Autopilot Disconnection

There's so much testosterone flowing on both sides of the debate, I'm afraid that if I go offline, someone's going to "ballwalk" my forum to prove their manhood! :sarcasm:
 
Hehehe - no worries, Dough . . . I've admitted that I'm not a very safe pilot already!!:D

How are the loads usually from CVG to PHX . . . any idea?
 
Ok but dudes for serious, we were having a legit discussion about technique and autopilot disconnection, which I think was a good discussion until we all started saying, "Yeah well my way is the only way and #### the FOM, #### freight pilots, #### autopilots, #### RJ's and #### YOU!!!!"
 
Ok but dudes for serious, we were having a legit discussion about technique and autopilot disconnection, which I think was a good discussion until we all started saying, "Yeah well my way is the only way and #### the FOM, #### freight pilots, #### autopilots, #### RJ's and #### YOU!!!!"

Exactly. Refer to the FOM for guidance. Work from there.

I keep trying to beat it into people's heads that it's not as important what they think, they're going to have the flight operations manual smacked over their head if they as much as blow a tire.
 
Like Doug said.......

It is imperative you know the books cold or know at least where to find the information or you will be hung by your skin while they dismantle your balls.

Ask jinxyjoe about it, but I had to deny boarding to an elderly lady over the summer. What a crapstorm that produced!

But I knew what information I had in the books, referenced the books and I, for once in my life, was right!

:)
 
I liked the post better before...it was right.

-mini

*edit to add*
Do you RJ/ATR/general 121 drivers have a policy in the manual requiring you to program the box and use the flight director for everything? I'm not asking to be a smart-arse, I'm just trying to understand why everyone says the PNF is so busy programing the computer when you should be able to fly of of raw data at this level. If it's a manual/ops thing, I understand. If it's just pilots needing the automation...I don't get it. Not that automation isn't nice...it certainly is. Does it help? Absolutely. But to say that it's dangerous to hand fly to minimums and missed approaches and raw data...it just doesn't add up to me.

AP is mandatory on CAT II. As far as flying raw data, you could, but using the FD is safer and more efficient. Its not dangerous to hand fly to minimums and do the missed approaches and raw data, but the margin for error increases as does the workload. Sure you can do it but its not necessary unless you want to boast your ego as a superpilot:) It kinda like having power steering in your car but saying 'to hell with it, I can drive without it' Why make things harder for yourself?
 
AP is mandatory on CAT II. As far as flying raw data, you could, but using the FD is safer and more efficient. Its not dangerous to hand fly to minimums and do the missed approaches and raw data, but the margin for error increases as does the workload. Sure you can do it but its not necessary unless you want to boast your ego as a superpilot:) It kinda like having power steering in your car but saying 'to hell with it, I can drive without it' Why make things harder for yourself?
And there are times when you should say...automation off (FOM permitting), fly the dang airplane. Green source is not your enemy!!!
 
True dat! But those situations are not on Cat II approaches.

All that crap goes out the window on visuals for me. The FD comes off, the autopilot obviously comes off and I hand fly the thing around the pattern. I had one captain ask me what the heck I was doing, not flying the ILS when it was clear and a million and I was in the left downwind. It's still an airplane, and will fly just like a regular airplane!
 
True dat! But those situations are not on Cat II approaches.

All that crap goes out the window on visuals for me. The FD comes off, the autopilot obviously comes off and I hand fly the thing around the pattern. I had one captain ask me what the heck I was doing, not flying the ILS when it was clear and a million and I was in the left downwind. It's still an airplane, and will fly just like a regular airplane!
I have no experience with Cat II so I'll let the bus drivers handle that one;)...but if you're afraid to shoot an ILS green source, something is wrong. Why do some airliners get delay vectors to "set up the box" on a CAAM day? Most days I wouldn't trust our autopilot down below 1000', but supposedly it will do Cat II (we're not certified for it). I wouldn't trust it, that's for sure!!! The only days I let the autopilot fly below 10K is if it's CAAM and we're looking outside for bug smashers.
 
Do you RJ/ATR/general 121 drivers have a policy in the manual requiring you to program the box and use the flight director for everything? I'm not asking to be a smart-arse, I'm just trying to understand why everyone says the PNF is so busy programing the computer when you should be able to fly of of raw data at this level. If it's a manual/ops thing, I understand. If it's just pilots needing the automation...I don't get it. Not that automation isn't nice...it certainly is. Does it help? Absolutely. But to say that it's dangerous to hand fly to minimums and missed approaches and raw data...it just doesn't add up to me.

