Emirates EK521 preliminary report released
09-15-2016, 11:28 PM
#12
Don't say Guppy
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Guppy driver
Posts: 1,926
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
Most of the automation incidents occur at the end of very long flight. Hand-flying to altitude, while fun, certainly does nothing to mitigate the risk at the end of that flight if it occurs 12+ hours later.
Familiarity with, and competency in use of the automation is the best risk avoidance strategy.
Familiarity with, and competency in use of the automation is the best risk avoidance strategy.
09-17-2016, 10:17 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,988
This whole attitude of excuses is a huge source of this problem. It's a busy airport, I just flew 12 hours, I don't want to overload the PM, etc. These are all just cop outs. Sure, there are times some factors may combine to create a situation that warrants max use of automation. But, if you're making these excuses every time you fly and actually feel uncomfortable leaving the automation off after takeoff or clicking off the autopilot and auto-throttles at ~10K or at least significantly prior to a one-mile final, you have a problem.
You owe it yourself, your company and passengers (if you have them) to challenge yourself and the PM when conditions permit. Are you magically going to bring the A-game when stuff does happen after a 12 hour flight if you never even try to do it on a regular basis? Whatever excuses have been keeping it from happening won’t matter at that point.
I don't think you can definitively say what benefit hand flying at various points in a flight may or may not have. It certainly can't hurt. You know what probably will mitigate risk at the end of a 12+ hour flight?.... making a regular practice of hand flying after a 12+ hour flight. Didn't you just spend about half that 12+ hour flight not even on the flight deck resting in the bunk? Give me a break.
Of equal importance is familiarity and competency with manual manipulation of the flight controls and throttles.
Competency with automation is certainly important. I would suggest that the attitude that automation is going to drastically reduce your workload in the approach environment is another huge source of the problem with over-reliance on automation. Understanding what to expect from automation and how to employ it is the first thing. In addition to that, the ability to recognize when it has failed to deliver the expected response (due to failure, improper use or improper expectations) require just as much, if not more, attention and pilot awareness as hand flying.
I’ve seen the problem children throughout my career: The pilot who lets the speed get 10 knot slow waiting for the auto-throttles to do their job.....the guy who uses up a thousand feet of runway hoping the auto-brakes are going to kick in........barely paying attention to the level off, expecting the A/P to handle it…..letting the jet over speed because the VNAV is AFU instead of putting himself back in the loop……getting vectored to final with his hands in his lap and feet flat on the floor reaching up to occasionally change the speed or heading bug........all basically along for the ride watching the airplane fly itself. As opposed to hands and feet on the controls, knowing what will happen next, recognizing immediately when it doesn't and being ready to intervene at a moment’s notice to ensure the airplane does what he wants with no delay. If you think being at that state of awareness and readiness as you monitor the automation is significantly less difficult than hand flying, then I would suggest you're doing it wrong.
As others have pointed out in this thread, giving up and just becoming a button pushing, automation monitor isn’t a good solution. If the company SOPs allow, stop making excuses and do whatever you can to be as proficient in ALL aspects of operating your aircraft as possible. The airlines forcing max automation on their pilots are making a big mistake, IMO.
You owe it yourself, your company and passengers (if you have them) to challenge yourself and the PM when conditions permit. Are you magically going to bring the A-game when stuff does happen after a 12 hour flight if you never even try to do it on a regular basis? Whatever excuses have been keeping it from happening won’t matter at that point.
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
Most of the automation incidents occur at the end of very long flight. Hand-flying to altitude, while fun, certainly does nothing to mitigate the risk at the end of that flight if it occurs 12+ hours later.
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
Familiarity with, and competency in use of the automation is the best risk avoidance strategy.
Competency with automation is certainly important. I would suggest that the attitude that automation is going to drastically reduce your workload in the approach environment is another huge source of the problem with over-reliance on automation. Understanding what to expect from automation and how to employ it is the first thing. In addition to that, the ability to recognize when it has failed to deliver the expected response (due to failure, improper use or improper expectations) require just as much, if not more, attention and pilot awareness as hand flying.
I’ve seen the problem children throughout my career: The pilot who lets the speed get 10 knot slow waiting for the auto-throttles to do their job.....the guy who uses up a thousand feet of runway hoping the auto-brakes are going to kick in........barely paying attention to the level off, expecting the A/P to handle it…..letting the jet over speed because the VNAV is AFU instead of putting himself back in the loop……getting vectored to final with his hands in his lap and feet flat on the floor reaching up to occasionally change the speed or heading bug........all basically along for the ride watching the airplane fly itself. As opposed to hands and feet on the controls, knowing what will happen next, recognizing immediately when it doesn't and being ready to intervene at a moment’s notice to ensure the airplane does what he wants with no delay. If you think being at that state of awareness and readiness as you monitor the automation is significantly less difficult than hand flying, then I would suggest you're doing it wrong.
