Dependence on Automation
#11
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 26
Not where I live
One or two glass cockpit airplanes can be found. They may not make a lot of steam gauge airplanes anymore, but there are plenty still around.
#12
I teach at a flight school that has new 172s with the G1000s installed. We do all of our training, including private and instruments in them. It’s hard enough in the six packs to get a new student to look out side, with the G1000s it’s similar to trying to get a kid to look away from Call of Duty. You ask them where they are and they instantly turn on the autopilot and look at the moving map. Heaven forbid that the GPS fails, they might have to use a VOR or (I’m going to say it) a chart. You can “Fail” these items, but in the back of the students’ minds, it’s still on. It all works by PFM. The dependence on automation is getting harder to over come. I agree that private and instrument should be done in the six packs. Angry Outburst Over.
The WildSmurf
The WildSmurf
#13
The sad thing is that students and even pilots who are dependent on automation, don't really know it. They think they are just fine. When I was teaching, we had DA-40s with the G1000 and autopilot. Personally, I only allowed students to use it on a long cruise portion, and even then only once. Other than demonstrating and doing a couple of approaches with the autopilot, they never touched the thing.
That works well for me now. My current plane has no autopilot. That's one of the reasons I wanted to be assigned when I was hired. I knew I didn't have a lot of TT and wanted to keep developing my flying skills. Some day, I'll gladly let the autopilot fly, but for now, I'm happy to have to work and be better at what I do. I just worry that the next wave won't have that same desire, or worse, they won't realize they need it.
That works well for me now. My current plane has no autopilot. That's one of the reasons I wanted to be assigned when I was hired. I knew I didn't have a lot of TT and wanted to keep developing my flying skills. Some day, I'll gladly let the autopilot fly, but for now, I'm happy to have to work and be better at what I do. I just worry that the next wave won't have that same desire, or worse, they won't realize they need it.
#14
Personally, I only allowed students to use it on a long cruise portion, and even then only once. Other than demonstrating and doing a couple of approaches with the autopilot, they never touched the thing.
#15
Today's aircraft have "TOO MUCH" information. It's distracting because it is so new and neat. I do agree, it makes lazy and unskilled pilots. The hardest thing to do is make them hard-working and honest. I love the glass and automation, but I came from a background of 3400hrs before I worked full time with it.
#16
I am having the same problem with the leadership at where I am located. It’s very frustrating, I just look and shake my head. The leadership here has thousands of hours and has lost the perspective on how the students learn. It’s easy for a person with that much time jump in a G1000 and fly with no problem. Just imagine a new student and how he/she would react. They have no idea what it means and how to use it. They expect the student to just pick it up. It just makes me feel better that I am not alone in this.
WildSmurf
#17
While there is some validity to making sure students know all their equipment, I can't see any reason they would need to use the AP before getting a PPL. Obviously, they have to be able to shoot an approach with the AP (I believe that's in the new Inst. PTS), but that shouldn't take much. What reason do your superiors give for students needing to use an autopilot?
#18
While there is some validity to making sure students know all their equipment, I can't see any reason they would need to use the AP before getting a PPL. Obviously, they have to be able to shoot an approach with the AP (I believe that's in the new Inst. PTS), but that shouldn't take much. What reason do your superiors give for students needing to use an autopilot?
WildSmurf
#19
I found this on another forum, apparently it's from the Indian media blasting pilots who would dare hand fly. I fear the day this attitude comes to the US.
There is great discussion in this thread about the merits of training in glass cockpits. While glass can do some great things for pilot SA, there still needs to the the basic [and proficient] airmanship that backs-up the glass. I'd love to see a prohibition against auto pilots and glass in training aircraft, and get back to teaching new pilots how to FLY the aircraft!
What follows, if true, is an indictment of negligence of the Indian government in certifying new pilots.
EDIT: Article Link added: http://www.in.com/news/current-affai...7ceb256-1.html
There is great discussion in this thread about the merits of training in glass cockpits. While glass can do some great things for pilot SA, there still needs to the the basic [and proficient] airmanship that backs-up the glass. I'd love to see a prohibition against auto pilots and glass in training aircraft, and get back to teaching new pilots how to FLY the aircraft!
What follows, if true, is an indictment of negligence of the Indian government in certifying new pilots.
Pilots play with lives by flying manually for 'ultimate kick'
Soaring in the sky, pilots at times switch off the automation instruments in the cockpit to fly the aircraft manually. Sounds bizarre! The truth is that they do it to get that 'ultimate kick'. In the process, they compromise on passenger safety.
Though 'raw data flying' (the technical term for manual flying) is not prohibited, pilots are not exposed to manual flying, which is normally carried out only on a simulator.
It is done to train pilots in case the computerised systems in the cockpit fail.
Pilots of various airlines have been found violating the parameters of standard flying procedures.
While a senior commander of a private airline admitted that pilots do go for 'raw data flying', Air India director (flight safety) has gone a step ahead and issued a circular cautioning the pilots.
The Air India circular stated that there were cases of 'parameter excedence' and advised pilots to stick to the standard operating procedures.
There have been more than 40 incidents when flying parameters were breached, said an official familiar with monitoring flight data recorders (FDR).
The FDRs, which store flight data including the ways in which the pilots handle aircraft instruments, are regularly monitored by senior airline officers to analyse whether pilots have been following flying rules.
In case a breach is noticed, the pilots are summoned and counselled to ensure that passenger safety is not compromised.
