Q's and thoughts about Autopilot
- Thread starter eagledriver101
- Start date
Nick
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't have the heart to tell he or she that they are heavy enough to pitch the airplane up and down.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't have the heart to tell he or she that they are heavy enough to pitch the airplane up and down.
I had a two-hundred pounder on one flight...I gave up and turned the autopilot on. Poor gal, she was furloughed from DAL too.
Alchemy
Well-Known Member
Example of how autopilot is used on my flights (my legs)
It goes on leaving 10,000 AGL and doesn't come off until the final vector to intercept the loacalizer. If I'm shooting a non-precision approach it usually stays on until I get the runway in sight. On a visual I will disconnect on downwind or about 10 miles out, depending on which direction I'm coming from.
I shoot a raw data approach once or twice a month just to stay fresh. Other than that I like to use the autopilot. Most guys I fly with are new to the airplane and there's no need to load them up with manipulating the flight guidance when they often have their hands full just running checklists and communicating with ATC.
It goes on leaving 10,000 AGL and doesn't come off until the final vector to intercept the loacalizer. If I'm shooting a non-precision approach it usually stays on until I get the runway in sight. On a visual I will disconnect on downwind or about 10 miles out, depending on which direction I'm coming from.
I shoot a raw data approach once or twice a month just to stay fresh. Other than that I like to use the autopilot. Most guys I fly with are new to the airplane and there's no need to load them up with manipulating the flight guidance when they often have their hands full just running checklists and communicating with ATC.
Cheechako
Well-Known Member
The RJ was such a short-coupled, pitch-sensitive, blink-and-your-off-altitude airplane that it was much smoother and more precise to have the autopilot fly (except for those snap-rolls to the localizer). The 737 is a much more stable airplane and, frankly, easier to hand fly to precision. I'd much prefer to hand-fly a 737 to minimums over the CRJ-200.
The autopilot is required for all our RNP approaches. On the other hand, our HGS approaches are hand-flown to Cat III minimums.
The autopilot is required for all our RNP approaches. On the other hand, our HGS approaches are hand-flown to Cat III minimums.
eagledriver101
New Member
So as an FO you have to do all the ATC/Check list stuff....
C150J
Well-Known Member
There are pilot flying (PF) and pilot not flying/pilot monitoring (PNF or PM, depending on where you work) duties. The PF flies the plane, calls for checklists , briefs the approach (at some companies the PNF does), etc. The PNF accomplishes flows, checklists, ATC communications, PA announcements, etc.
TheGirlinPurple
Well-Known Member
Hey Cheechako, a little off topic, but are the 737's at Alaska CAT IIIa or b? Also do you lose CAT III if your HGS is inop or do you also have a triple autopilot sys?
Cheechako
Well-Known Member
Dual autopilot system. Everything I see says Cat IIIa, 50'DH, 600RVR. The HGS does not need to be available for autoland, although I'm not sure we can still take it to 50' and 600RVR. That's something that's in our HGS/Autoland briefing cards in the airplane. I'll check on that tonight. . .
TheGirlinPurple
Well-Known Member
Cool thanks, I was just comparing our systems here at Horizon to you guys. We are CAT IIIa with HGS, Cat I without it.
Baronman
Well-Known Member
I thought this was an interesting thread due to some things I saw the last week regarding automation and hand-flying.
I flew a trip with an FO who wanted to hand-fly everything below 10,000'. Even while descending and getting vectors for our approach into LAX he still wanted to hand fly. The problem I had with this is that while hand-flying he was glued to the instruments, glancing outside maybe once every ten seconds. We had traffic on the parallel arriving, other VFR traffic in proximity and he had little to no outside scan. It really fell upon me to keep my eyes peeled outside (I've already had one close call-TCAS didn't call the traffic). Basically I think the automation would have been great in a scenario like this, to keep the scan up outside the aircraft.
I flew a trip with an FO who wanted to hand-fly everything below 10,000'. Even while descending and getting vectors for our approach into LAX he still wanted to hand fly. The problem I had with this is that while hand-flying he was glued to the instruments, glancing outside maybe once every ten seconds. We had traffic on the parallel arriving, other VFR traffic in proximity and he had little to no outside scan. It really fell upon me to keep my eyes peeled outside (I've already had one close call-TCAS didn't call the traffic). Basically I think the automation would have been great in a scenario like this, to keep the scan up outside the aircraft.