As others have pointed out in this thread, giving up and just becoming a button pushing, automation monitor isn’t a good solution. If the company SOPs allow, stop making excuses and do whatever you can to be as proficient in ALL aspects of operating your aircraft as possible. The airlines forcing max automation on their pilots are making a big mistake, IMO.
09-17-2016, 11:36 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by FlyingSlowly
We need AVIATORS, not BUTTON-PUSHERS in flight decks around the world...whether its a Cessna 172 or a B777.
09-18-2016, 06:43 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Retired
Posts: 230
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
This whole attitude of excuses is a huge source of this problem. It's a busy airport, I just flew 12 hours, I don't want to overload the PM, etc. These are all just cop outs. Sure, there are times some factors may combine to create a situation that warrants max use of automation. But, if you're making these excuses every time you fly and actually feel uncomfortable leaving the automation off after takeoff or clicking off the autopilot and auto-throttles at ~10K or at least significantly prior to a one-mile final, you have a problem.
You owe it yourself, your company and passengers (if you have them) to challenge yourself and the PM when conditions permit. Are you magically going to bring the A-game when stuff does happen after a 12 hour flight if you never even try to do it on a regular basis? Whatever excuses have been keeping it from happening won’t matter at that point.
I don't think you can definitively say what benefit hand flying at various points in a flight may or may not have. It certainly can't hurt. You know what probably will mitigate risk at the end of a 12+ hour flight?.... making a regular practice of hand flying after a 12+ hour flight. Didn't you just spend about half that 12+ hour flight not even on the flight deck resting in the bunk? Give me a break.
Of equal importance is familiarity and competency with manual manipulation of the flight controls and throttles.
Competency with automation is certainly important. I would suggest that the attitude that automation is going to drastically reduce your workload in the approach environment is another huge source of the problem with over-reliance on automation. Understanding what to expect from automation and how to employ it is the first thing. In addition to that, the ability to recognize when it has failed to deliver the expected response (due to failure, improper use or improper expectations) require just as much, if not more, attention and pilot awareness as hand flying.
I’ve seen the problem children throughout my career: The pilot who lets the speed get 10 knot slow waiting for the auto-throttles to do their job.....the guy who uses up a thousand feet of runway hoping the auto-brakes are going to kick in........barely paying attention to the level off, expecting the A/P to handle it…..letting the jet over speed because the VNAV is AFU instead of putting himself back in the loop……getting vectored to final with his hands in his lap and feet flat on the floor reaching up to occasionally change the speed or heading bug........all basically along for the ride watching the airplane fly itself. As opposed to hands and feet on the controls, knowing what will happen next, recognizing immediately when it doesn't and being ready to intervene at a moment’s notice to ensure the airplane does what he wants with no delay. If you think being at that state of awareness and readiness as you monitor the automation is significantly less difficult than hand flying, then I would suggest you're doing it wrong.
As others have pointed out in this thread, giving up and just becoming a button pushing, automation monitor isn’t a good solution. If the company SOPs allow, stop making excuses and do whatever you can to be as proficient in ALL aspects of operating your aircraft as possible. The airlines forcing max automation on their pilots are making a big mistake, IMO.
You owe it yourself, your company and passengers (if you have them) to challenge yourself and the PM when conditions permit. Are you magically going to bring the A-game when stuff does happen after a 12 hour flight if you never even try to do it on a regular basis? Whatever excuses have been keeping it from happening won’t matter at that point.
I don't think you can definitively say what benefit hand flying at various points in a flight may or may not have. It certainly can't hurt. You know what probably will mitigate risk at the end of a 12+ hour flight?.... making a regular practice of hand flying after a 12+ hour flight. Didn't you just spend about half that 12+ hour flight not even on the flight deck resting in the bunk? Give me a break.
Of equal importance is familiarity and competency with manual manipulation of the flight controls and throttles.
Competency with automation is certainly important. I would suggest that the attitude that automation is going to drastically reduce your workload in the approach environment is another huge source of the problem with over-reliance on automation. Understanding what to expect from automation and how to employ it is the first thing. In addition to that, the ability to recognize when it has failed to deliver the expected response (due to failure, improper use or improper expectations) require just as much, if not more, attention and pilot awareness as hand flying.
