There is nothing that can be done about that. It's up to boeing and airbus to design better a/c.

You're right, they should build 'em so well that they can eliminate the Pilot altogether. Then we'd never have to know anything.

A basic CRM question for you CP. Does knowledge affect behavior? If you answer in the affirmative, where do you as a "professional" draw the line. How much knowledge is enough? When does one stop learning? It appears you are using the ole military adage...if the minimum wasn't good enough, there wouldn't be a minimum. IMHO, if the majority of your ilk have the same attitude as you, the profession of "pilot" is in danger. You will paid and respected accordingly.

This is a basic issue with the Y generation. Because information is so readily available with ipads, smart phones, tablets etc., there seems to be a reduction in internal knowledge and internal locus. You allow the world and your environment to control you, not vice versa. Senior surgeons are seeing this, as well, in the operating theater. The reliance on formulatic solutions and not having the ability to react out of the box.

You will mostly react to problems with "by the book". But there will be times when you "use the book" and others "what book". Black swan events do happen and one's knowledge of systems, operating areas, rules and regulations etc., will enable the outcome to be satisfactory.

So in effect, knowledge DOES affect behavior. Perhaps CanoePilot should change his moniker to CanoeOperator. I would not affix the title of "pilot" to him. His attitude is an affront to the profession. I would like to nominate him as runnerup to said professor of aviation for the title TFI. Seconds?

Negative! It's the crew's responsibility to know how every system works on their aircraft. It's there responsibility to understand the significance and effect by moving a switch be it under normal or non-normal situations.

:rolleyes: If this yutz isn't yanking our chain, I want to know what airline he works for so I can avoid it at all costs! Oy vey.

I'm pretty sure he is just trolling for effect at this point.....

However, believe me there are Pilots who feel that we shouldn't have to know any systems. We shouldn't have to get a four year degree. We shouldn't have to engage the PAX during IROPs. We shouldn't have to manage the crew and maybe coordinate with catering for the F/As......

We should just sit high up in the shiny cockpit, wear leather jackets, earn $300k a year and ooze awesomeness.

I'm not saying you shouldn't know what happens when you push the fuel pump button or what the fault line means. What I'm saying is we need to lose useless info that we have not control over. Why should I have to build the airplane when there is not point to?

Well, here's a question, should you not turn the standby power to ON?

Let's say you decide yes you will turn it on and now you're on battery, you realize you've got 45 minutes and you land 30 minutes later.

Knowing that if you turn that switch XYZ happens is the new philosophy vs knowing that plus what the tire pressure is in the mains, how much of a certain quantity is required even though you can't measure it, knowing what temperature a valve opens when you can't read the temperature anywhere or how to draw this from memory...

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/conten...s/3J72F001.GIF

I'm with you on not building the airplane. It's excessive rote learning. I think what they're pushing for now is more correlation than rote. And the people pushing this from the training house are not idiots about their aircraft and hoping to skip out on studying.

BTW, when I first heard it on the 767 that are knowledge needs to be 8 feet wide and an inch deep, I cringed. Then I looked at what they wanted you to know and realized it's more than an inch deep, but the focus is on correlating it.

Now if the checklist is a failure, that needs to be addressed. We need to know that the QRH is tested and trustworthy, because these are complicated machines and skipping a step might cause a problem with another system (something they may have figured out in the sim when they wrote it), or you might forget to go back to what you skipped, etc. It's kind of like taking something apart, putting it back together and have all of these "spare" pieces.

It doesn't matter to me if it's a 742 or a 748, I'll fly either and I'm sure one is a whole lot easier than the other on the pilot's systems knowledge. What matters to me is that the checklist is right. The checklist should have said (paraphrasing):

ABC. When within approximately 30 minutes of landing:
STBY POWER selector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BAT
Go to step XYZ


Which is still the case. That has not gone away.

I think there is some confusion though on the difference in knowing nothing because you don't care but you still can function just fine at work and knowing how many rivets are on the horizontal stabilizer. One is wrong, the other is the waste of everyone's collective time. The solution is in the middle.

You should definitely turn it on....however, you should also have the wherewithall to know that when you turn on STBY PWR or EMERG PWR, or whatever they call it on your plane, you are on Battery and the clock is ticking and it's time to get on the the ground (it's worth noting that in this incident, there were issues with the flow of the QRH procedure....but what QRH procedure isn't written generically? They also got some bad advice from MX, but really, your average mechanic has to know 5-6 different models and you probably should know about your systems better than he does...it's your butt in the air on the line)

While certainly not the norm, I do fly with some guys who are literally, along for the ride. Their mantra is "I don't get paid enough/it's not my job". I'm convinced that there are a number of consultants at the Regional Airline Association (and probably the A4A) who believe you can throw any schmoe in the seat and the Aviation System has become so good, that everything will be fine. With automation, advanced warning systems, ATC, etc, you just need a warm body....and when the system is working fine on a VMC day with no MELs, they may even get away with it. But when things don't go according to plan, you need someone with solid judgment, professional acumen, CRM and leadership skills.

I've followed a lot of incidents/accidents, and they rarely occur because the pilot couldn't perform a perfect Split S. 99.9% of the time it's because of a combination of poor decisions based on lack of SA/knowledge with nobody in charge of the situation. Whether it's the AA crew not understanding the electrical system, the Asiana crew not understanding how their automation works, or the Air France crew not knowing some basic pitch/powers combinations, this job has far more to do with cerebral skills than motor skills.