Ask The Pilot

[Quickstatus]

Hi JB747 would you put QZ8501, AF447 and OZ214 in the same category?

Pilots trained to operate a glass coughpit but when autopilot/electronics goes to sleep/gets sick and pilots have to take over manual flying sometimes in difficult condition, the plane then crashes?

 

[jb747]

Interesting that both days involved scenarios going into HNL given this isn't exactly a common A380 airport.

Is this just to mix things up or as a result of it being a diversion for LAX/DFW

Honolulu, whilst not a common place for us to be landing, has been used a number of times, mostly for medical issues. It's interesting because it has high terrain nearby, not all runways are useful to us, and it's probably one of the few places we're likely to find now that has an offset approach.

And, even though we might not be going there, we often fly nearby, and it has a very big volcano...

 

[jb747]

Hi JB747 would you put QZ8501, AF447 and OZ214 in the same category?

Pilots trained to operate a glass coughpit but when autopilot/electronics goes to sleep/gets sick and pilots have to take over manual flying sometimes in difficult condition, the plane then crashes?

Whilst we're still waiting for the final (or even initial) report on Air Asia, the others are examples of perfectly flyable aircraft that, for whatever reason, the pilots were unable to fly.

Air France was probably a rather noisy and confusing coughpit, but they would not have had any more alarms than we did...plus they had all of their engines. I've been very critical of the bloke who was doing the flying in the past, and I see no reason to relent now. In no world does holding full aft stick lead to the recovery of an aircraft. He was not a pilot...but more a video game player.

Aseana will also get no sympathy from the pilot world. It was daylight, in a perfectly serviceable 777. There was no reason whatsoever for the flight to end the way it did...other than the pilots simply not being able to understand the very basic relationship that is taught to all pilots from day one. Power + attitude = performance. A visual approach is a really simple thing to do, and should be bread and butter.

I've been very critical of cadet training systems in the past, and I think that all of these events included pilots with that sort of background. But, they should also have been well past the point that I'd have expected it to make any difference, so the assumption is that they never really learnt to fly in the first place.

'day-heg' is currently undergoing similar training at the moment and it will be very interesting to see how he eventually finds life in the real world. Ultimately this form of training will have to be made to work, as it's the only viable way to produce pilots in the numbers needed in the future. I'm sure it will produce many fine pilots...but I wonder at the potential to let video gamers through.

At this point I'm sure someone is thinking.."but, in the future we won't need pilots at all". Perhaps you're right. In fact, at some point you'll be right for sure. But, from what I've seen of the automation, we have a very long way to go. Right now, when the automatics lose the plot, they invariably dump a much worse can of worms in the pilot's lap than he would have had without their involvement. The electric jets are much easier than the classics to fly...until something goes wrong, at which point they can become much harder. You can't train for the easy days.

You'll read about pilot error/automation events. Sadly they're like an iceberg. You read about the times the pilots get it wrong, but much more often they get it right, and fix whatever mess the FBW etc was inventing. That isn't newsworthy, but remove the pilot and there will be no-one to fix the issues when they invariably happen.

 

[Captain Halliday]

How far in advance are the sims planned by the trainers or whomever dreams them up? I'm wondering if the volcanic ash scenario has been in the pipeline for a while or if the training mob decided it was topical/current due to the activity around Bali over the last few weeks?

 

[jb747]

How far in advance are the sims planned by the trainers or whomever dreams them up? I'm wondering if the volcanic ash scenario has been in the pipeline for a while or if the training mob decided it was topical/current due to the activity around Bali over the last few weeks?

I don't know the exact time frame, but it's quite lengthy...well in excess of a year, and probably close to two. This is the second time I've done volcanos on the A380, and I did it on the 747 as well. Don't recall the 767. They cycle around every couple of years. Volcanos are probably interesting from a trainers' point of view, as they have the potential to throw up so many other interesting problems.

The training cycle, and everything in it, has to be approved by CASA, so nothing happens quickly. But, if the company decides they want you to see something, they can easily add it to any sequence.

Who dreams them up? Well, they are an otherwise quite decent group of training Captains, and FOs, who, for some unknown reason take delight in torturing the rest of us. Actually a bunch of smart blokes who look at the things we get wrong, and give us more of it. The training is generally very well targeted.

 

[por930]

Who dreams them up? Well, they are an otherwise quite decent group of training Captains, and FOs, who, for some unknown reason take delight in torturing the rest of us. Actually a bunch of smart blokes who look at the things we get wrong, and give us more of it. The training is generally very well targeted.

jb, I would imagine the training Captains and FOs are also active pilots, just with two hats? Who establishes their sim training to make sure they are competent to make sure you are competent?

Is the sim facility operated by full time instructors, who run you through the prepared scripts? and do you have several instructors per aircraft type, as they operate 24/7. Are the instructors actual pilots?

 

[day-heg]

I think your previous training was in a 737 sim, so it will be interesting to hear what you think of the 320.

The last sim was indeed a 737-300... quite a different beast from the 320. First impressions are that whilst 'ops normal', managing the 320 will be much easier, it looks like it will leave the crew with more capacity. When non-normal though... well, let's see when I get in the sim.