I’ve seen the problem children throughout my career: The pilot who lets the speed get 10 knot slow waiting for the auto-throttles to do their job.....the guy who uses up a thousand feet of runway hoping the auto-brakes are going to kick in........barely paying attention to the level off, expecting the A/P to handle it…..letting the jet over speed because the VNAV is AFU instead of putting himself back in the loop……getting vectored to final with his hands in his lap and feet flat on the floor reaching up to occasionally change the speed or heading bug........all basically along for the ride watching the airplane fly itself. As opposed to hands and feet on the controls, knowing what will happen next, recognizing immediately when it doesn't and being ready to intervene at a moment’s notice to ensure the airplane does what he wants with no delay. If you think being at that state of awareness and readiness as you monitor the automation is significantly less difficult than hand flying, then I would suggest you're doing it wrong.
As others have pointed out in this thread, giving up and just becoming a button pushing, automation monitor isn’t a good solution. If the company SOPs allow, stop making excuses and do whatever you can to be as proficient in ALL aspects of operating your aircraft as possible. The airlines forcing max automation on their pilots are making a big mistake, IMO.
Are you suggesting flying a departure on raw data? Is that how you 'practice'?
Are you suggesting handflying a raw data approach? Even in high traffic, complex arrival situations?
Are you suggesting violating company (and consequently FAA) procedures by turning off autothrottles? Use of autothrottles is mandated by my companies FAA approved Flight Manual.
I stand by my assertion that automation has prevented more incidents than it has caused. All the automation accidents that I'm aware of were caused by pilots who were unfamiliar with the limitations of their systems.
The notion that one is simply a 'button-pusher' because you use the automation to make the operation safer is nuts. I've done my time cranking and banking a B737 into Tegucigalpa, and I enjoyed that kind of flying when I was doing it. Widebody international flying is a different kind of beast.
I maintain my stick and rudder skills by flying my C170 taildragger into short dirt strips. I'm pretty confident that the day that all three auto-pilots on my WB fail, I'll manage! In the meantime I'll strive to operate as safely as possible, which will include max use of all the automation available.
09-19-2016, 08:21 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,988
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
I'm curious as to what automation level you want to practice at? Simply handflying the aircraft while using the monitoring pilot to manipulate the flight director seems pointless. You could probably train a chimpanzee to do that. Certainly any twelve year old proficient in PlayStation could do it.
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
Are you suggesting flying a departure on raw data? Is that how you 'practice'?
Are you suggesting handflying a raw data approach? Even in high traffic, complex arrival situations?
Are you suggesting violating company (and consequently FAA) procedures by turning off autothrottles? Use of autothrottles is mandated by my companies FAA approved Flight Manual.
How about no auto throttles or auto pilot to start with. Maybe advance to turning off the flight director. It’s really not that big a deal. Flying an RNAV arrival or departure using “raw data” or no lateral FD guidance would be pretty non-standard. But, getting vectored around the pattern to a visual or ILS? Why not? I just jumpseated in the cockpit of an RJ yesterday flying into a large metropolitan airport with lots of traffic, flying a STAR followed by vectors to an ILS. No auto-throttles, they didn’t use VNAV and they had auto pilot off by 8K. Flight director wasn’t that helpful when the ILS turned into a visual so they turned it off. I’ll bet you could do the same thing (if your company allowed) and you might actually have a little fun. The size of your jet or the location you’re flying it in doesn’t really have any bearing on the situation. If the arrival is really THAT complex or you’re concerned about the traffic situation, then maybe that’s not the day to do it. There needs to be a little judgment involved, right?
No, I’m not telling you to violate company policy. It seems like you’re a product of that culture which happens to view automation as king rather than a balance of both automation and manual flying. It sounds like the “group think” mentality where everyone confirms each other’s viewpoints and it becomes difficult to imagine that there are others on the outside who don’t share the same attitudes. If your company thinks that little of your pilot group’s ability to maintain airspeed with manual throttles, then I guess there’s not much you can do. Just know you are a minority (at least in the U.S.) and mandating use of auto-throttles is not a widely used practice. The fact that the FAA bought off on it is kind of irrelevant. Do you really think a government agency with their history is going to step off the fence and plant a flag on a specific policy? They’ll be happy to sign off on company X’s requirement to maximize automation and turn around and approve Y’s plan to allow manual flying.
