Oh Qatar

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Bro, work on your CFI.

I was speaking from my experience. You know GA planes have AP too, right? The DA40's I trained in in SLC most had AP and LNAV. And they could be wonky at times. I never said that I was talking about a 121 jet. So yeah, I was speaking to my actual experience with autopilot.

 

[mikecweb]

I was speaking from my experience. You know GA planes have AP too, right? The DA40's I trained in in SLC most had AP and LNAV. And they could be wonky at times. I never said that I was talking about a 121 jet. So yeah, I was speaking to my actual experience with autopilot.

Don't make me agree with Todd...

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I was speaking from my experience. You know GA planes have AP too, right? The DA40's I trained in in SLC most had AP and LNAV. And they could be wonky at times. I never said that I was talking about a 121 jet. So yeah, I was speaking to my actual experience with autopilot.

Flashbacks of private pilots stopping by the cockpit...

 

[///AMG]

No reason to think so, any pilot can get distracted and make a mistake. The takeaway should be to use the automation because it doesn’t get fatigued, it doesn’t get distracted, etc.

Counterpoint being pilots getting confused about how to fix the automation, and letting the airplane get out of control either in AP, or while hand flying and not knowing what to look at when the FDs are all messed up due to automation being wrong. Which goes back to the point about experience/training. Not saying automation is the problem.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Counterpoint being pilots getting confused about how to fix the automation, and letting the airplane get out of control either in AP, or while hand flying and not knowing what to look at when the FDs are all messed up due to automation being wrong.

Which is why the focus needs to be on training to the automation rather than hand flying.

 

[///AMG]

Which is why the focus needs to be on training to the automation rather than hand flying.

You were too quick.....edited above, I agree that automation is an important skill that needs to be fully understood.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Automation is a tool. If it’s not doing what you want, lower the level of automation - all the way back to hand flying if you have to, to correct the flight path and energy state of the airplane. Too many people get sucked into poking at buttons, heads down trying to make the computer bend to their will. I’d rather hear “click click” and see them take control of the airplane. You know, like a pilot.

 

[tcco94]

Which is why the focus needs to be on training to the automation rather than hand flying.

So are you saying don’t teach hand flying or maybe you’re saying the knowledge of basic hand flying should already be known at this point and the emphasis should be on training to the automation? Not arguing, just inquiring on your thought.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Don't make me agree with Todd...

Flashbacks of private pilots stopping by the cockpit...

I disagree.

I simply stated that they're not perfect. That autopilots can be wonky at times. Is that fact incorrect? Please correct me if I'm wrong about that. @SlumTodd_Millionaire would be correct in his slap down, if I had said as I was speaking from experience about the autopilot on the 737, or A320 does this or that. As I have no experience with those.

But my actual experience with AP's, which I again I related was simply that they can be wonky at times. Not sure why that simple statement ruffles feathers.

If the landlord or any other 121/135 pilots here take umbrage at me relating my experience with an AP's and would prefer in the future. That I state a disclaimer that, "from my GA experience AP's can be wonky at times," if that helps and prevents me from being called out. Or if maybe you would just prefer that I don't participate in certain threads, also let me know that to, okay.

Also Todd. I'm not a PPL.

 

[mikecweb]

I disagree.

I simply stated that they're not perfect. That autopilots can be wonky at times. Is that fact incorrect? Please correct me if I'm wrong about that. @SlumTodd_Millionaire would be correct in his slap down, if I had said as I was speaking from experience about the autopilot on the 737, or A320 does this or that. As I have no experience with those.

But my actual experience with AP's, which I again I related was simply that they can be wonky at times. Not sure why that simple statement ruffles feathers.

If the landlord or any other 121/135 pilots here take umbrage at me relating my experience with an AP's and would prefer in the future. That I state a disclaimer that, "from my GA experience AP's can be wonky at times," if that helps and prevents me from being called out. Or if maybe you would just prefer that I don't participate in certain threads, also let me know that to, okay.