Air France was probably a rather noisy and confusing coughpit, but they would not have had any more alarms than we did...plus they had all of their engines. I've been very critical of the bloke who was doing the flying in the past, and I see no reason to relent now. In no world does holding full aft stick lead to the recovery of an aircraft. He was not a pilot...but more a video game player.

Aseana will also get no sympathy from the pilot world. It was daylight, in a perfectly serviceable 777. There was no reason whatsoever for the flight to end the way it did...other than the pilots simply not being able to understand the very basic relationship that is taught to all pilots from day one. Power + attitude = performance. A visual approach is a really simple thing to do, and should be bread and butter.

You probably won't be surprised to hear that AF447 has been discussed several times already this week, not to mention over the last 2 years I've been training. As has Asiana.

Power + Attitude = Performance... it was quite literally lesson 101 for me, before even I stepped foot inside a Cessna, and has been driven home ever since. We talked about just last Friday, in relation to multiple air-data source losses.

Obviously, I don't know what happened in the years before I started training, but I get the impression that AF447 was some sort of seminal moment in low-hour pilot training.... a realisation perhaps in the industry of the vulnerabilities of low-hour pilots in non-normal situations, combined with what we can probably agree was some fairly poor CRM. it's been discussed a huge amount. Often, instructors have said "since AF447, we've been doing this...", or similar.

Ultimately this form of training will have to be made to work, as it's the only viable way to produce pilots in the numbers needed in the future. I'm sure it will produce many fine pilots...but I wonder at the potential to let video gamers through.

I think the industry is actively looking for the video gamers - allow those brought up in a digital world to take that experience into a computerised flight deck? Moves are already afoot - see here details of a conference at the Royal Aeronautical Society just last week.
Two of the topics:

• Game-Based Training for airline pilots
  
• Gamificated Teaching & Learning in the Future coughpit

Draw your own conclusions... [I'd add at this point that I'm nearer 40 than 30, and don't consider myself a video gamer ]

 

[jb747]

jb, I would imagine the training Captains and FOs are also active pilots, just with two hats? Who establishes their sim training to make sure they are competent to make sure you are competent?

There is a matrix of events that is CASA approved that must be covered over a 2 or 3 year period. That provides the backbone of the sim sequences. Exercises beyond that are written by a team of three TFOs (training First Officers) who do the leg work. The sessions will then be test run before final approval by the fleet's training manager.

Every pilot will have to run through the identical sessions. The training people included.

The sim sessions are run by either SCCs (senior check captains) or sim instructors. The TFOs can run a restricted list of the sessions too. The SCCs also do much of the line flying training. They are extremely experienced, and generally very good at passing along their knowledge. They spend about 2/3rds of their time in the sim, and the rest in the aircraft. The sim instructors are mostly retired pilots. Some are even recently retired from our 380s. Many flew Boeing or other Airbus types when they were flying, but they all have to do the same conversion to the 380 that the line pilots do...only they don't get to do the actual aircraft flying. I've found them to be superb instructors over the years, with lots of information and ideas from other airlines to consider.

Is the sim facility operated by full time instructors, who run you through the prepared scripts? and do you have several instructors per aircraft type, as they operate 24/7. Are the instructors actual pilots?

All of the instructors are pilots, though not all are currently active. There are many .... but I don't know how many. The sessions are scripted, but with a number of variations. In part that counters the fact that the line people will get pretty good information on exactly what happens, but also because it's common to do a sim more than once (not for repeats, but rather because often they have to use someone to support a session if they can't manage to get two people who are due together...the line schedules take precedence).

The sims run 24 hours per day. Mostly the sessions during the day are for cyclic training (the qualified line people), whilst the night sessions are for the conversions.

 

[jb747]

The last sim was indeed a 737-300... quite a different beast from the 320. First impressions are that whilst 'ops normal', managing the 320 will be much easier, it looks like it will leave the crew with more capacity. When non-normal though... well, let's see when I get in the sim.

It will indeed be interesting. I don't find the 380 to be any easier to operate than the 747. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. I find the Airbus manuals, and their propensity to micro manage procedures to be appalling. One of the biggest weaknesses of the AB is their decision to use the thrust levers as more or less fixed switches. You will find issues with them. Overall the Airbus has had the effect of weakening pilot skills because they've automated much of the day to day stuff...but at the same time, when it drops its bundle you'll need those very same weakened skills. That's in part behind the recent push towards less autopilot use.

 

[harvyk]

Decide to go to Muscat. TCAS RA during climb. “Company” tries to talk us into going to Al Ain (which would be a perfectly acceptable airport) but I didn’t want to make multiple changes. Various calls from ‘cabin’, etc, designed to either make you change your mind, or just to upset the flow. Ignore all.

During real diversions, how often does the company suggest alternate airports, and how "forceful" are those suggestions? Is it a case of they are giving suggestions which you may not have considered, or is it a case of all but begging you to go to a certain airport or somewhere in between?