If you use a flight director like a kid on play station or an ignorant animal blindly following rote commands, then I can see why you feel the way you do. I prefer to use it as an aid, rather than a crutch, looking through it and setting pitch and bank angles I know to be correct and what I would be using without it. My first flight director was analog and only popped into view when the ILS was captured. It had a vote, but we were always cautioned to use the raw data and look through it. I have carried that attitude throughout my career and it has served me well. I really don’t care if I use it even today. Whether it’s on or off, I still feel like I get some benefit from manually flying an ILS with primary reference to raw data. I’d suggest you give it a try with the FD off, but considering you can’t even turn the auto-throttles off, that’s probably a pipe-dream. Maybe next time in the sim. So, are you grounded if the auto-throttles are MELed? I’ve flown ANC-OAK and ANC-IND in the MD-11 with no auto-throttles. Kind of a pain at cruise, but not that big a deal, especially if you make a regular practice of turning them off.
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
I stand by my assertion that automation has prevented more incidents than it has caused. All the automation accidents that I'm aware of were caused by pilots who were unfamiliar with the limitations of their systems.
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
The notion that one is simply a 'button-pusher' because you use the automation to make the operation safer is nuts. I've done my time cranking and banking a B737 into Tegucigalpa, and I enjoyed that kind of flying when I was doing it. Widebody international flying is a different kind of beast.
I maintain my stick and rudder skills by flying my C170 taildragger into short dirt strips. I'm pretty confident that the day that all three auto-pilots on my WB fail, I'll manage! In the meantime I'll strive to operate as safely as possible, which will include max use of all the automation available.
If you evaluate the circumstances on a particular day and decide max automation is the best option, then that’s the way to go. I guess where we deviate is coming to that conclusion on every flight. Obviously, you’re not doing anything wrong and are bound by your company procedures. Since I have the choice, I think there is high value in making a regular practice of basic hand flying without automation. You don’t – and I doubt we’re going to change each other’s mind, so it is what it is. I know it has helped me in more challenging simulator training and every day flying. I have a better feel for the aircraft; I’m more familiar with typical pitch and power settings and simply more comfortable and confident flying the jet. I spent almost 10 years on the MD-11 and I really liked hand flying it. I’ve only been on the 777 a little more than a year, so I like to take every opportunity I can to fly it. Not everyone has a C170 to fly around in. Even if they did, I would suggest the skill set in a heavy transport category jet and a taildragger are different enough for me to question the cross-over benefit. But, maybe it works for you.
Widebody international flying is still just flying a transport category jet from A to B, it just takes longer. There may be more potential to encounter situations that warrant a higher level of automation. But, not by definition and not every flight, IMO. As I said, we’re on different pages here and it’s unlikely that’s going to change.
Tailwinds.
09-19-2016, 06:15 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Window seat
Posts: 5,206
Originally Posted by tailwheel48
Are you suggesting violating company (and consequently FAA) procedures by turning off autothrottles? Use of autothrottles is mandated by my companies FAA approved Flight Manual.
What airline's approved Flight Manual mandate the use of autothrottles?
Most airlines are allowed to do CAT III approaches without autothrottles. How do they do that???
09-20-2016, 08:20 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Early Retiree SWA
Posts: 354
Emirates Airline pretty much mandates the use of auto throttles at time by the words in their OM-A: Thou shalt use the highest level of automation at all times.
You guys not flying for Middle East airlines don't know one extra burden of not hand flying. First, they are made to engage the A/P below 10,000 ft for each dept and not disconnect until below 10,000 ft.
The punitive culture at Emirates (from which I left 1 year ago after 8 years with them) is such that if you screw up a SID, STAR, VNAV or didn't put the landing flaps down by 1500 AGL, you received a visit to the chief pilots office and the possibility of a warning letter.
When time comes to upgrade, unlike in US and European legacy carriers, it' NOT based on seniority. They look at things like how many days sick leave did this FO take, and how many (if any) warning letters did he receive, and whether his grades on his PPC (annual recurrent) were stronger than aver who for 1 hour will grill the FO with questions and hypothetical situations and knowledge level of the FCOM and OM-A.
So.... the point here is that if you want to upgrade at a place like Emirates, you need to play THEIR game... and that game is USE THE AUTOMATION TO THE MAX EXTENT.
We all complained about this but to no avail. EK wants robots in their cockpits.
This is a prime example and good reason the accident happened in Dubai a few weeks ago. The crew still had 2500 meters to stop the aircraft but because the rule there is to go around if you get the RAAS "Long Landing" callout, that's what the crew did.... all to the specific rules of EK. And look at the result.
