Experience Matters...
04-21-2015 | 01:07 PM
#21
Line Holder
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
From: Captain, SS Orca
How about working something like this into a recurrent now and again? No autopilot, no flight directors, no autothrottles, and most importantly no jeopardy.
Funny you mention that, because that's exactly what is in the recurrent cycle right now. (DAL)
I'm glad the other guy went first.
04-21-2015 | 01:23 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,385
Likes: 0
From: Airplane
Aren't simulated engine failures, smoke in the cockpit, hydraulic failures, etc. designed to do just that? Give you experience handling emergencies w/o the danger? You can't manufacture ALL experience, but you could do a much better job than what is being offered. In the current environment there isn't a requirement, so it doesn't get done.
Meanwhile Airbus and the new line of regional jets are out there being marketed as simpler and safer to fly, with enough automation to compensate for the lack of pilot skill and experience. The growth of world aviation demands this; the general public is ignorant of the situation, and the amount of automation is actually contributing to the difficulty in handling emergencies. In the case of an A380 with a blown engine, they had 15 checklists to cover! It was information overload and in the end, the pilots fell back on their experience to determine the proper approach speeds. see link below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29OI5VeW30
Meanwhile Airbus and the new line of regional jets are out there being marketed as simpler and safer to fly, with enough automation to compensate for the lack of pilot skill and experience. The growth of world aviation demands this; the general public is ignorant of the situation, and the amount of automation is actually contributing to the difficulty in handling emergencies. In the case of an A380 with a blown engine, they had 15 checklists to cover! It was information overload and in the end, the pilots fell back on their experience to determine the proper approach speeds. see link below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29OI5VeW30
I'm just now watching the episode, and I'm not an Airbus A380 pilot, but I have two initial questions.
1. Why, why, why did he turn the A/P off and handfly while this is going on?
2. What in the world is the FO typing on the keyboard? He's constantly typing.
I know it's just a dramatization.
04-21-2015 | 02:23 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,816
Likes: 5
From: retired 767(dl)
04-21-2015 | 02:43 PM
#26
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Aren't simulated engine failures, smoke in the cockpit, hydraulic failures, etc. designed to do just that? Give you experience handling emergencies w/o the danger? You can't manufacture ALL experience, but you could do a much better job than what is being offered. In the current environment there isn't a requirement, so it doesn't get done.
Meanwhile Airbus and the new line of regional jets are out there being marketed as simpler and safer to fly, with enough automation to compensate for the lack of pilot skill and experience. The growth of world aviation demands this; the general public is ignorant of the situation, and the amount of automation is actually contributing to the difficulty in handling emergencies. In the case of an A380 with a blown engine, they had 15 checklists to cover! It was information overload and in the end, the pilots fell back on their experience to determine the proper approach speeds. see link below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29OI5VeW30
Meanwhile Airbus and the new line of regional jets are out there being marketed as simpler and safer to fly, with enough automation to compensate for the lack of pilot skill and experience. The growth of world aviation demands this; the general public is ignorant of the situation, and the amount of automation is actually contributing to the difficulty in handling emergencies. In the case of an A380 with a blown engine, they had 15 checklists to cover! It was information overload and in the end, the pilots fell back on their experience to determine the proper approach speeds. see link below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29OI5VeW30
Back to my original premise, it's up to the individual to work to be a better pilot.
Excessive checklists might also have been contributory in the A380 case...just sayin. However, they had compounded emergencies. Not just a simple engine failure.
Wasn't it swissair who had some form of fire on board, who decided it was more important to run checklist rather than just land and un-a$$ the plane?
I'm not knocking simulators, but when was the last time you simulated an engine failure coupled with a (main) hydraulic failure and a fire that wouldn't go out with an airport that was in a bowl (no straight out departure option).
I'm not trying to build some kobiyashi Maru scenario, but practicing simple/ single failures isn't that tough and not even necessarily real world.
When I fly polar, 800 miles from the nearest concrete, it isn't an engine failure that concerns me. It's the fire that won't go out.
04-21-2015 | 02:55 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,820
Likes: 69
Worse than the long and complicated checklist, when they told ATC they had to dump fuel before landing, ATC vectored them AWAY form the airport because they had to dump fuel over the ocean. Sometimes it is difficult to see the forest through the trees.
04-21-2015 | 03:20 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,816
Likes: 5
From: retired 767(dl)
If I'm not mistaken the regular Capt. wouldn't take the airplane, so they flew in two supervisory guys.
04-21-2015 | 03:25 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,100
Likes: 0
From: C47 PIC/747-400 SIC
I can't dispute that automation reliance contributes to difficulties in handling emergencies. In fact, it contributes to difficulties in handling some normal ops.
Back to my original premise, it's up to the individual to work to be a better pilot.
Excessive checklists might also have been contributory in the A380 case...just sayin. However, they had compounded emergencies. Not just a simple engine failure.
Wasn't it swissair who had some form of fire on board, who decided it was more important to run checklist rather than just land and un-a$$ the plane?
I'm not knocking simulators, but when was the last time you simulated an engine failure coupled with a (main) hydraulic failure and a fire that wouldn't go out with an airport that was in a bowl (no straight out departure option).
I'm not trying to build some kobiyashi Maru scenario, but practicing simple/ single failures isn't that tough and not even necessarily real world.
When I fly polar, 800 miles from the nearest concrete, it isn't an engine failure that concerns me. It's the fire that won't go out.
Back to my original premise, it's up to the individual to work to be a better pilot.
Excessive checklists might also have been contributory in the A380 case...just sayin. However, they had compounded emergencies. Not just a simple engine failure.
Wasn't it swissair who had some form of fire on board, who decided it was more important to run checklist rather than just land and un-a$$ the plane?
I'm not knocking simulators, but when was the last time you simulated an engine failure coupled with a (main) hydraulic failure and a fire that wouldn't go out with an airport that was in a bowl (no straight out departure option).
I'm not trying to build some kobiyashi Maru scenario, but practicing simple/ single failures isn't that tough and not even necessarily real world.
When I fly polar, 800 miles from the nearest concrete, it isn't an engine failure that concerns me. It's the fire that won't go out.
04-21-2015 | 04:41 PM
#30
Weekend workaholic
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
From: A320 CA
I went through Initial at AE with a guy with tons of time in a -3 flying in Puerto Rico. I'm sure he was a great VFR stick-and-rudder guy but he just couldn't wrap his head around ADF approaches and other IFR procedures in an ATR sim. He ended up busting out.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