 

[Shorns]

So on the topic of video gamers, and engine out procedures; I was flying my 787 the other day and threw a whole heap of birds at it and then watched one of my engines slowly catch fire. Returned and landed.... Forgot to hit the "reverse button" on the keyboard and powered up the remaining (right) engine and almost flew off the runway to the left. Mistake noted. Did it all again and stuck the working right engine into reverse and powered it up. This time it flew off to the right at practically the same pace. Perhaps a failing of x-plane, but, as you've mentioned before, reverse power doesn't as such push air forward it just messes with any residual lift, so if you were landing a twin with an engine out do you still use reverse thrust and does it have any significant effect on yaw on the ground?

 

[mjt57]

The sims run 24 hours per day. Mostly the sessions during the day are for cyclic training (the qualified line people), whilst the night sessions are for the conversions.

How do the guys/gals doing the nights handle it?

Given how we perform at our worst at night, particularly from 0300 onwards, I would've thought that training during these times would've been avoided.

But then, I s'pose that you don't get that luxury flying into LAX or LHR, do you?

 

[jb747]

During real diversions, how often does the company suggest alternate airports, and how "forceful" are those suggestions? Is it a case of they are giving suggestions which you may not have considered, or is it a case of all but begging you to go to a certain airport or somewhere in between?

I guess that will vary depending upon the company. Mostly it's something that happens pretty quickly, and the last thing any pilot is likely to do is to ask someone a world away in an office what they think.

 

[jb747]

So on the topic of video gamers, and engine out procedures; I was flying my 787 the other day and threw a whole heap of birds at it and then watched one of my engines slowly catch fire. Returned and landed.... Forgot to hit the "reverse button" on the keyboard and powered up the remaining (right) engine and almost flew off the runway to the left. Mistake noted. Did it all again and stuck the working right engine into reverse and powered it up. This time it flew off to the right at practically the same pace. Perhaps a failing of x-plane, but, as you've mentioned before, reverse power doesn't as such push air forward it just messes with any residual lift, so if you were landing a twin with an engine out do you still use reverse thrust and does it have any significant effect on yaw on the ground?

You use whatever reverse you have available. It will swing, but it's easily caught.... You don't really fly aircraft with a keyboard.

BTW, birdstrike is pretty unlikely to give you an engine fire. Stalls, but not a fire.

 

[jb747]

How do the guys/gals doing the nights handle it?

Given how we perform at our worst at night, particularly from 0300 onwards, I would've thought that training during these times would've been avoided.

But then, I s'pose that you don't get that luxury flying into LAX or LHR, do you?

In most cases if you're doing the training sessions in the middle of the night, then all of your sessions will happen then. So, you basically end up on night shift for the duration of the course. It has some positives...no traffic for a start.

 

[mjt57]

In most cases if you're doing the training sessions in the middle of the night, then all of your sessions will happen then. So, you basically end up on night shift for the duration of the course. It has some positives...no traffic for a start.

How many hours would be required to attend when on "nightshift"? And what about the instructors? Do they do multiple sessions and spend all night there or do they get rostered with particular students?

 

[day-heg]

How many hours would be required to attend when on "nightshift"? And what about the instructors? Do they do multiple sessions and spend all night there or do they get rostered with particular students?

For my up-coming sim course, we're required to report 90 mins before the sim start time, in the box for 4 hrs, plus likely at least a 30 min debrief. I've heard of a few instructors doing a sim, having a break and doing another, but I reckon by the end of the second they wouldn't be particularly effective... More likely, they'll be on a similar roster pattern so the trainees, leads to some consistency for trainer/trainee in the sim and out of it.

I've managed to swerve the the proper graveyard shifts but still have a handful of 03.00 finishes scheduled in the coming weeks.

 

[jb747]

How many hours would be required to attend when on "nightshift"? And what about the instructors? Do they do multiple sessions and spend all night there or do they get rostered with particular students?

Our sims are generally planned with 45 minutes before the start, they run for 4 hours, and then 15 minutes afterwards. Extra briefing time may be included occasionally. If there are (say) 13 sims in a course, then they will probably all occur at similar times. That number of sims would take 3 to 4 weeks.

On that same course, you might have 5-6 instructors. They don't more than one sim on a 'shift'.

 

[por930]

Our sims are generally planned with 45 minutes before the start, they run for 4 hours, and then 15 minutes afterwards. Extra briefing time may be included occasionally. If there are (say) 13 sims in a course, then they will probably all occur at similar times. That number of sims would take 3 to 4 weeks.

On that same course, you might have 5-6 instructors. They don't more than one sim on a 'shift'.

jb, do the instructors give you a full brief before each exercise, and what outcomes are expected, sort of like you giving a briefing to your FO before an actual flight? Also, do the instructors talk at all during the particular maneuver, giving hints or warnings about such and such, or even stop it and say this or that needs addressing and start again? OR...is it more like this is the exercise, I will watch you and FO and afterwards have a debrief?

 

[mjt57]

On that same course, you might have 5-6 instructors. They don't more than one sim on a 'shift'.

That's not too bad then, I s'pose. Better than being stuck there for 12hrs, or whatever.