forum will just lead to posturing and all of us positioning ourselves in arguments that we wouldn't actually ever intend. I'll end up coming off as a "Don't tell me what to do!" n'er-do-well, and the other side will come off as an authoritarian "Captain is god" type.

If I flew at a "captain is god" airline, or one where captains took it upon themselves to chew out FOs on subjects that amount to their personal preferences, I wouldn't stay. That's not good CRM, and that attitude and ego has no place. But I doubt people here are legitimately espousing that, despite the sharp points.

-Fox

Yeah the problem is, you get people kicking off the AP when still on the arrival going into places like New York so now the other pilot is talking to ATC, making configuration changes, running checklists, making sure the flying pilot is now making the altitude and speeds that are assigned and so on. There is a time and place for hand flying but the people who take really busy situations and kick everything off aren't doing anyone any favors.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Yeah the problem is, you get people kicking off the AP when still on the arrival going into places like New York so now the other pilot is talking to ATC, making configuration changes, running checklists, making sure the flying pilot is now making the altitude and speeds that are assigned and so on. There is a time and place for hand flying but the people who take really busy situations and kick everything off aren't doing anyone any favors.

What would be different in your scenario, for the other pilot not flying, if the AP had been left on while on the arrival? Likewise, why was the scenario above a problem back in the days of 727's, MD-80's and 737200/300's?

 

[jtrain609]

What would be different in your scenario, for the other pilot not flying, if the AP had been left on while on the arrival? Likewise, why was the scenario above a problem back in the days of 727's, MD-80's and 737200/300's?

PNF has to make all the changes to the FMC and FMS and get all the radio calls when the PF is hand flying. They're doing their own job plus the work of the PF.

 

[U_of_I_Tweak]

PNF has to make all the changes to the FMC and FMS and get all the radio calls when the PF is hand flying. They're doing their own job plus the work of the PF.

I've been resisting since I think my opinion is in the minority here, and I'm not anxious for the pile on, but by and large I agree with Fox's take on this. I hand fly a fair amount. I was stunned to see how fast certain skills and part of my scan atrophied when I was first motoring around an airplane with auto throttles.

To the quoted point above, the PNF isn't doing the PF's job when the PF is hand flying. They're busier, but that's that's otherwise hyperbole. At my place of employment, the SOP dictates that the PNF is responsible for FMS changes anyway. I do agree that hand flying adds to the workload of the PNF, and that's where a little SA goes a long way. That and a brief that says something along the lines of, "If you're getting too busy, let me know and I'll hand the plane off to Otto."

I'm completely comfortable managing the automation. I'm not comfortable having to depend on it because my skills aren't up to snuff. And, I'm not happy with changing how I fly to match the limitations of the system. Specifically in my plane, the auto throttles don't go to idle soon enough in my opinion. When I was doing my first landings in the plane, the other pilot told me to just keep pointing it at the runway and they'll eventually come back to idle. Why would I do that? That, and the fact that it's a 12% preformance penalty is why I, and no one I fly with leave the engaged through landing.

Anyway, a couple of micro example in the macro opinion of fly how you want to fly, let the other pilot fly how they want. Maintain a little SA and modify as necessary.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[jtrain609]

I've been resisting since I think my opinion is in the minority here, and I'm not anxious for the pile on, but by and large I agree with Fox's take on this. I hand fly a fair amount. I was stunned to see how fast certain skills and part of my scan atrophied when I was first motoring around an airplane with auto throttles.

To the quoted point above, the PNF isn't doing the PF's job when the PF is hand flying. They're busier, but that's that's otherwise hyperbole. At my place of employment, the SOP dictates that the PNF is responsible for FMS changes anyway. I do agree that hand flying adds to the workload of the PNF, and that's where a little SA goes a long way. That and a brief that says something along the lines of, "If you're getting too busy, let me know and I'll hand the plane off to Otto."

I'm completely comfortable managing the automation. I'm not comfortable having to depend on it because my skills aren't up to snuff. And, I'm not happy with changing how I fly to match the limitations of the system. Specifically in my plane, the auto throttles don't go to idle soon enough in my opinion. When I was doing my first landings in the plane, the other pilot told me to just keep pointing it at the runway and they'll eventually come back to idle. Why would I do that? That, and the fact that it's a 12% preformance penalty is why I, and no one I fly with leave the engaged through landing.