About two- three years ago, an Indian Airlines aircraft had deviated from its flight path and moved towards the Rashtrapati Bhawan prompting the official carrier to issue an alert. The incident happened because the co-pilot was flying manual.
An Air India pilot admitted that during 'raw data flying', parameters have been violated.
For example, while landing at the IGI airport, the normal rate of descent of an aircraft should be around 700 ft per minute. But it could shoot up to 2000 ft per minute during manual handling, thereby endangering passenger safety, the pilot stated.
This then sets off a chain reaction putting the pilot under tremendous psychological pressure.
In the panic-like situation, the pilot might find it difficult to simultaneously adjust parameters like direction and altitude for a safe landing, he said.
And then there is the possibility that instead of landing at position 'A' the aircraft might land at place 'B', or instead of runway 29, at runway 27, he explained. In case of automated flying, computers do these jobs for the pilot.
At times, the passengers may never get to know about the violation and it is the air traffic control which pitches in to guide the pilot for a safe landing.
An air traffic controller pointed out "there have been instances of level busts and sudden rates of descent and climb were noticed which weren't desirable". Former DGCA Kanu Gohain said, "Raw data flying can't be banned. It is part of the training and if pilots are violating the parameters, they should be counselled and sent for corrective training". Capt A. Ranganathan, an aviation expert, stated that manual flying should be normally tried on simulators.
"It can be practised once in a while at airports with low air traffic density but certainly not at busy airports such as Mumbai or Delhi," Ranganathan said.
A senior commander of a private airline said 'raw data flying' should be done rarely since passenger safety is involved.
"But the pilots should also be comfortable with manual flying, what if the onboard computers fail," he said. He also conceded that manual flying should be tried on simulators as at times things could really go out of hand.
Aviation experts pointed out that the purpose of complete automation was to enhance safety features, besides saving the pilot from fatigue or any other distractions and making the cockpit less crowded.
The automation inside the cockpit includes flight director, auto thrust and auto pilot, the job of which is to direct flight, control climb, descent, direction, speed and other aspects.
A senior instructor pilot admitted that younger pilots pester them for 'raw data flying' while some seniors flaunt their skills by completely switching off automation.
Soaring in the sky, pilots at times switch off the automation instruments in the cockpit to fly the aircraft manually. Sounds bizarre! The truth is that they do it to get that 'ultimate kick'. In the process, they compromise on passenger safety.
Though 'raw data flying' (the technical term for manual flying) is not prohibited, pilots are not exposed to manual flying, which is normally carried out only on a simulator.
It is done to train pilots in case the computerised systems in the cockpit fail.
Pilots of various airlines have been found violating the parameters of standard flying procedures.
While a senior commander of a private airline admitted that pilots do go for 'raw data flying', Air India director (flight safety) has gone a step ahead and issued a circular cautioning the pilots.
The Air India circular stated that there were cases of 'parameter excedence' and advised pilots to stick to the standard operating procedures.
There have been more than 40 incidents when flying parameters were breached, said an official familiar with monitoring flight data recorders (FDR).
The FDRs, which store flight data including the ways in which the pilots handle aircraft instruments, are regularly monitored by senior airline officers to analyse whether pilots have been following flying rules.
In case a breach is noticed, the pilots are summoned and counselled to ensure that passenger safety is not compromised.
About two- three years ago, an Indian Airlines aircraft had deviated from its flight path and moved towards the Rashtrapati Bhawan prompting the official carrier to issue an alert. The incident happened because the co-pilot was flying manual.
An Air India pilot admitted that during 'raw data flying', parameters have been violated.
For example, while landing at the IGI airport, the normal rate of descent of an aircraft should be around 700 ft per minute. But it could shoot up to 2000 ft per minute during manual handling, thereby endangering passenger safety, the pilot stated.
This then sets off a chain reaction putting the pilot under tremendous psychological pressure.
In the panic-like situation, the pilot might find it difficult to simultaneously adjust parameters like direction and altitude for a safe landing, he said.
And then there is the possibility that instead of landing at position 'A' the aircraft might land at place 'B', or instead of runway 29, at runway 27, he explained. In case of automated flying, computers do these jobs for the pilot.
At times, the passengers may never get to know about the violation and it is the air traffic control which pitches in to guide the pilot for a safe landing.
An air traffic controller pointed out "there have been instances of level busts and sudden rates of descent and climb were noticed which weren't desirable". Former DGCA Kanu Gohain said, "Raw data flying can't be banned. It is part of the training and if pilots are violating the parameters, they should be counselled and sent for corrective training". Capt A. Ranganathan, an aviation expert, stated that manual flying should be normally tried on simulators.
"It can be practised once in a while at airports with low air traffic density but certainly not at busy airports such as Mumbai or Delhi," Ranganathan said.
A senior commander of a private airline said 'raw data flying' should be done rarely since passenger safety is involved.
"But the pilots should also be comfortable with manual flying, what if the onboard computers fail," he said. He also conceded that manual flying should be tried on simulators as at times things could really go out of hand.
Aviation experts pointed out that the purpose of complete automation was to enhance safety features, besides saving the pilot from fatigue or any other distractions and making the cockpit less crowded.
The automation inside the cockpit includes flight director, auto thrust and auto pilot, the job of which is to direct flight, control climb, descent, direction, speed and other aspects.
A senior instructor pilot admitted that younger pilots pester them for 'raw data flying' while some seniors flaunt their skills by completely switching off automation.
Last edited by HSLD; 04-14-2010 at 11:01 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post