Also Todd. I'm not a PPL.

At this level, "autopilots" rarely go "wonky" and if they do you use the other one. Or the third one.
FMS vertical and horizontal guidance can sometimes do what you dont want it to do but that's usually from human error. GIGO. The skill comes in where you know what level of automation you are in, what you expect it to do, what it is doing, and how to modify or reduce automation to maintain a desired aircraft state. This is complicated by two dudes that may process, know, and do things at different paces. For arguments sake we'll assume everyone is technically proficient, which you can't really assume.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

At this level, "autopilots" rarely go "wonky" and if they do you use the other one. Or the third one.
FMS vertical and horizontal guidance can sometimes do what you dont want it to do but that's usually from human error. GIGO. The skill comes in where you know what level of automation you are in, what you expect it to do, what it is doing, and how to modify or reduce automation to maintain a desired aircraft state. This is complicated by two dudes that may process, know, and do things at different paces. For arguments sake we'll assume everyone is technically proficient, which you can't really assume.

Thank you @mikecweb for the explanation.

 

[inigo88]

Which is why the focus needs to be on training to the automation rather than hand flying.

Automation is a tool. If it’s not doing what you want, lower the level of automation - all the way back to hand flying if you have to, to correct the flight path and energy state of the airplane. Too many people get sucked into poking at buttons, heads down trying to make the computer bend to their will. I’d rather hear “click click” and see them take control of the airplane. You know, like a pilot.

So are you saying don’t teach hand flying or maybe you’re saying the knowledge of basic hand flying should already be known at this point and the emphasis should be on training to the automation? Not arguing, just inquiring on your thought.

I was gonna say, am I being too greedy as a passenger on an international flight halfway around the world to expect the professionals up front to both:

1. Understand how to use the automation, and

2. Understand raw data / basic attitude instrument and hand flying enough to avoid killing me whilst troubleshooting the problem should the automation temporarily be doing something unexpected?

Is it really too much to ask to train to both? There’s two of you up there for god’s sake and one of you literally has the title “Pilot Monitoring”.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

So are you saying don’t teach hand flying or maybe you’re saying the knowledge of basic hand flying should already be known at this point and the emphasis should be on training to the automation? Not arguing, just inquiring on your thought.

Proficiency in raw data hand flying should certainly be expected in initial training, and it should be brushed up on in the sim when you go back. But the primary focus should be on understanding and properly utilizing the automation. Under no circumstances should anyone be willfully flying raw data in today's day and age with paying passengers in the back.

 

[🦈💜]

Automation is a tool. If it’s not doing what you want, lower the level of automation - all the way back to hand flying if you have to, to correct the flight path and energy state of the airplane. Too many people get sucked into poking at buttons, heads down trying to make the computer bend to their will. I’d rather hear “click click” and see them take control of the airplane. You know, like a pilot.

Yeah. It's pretty terrifying that there are people out there who think handflying skills stay proficient from initial training, or that all automation, all the time, is the only way, the right way, the true way to run a flight deck.

But hey, what do I know? I'm basically just a private pilot at this point, like Max and Todd.

 

[killbilly]

Automation is a tool. If it’s not doing what you want, lower the level of automation - all the way back to hand flying if you have to, to correct the flight path and energy state of the airplane. Too many people get sucked into poking at buttons, heads down trying to make the computer bend to their will. I’d rather hear “click click” and see them take control of the airplane. You know, like a pilot.

I work for a “cheap” regional.

One of the things a number of our instructors hammered into us was if the automation isn’t doing what you want - whether it’s YOU or the automation itself - turn it off and Do Pilot Stuff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[mikecweb]

Proficiency in raw data hand flying should certainly be expected in initial training, and it should be brushed up on in the sim when you go back. But the primary focus should be on understanding and properly utilizing the automation. Under no circumstances should anyone be willfully flying raw data in today's day and age with paying passengers in the back.

Were you an autopilot on at 250' and autoland every leg?