Anyway, a couple of micro example in the macro opinion of fly how you want to fly, let the other pilot fly how they want. Maintain a little SA and modify as necessary.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Who has the PNF do all FMS and FMC changes even with the AP on?

 

[U_of_I_Tweak]

Who has the PNF do all FMS and FMC changes even with the AP on?

I fly 91. It's different than I've done it in the past, and not how I'd do it if I were king, but it's how we do it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[mikecweb]

"I'll handfly it till 18 or it gets busy or i I get bored"
"I'll leave it hooked up until the checklists are complete and we are cleared to land"

Works good lasts long time.

 

[skatergeek]

"I'll handfly it till 18 or it gets busy or i I get bored"
"I'll leave it hooked up until the checklists are complete and we are cleared to land"

Works good lasts long time.

Exactly how I am.

 

[trafficinsight]

Who has the PNF do all FMS and FMC changes even with the AP on?

We do below 10/18.


Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[jtrain609]

We do below 10/18.


Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

Even with the AP on? That's weird.

 

[Jordan93]

Most of my hand flying is when we get cleared for a visual on the downwind at an outstation. I try not to hand fly departing busy terminal areas because I don’t want to overload the FOs especially because a lot of them are brand new at their first 121 job. Don’t want to be filing a lot of ASAPs.

 

[trafficinsight]

Even with the AP on? That's weird.

I find 18 on the descent to be a little overkill, but below 10 it's really quite nice to be heads up at all times.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Cptnchia]

I try not to hand fly departing busy terminal areas because I don’t want to overload the FOs especially because a lot of them are brand new at their first 121 job. Don’t want to be filing a lot of ASAPs.

That I can understand, but when you get to the legacy level, if a guy can’t talk on the radio, turn the knobs as required, and run a checklist, without actually having to manipulate the controls, then how in the hell did they get to that level?

 

[Jordan93]

That I can understand, but when you get to the legacy level, if a guy can’t talk on the radio, turn the knobs as required, and run a checklist, without actually having to manipulate the controls, then how in the hell did they get to that level?

My job as an FO was to make my CA’s job easy. My job as a CA is to make my FO’s job easy. I could hand fly and overload them but I’d prefer to make it as easy as possible for them. I don’t mind moving knobs, working the FMS, doing radios, running checklists, but it would all be easier with the AP on rather than trying to show off to the PM that you can follow the FD and a magenta line. Time and place for everything. Last year’s recurrent LOE had an AP failure to a hand flown approach (don’t remember which exact one) to minimums at LGA so I think hand Flying is very important.

 

[jtrain609]

That I can understand, but when you get to the legacy level, if a guy can’t talk on the radio, turn the knobs as required, and run a checklist, without actually having to manipulate the controls, then how in the hell did they get to that level?

I figured by the time you got to that level, guys wouldn't have anything left to prove.

I'll admit that I was wrong.

 

[Cptnchia]

I figured by the time you got to that level, guys wouldn't have anything left to prove.

I'll admit that I was wrong.

You think hand flying is trying to prove something?

 

[jtrain609]

You think hand flying is trying to prove something?

I think having SA so low that someone is hand flying when they should be helping look for traffic in a busy terminal environment just because they can means they're trying to prove something.

 

[Cptnchia]

I think having SA so low that someone is hand flying when they should be helping look for traffic in a busy terminal environment just because they can means they're trying to prove something.

So, when the AP is deferred you’re going to refuse the aircraft? Or take it, but because you haven’t hand flown in over a year, be an even worse pilot?

There’s a reason legacies are putting an emphasis on hand flying. LOSA and ASAP reports point to a fundamental failure of pilots to be able to hand fly, due to an over reliance on automation.

Private pilots flying solo are able to function and operate in a safe manner without an AP. You should to. If the person who is hand flying is incapable of looking out the window for traffic, or have any SA as to the state of the aircraft, then they need to be 709’d.