Kap
Ex Emirates Robot
You guys not flying for Middle East airlines don't know one extra burden of not hand flying. First, they are made to engage the A/P below 10,000 ft for each dept and not disconnect until below 10,000 ft.
The punitive culture at Emirates (from which I left 1 year ago after 8 years with them) is such that if you screw up a SID, STAR, VNAV or didn't put the landing flaps down by 1500 AGL, you received a visit to the chief pilots office and the possibility of a warning letter.
When time comes to upgrade, unlike in US and European legacy carriers, it' NOT based on seniority. They look at things like how many days sick leave did this FO take, and how many (if any) warning letters did he receive, and whether his grades on his PPC (annual recurrent) were stronger than aver who for 1 hour will grill the FO with questions and hypothetical situations and knowledge level of the FCOM and OM-A.
So.... the point here is that if you want to upgrade at a place like Emirates, you need to play THEIR game... and that game is USE THE AUTOMATION TO THE MAX EXTENT.
We all complained about this but to no avail. EK wants robots in their cockpits.
This is a prime example and good reason the accident happened in Dubai a few weeks ago. The crew still had 2500 meters to stop the aircraft but because the rule there is to go around if you get the RAAS "Long Landing" callout, that's what the crew did.... all to the specific rules of EK. And look at the result.
Kap
Ex Emirates Robot
09-20-2016, 08:36 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,943
Originally Posted by Kapitanleutnant
Emirates Airline pretty much mandates the use of auto throttles at time by the words in their OM-A: Thou shalt use the highest level of automation at all times.
You guys not flying for Middle East airlines don't know one extra burden of not hand flying. First, they are made to engage the A/P below 10,000 ft for each dept and not disconnect until below 10,000 ft.
The punitive culture at Emirates (from which I left 1 year ago after 8 years with them) is such that if you screw up a SID, STAR, VNAV or didn't put the landing flaps down by 1500 AGL, you received a visit to the chief pilots office and the possibility of a warning letter.
When time comes to upgrade, unlike in US and European legacy carriers, it' NOT based on seniority. They look at things like how many days sick leave did this FO take, and how many (if any) warning letters did he receive, and whether his grades on his PPC (annual recurrent) were stronger than aver who for 1 hour will grill the FO with questions and hypothetical situations and knowledge level of the FCOM and OM-A.
So.... the point here is that if you want to upgrade at a place like Emirates, you need to play THEIR game... and that game is USE THE AUTOMATION TO THE MAX EXTENT.
We all complained about this but to no avail. EK wants robots in their cockpits.
This is a prime example and good reason the accident happened in Dubai a few weeks ago. The crew still had 2500 meters to stop the aircraft but because the rule there is to go around if you get the RAAS "Long Landing" callout, that's what the crew did.... all to the specific rules of EK. And look at the result.
Kap
Ex Emirates Robot
You guys not flying for Middle East airlines don't know one extra burden of not hand flying. First, they are made to engage the A/P below 10,000 ft for each dept and not disconnect until below 10,000 ft.
The punitive culture at Emirates (from which I left 1 year ago after 8 years with them) is such that if you screw up a SID, STAR, VNAV or didn't put the landing flaps down by 1500 AGL, you received a visit to the chief pilots office and the possibility of a warning letter.
When time comes to upgrade, unlike in US and European legacy carriers, it' NOT based on seniority. They look at things like how many days sick leave did this FO take, and how many (if any) warning letters did he receive, and whether his grades on his PPC (annual recurrent) were stronger than aver who for 1 hour will grill the FO with questions and hypothetical situations and knowledge level of the FCOM and OM-A.
So.... the point here is that if you want to upgrade at a place like Emirates, you need to play THEIR game... and that game is USE THE AUTOMATION TO THE MAX EXTENT.
We all complained about this but to no avail. EK wants robots in their cockpits.
This is a prime example and good reason the accident happened in Dubai a few weeks ago. The crew still had 2500 meters to stop the aircraft but because the rule there is to go around if you get the RAAS "Long Landing" callout, that's what the crew did.... all to the specific rules of EK. And look at the result.
Kap
Ex Emirates Robot
Thanks for posting this info.
09-20-2016, 11:17 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,988
Originally Posted by Kapitanleutnant
This is a prime example and good reason the accident happened in Dubai a few weeks ago. The crew still had 2500 meters to stop the aircraft but because the rule there is to go around if you get the RAAS "Long Landing" callout, that's what the crew did.... all to the specific rules of EK. And look at the result.
They didn't fly the airplane. The reason for the go around (whether you think it's valid or not) has no bearing on the outcome. That's all on the crew.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