Most companies at the very least strongly encourage the use of the highest level of automation. Pinnacle used to actually require the FD on takeoff. Raw data takeoffs were prohibited. Not sure if they still do or not. At AirTran, we pretty much never turn off the flight director. On my fed ride for initial upgrade at Pinnacle, I had a fed from the MEM FSDO in the jumpseat. He was a recently retired FedEx MD-11 Captain. On the visual approach into HSV, I turned off the AP and FD and flew the visual the old fashioned way. Just seemed easier because it was clear and a million. The fed was not happy. He still signed off my fed ride and said I did an otherwise good job, but he didn't like the fact that I turned off the FD at all. He said that reducing the level of automation to that degree was a degradation of safety. At the time, I thought he was a little over the top. Now, I agree with him completely. Experience taught me that removing levels of automation reduces the safety margin. Can you still fly a raw data approach and missed by hand 99.9999999% of time without a problem? Yep, I'm sure. But there's that tiny, tiny percent of the time that that extra little bit of automation could save your ass.
 
AP is mandatory on CAT II. As far as flying raw data, you could, but using the FD is safer and more efficient. Its not dangerous to hand fly to minimums and do the missed approaches and raw data, but the margin for error increases as does the workload. Sure you can do it but its not necessary unless you want to boast your ego as a superpilot:) It kinda like having power steering in your car but saying 'to hell with it, I can drive without it' Why make things harder for yourself?

Exactly.
 
If you have a Captain that does that, simply tell him that you'd prefer him/her to fly every leg. They'll get the message quick.

When a Captain has an authority issue, I let them be totally in charge. Want me to start the APU? You're gonna have to tell me. I'm not gonna do squat until you tell me to.

Told him if he was gonna tell me how to fly the plane technique wise and rant and rave when I didn't do it his way, then I'd be happy to work the radios for the rest of the trip. Esp when he kept getting grabby with my knobs when I was flying. He was making stuff up as he went along. Got p*ssy when I started the APU going through 10K b/c it was cold and they were shooting ILSs, so I knew ahead of time we'd be flying with anti-ice on with the flaps out of zero. He wanted to just leave the APU off to save gas. When I reminded him that it was a limitation....well, he started mocking me. He was a little taken back when he asked my why we put the anti-ice on the bleeds, knew the answer and still wanted to go with what the CFM said. The kicker was when NY approach told us to fly direct LGA, I asked him to put LGA in the FMS and his response was "Oh, just intercept the LDA 22. That's what she really wants" as he reaches up and spins my HDG bug.

After all was said and done, I had a beer, vented to Seggy and fired off an e-mail to pro stands.
 
That CA was obviously a • for various reasons, but I do agree with him about the APU. I never start the APU without asking the skipper first. On the CRJ, I always wanted to wait until as late as possible to start it to save not just the fuel, but time on the APU. Pinnacle's service contract with Garrett is priced base on a ratio of APU hours to flight time. The lower the ratio, the lower the cost. So, I always timed the APU start pretty late on the approach. I certainly wouldn't have snapped at you if you started it then, but I would have asked you to ask me before starting it from now on.
 
That CA was obviously a • for various reasons, but I do agree with him about the APU. I never start the APU without asking the skipper first. On the CRJ, I always wanted to wait until as late as possible to start it to save not just the fuel, but time on the APU. Pinnacle's service contract with Garrett is priced base on a ratio of APU hours to flight time. The lower the ratio, the lower the cost. So, I always timed the APU start pretty late on the approach. I certainly wouldn't have snapped at you if you started it then, but I would have asked you to ask me before starting it from now on.

Yeah, I would have been abolutely cool with that, and I would have said something along the lines of "Yeah, that makes sense." But to totally blow of a limitation (which is just one of the many things this guy did to get on my "do not fly with" list) is just.....well, retarded.

The anal pilot in me just doesn't like amber caution messages on the EICAS when they can be avoided.
 
But to totally blow of a limitation (which is just one of the many things this guy did to get on my "do not fly with" list) is just.....well, retarded.

Absolutely. Hopefully Pro Stands will knock some sense into the guy. I don't suppose you could hint at who it was? :)

The anal pilot in me just doesn't like amber caution messages on the EICAS when they can be avoided.

You'll have to remind me: what caution msg was up in this case? I don't remember having any msg up when I waited to start the APU.
 
True dat! But those situations are not on Cat II approaches.

All that crap goes out the window on visuals for me. The FD comes off, the autopilot obviously comes off and I hand fly the thing around the pattern. I had one captain ask me what the heck I was doing, not flying the ILS when it was clear and a million and I was in the left downwind. It's still an airplane, and will fly just like a regular airplane!

True dat twice. On CAT II go arounds sometimes the mains hit the ground, thats how close you are when you hit minimums. No jacking around on that approach AP has to be on.

Same here on visuals. Couple nights ago as soon as I turned downwind on the circle to land FD went off as did the autopilot. Felt like I was flying the seminole in the pattern at GKY.
 
Back
Top