 

[🦈💜]

At this level, "autopilots" rarely go "wonky" and if they do you use the other one. Or the third one.

True story, but they do fail. I've done flights on the E-175 with no AP and no A/T.

It's a lot of work. It gets easier the more you're used to disconnecting and flying, though.

FMS vertical and horizontal guidance can sometimes do what you dont want it to do but that's usually from human error. GIGO.

Usually, but again, not always. I've had departures, properly built and loaded from the DB, that suddenly decided they wanted to turn the wrong direction into a literal mountain range in IMC conditions after rotation. When they first released the IRNMN into LAX, the airplane decided it—while in FLCH, climbing to altitude—that it suddenly would rather go into a straight vertical VPATH descent to -2000'.

I've seen primus epic decide that an RNAV departure off close parallel runways involved flying a lowecase letter 'e' as depicted on the FMS, or that it was a good idea, passing BRIXX on the BDEGA with lower set, to try to fly a vertical descending VPATH.

I've seen stuff like that while jumpseating on other transport-category aircraft, as well, but I'm not trained on those and can't verify it wasn't GIGO. In the case of the 175, I've also seen plenty of GIGO, as well as "techniques" pushed that don't actually work in the airplane / actual operational environment.

skill comes in where you know what level of automation you are in, what you expect it to do, what it is doing, and how to modify or reduce automation to maintain a desired aircraft state. This is complicated by two dudes that may process, know, and do things at different paces. For arguments sake we'll assume everyone is technically proficient, which you can't really assume.

I generally feel that at the 121 level, the other important skills are continuing to mentally fly the airplane, creating and maintaining a mental model of the aircraft state and flight path, and making sure that the model is shared between the pilots. Yea it sounds cheesy, but realistically CRM is fundamental to safe operation when n>1.

But WTF do I know?

Signed,
-Basically a private pilot at this point

 

[mikecweb]

True story, but they do fail. I've done flights on the E-175 with no AP and no A/T.

It's a lot of work. It gets easier the more you're used to disconnecting and flying, though.



Usually, but again, not always. I've had departures, properly built and loaded from the DB, that suddenly decided they wanted to turn the wrong direction into a literal mountain range in IMC conditions after rotation. When they first released the IRNMN into LAX, the airplane decided it—while in FLCH, climbing to altitude—that it suddenly would rather go into a straight vertical VPATH descent to -2000'.

I've seen primus epic decide that an RNAV departure off close parallel runways involved flying a lowecase letter 'e' as depicted on the FMS, or that it was a good idea, passing BRIXX on the BDEGA with lower set, to try to fly a vertical descending VPATH.

I've seen stuff like that while jumpseating on other transport-category aircraft, as well, but I'm not trained on those and can't verify it wasn't GIGO. In the case of the 175, I've also seen plenty of GIGO, as well as "techniques" pushed that don't actually work in the airplane / actual operational environment.



I generally feel that at the 121 level, the other important skills are continuing to mentally fly the airplane, creating and maintaining a mental model of the aircraft state and flight path, and making sure that the model is shared between the pilots. Yea it sounds cheesy, but realistically CRM is fundamental to safe operation when n>1.

But WTF do I know?

Signed,
-Basically a private pilot at this point

Clearly you know alot, so cut the PPL stuff out.

 

[NovemberEcho]

Counterpoint being pilots getting confused about how to fix the automation, and letting the airplane get out of control either in AP, or while hand flying and not knowing what to look at when the FDs are all messed up due to automation being wrong. Which goes back to the point about experience/training. Not saying automation is the problem.

The amount of planes I see given a vector to intercept, make the turn to the heading, only to suddenly start making a hard left/right towards the IAF is too damn high.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Which is why the focus needs to be on training to the automation rather than hand flying.

This is done too much IMO. The reason Ethiopian could not be recovered is because you had a crew so desperate to turn the AP on.

They were button pushers, not aviators. And training a guy to only use automation with atrophied hand skills is a button pusher. Not an aviator.