Gone Flying

no one is talking about removing automation from the flight deck.

whether it’s automation trapping a human error or a pilot trapping an automation error, having them BOTH there vastly increases safety

havick206

Had one about a month ago R20R ILS at SNA.

USMCFLYR

Had what exactly?
False LOC?

Can you give more details as requested before too?

--------------
Until we get some more specifics:

Facility is a CAT I/E performance category.

Last inspection - 11/01/2019
Clearances at the low end 20% more than minimums.

No special inspections requested since.

For both you and Viperstick - any other idea if anyone else reported a similar problem when you say that you experienced an issue?
Again - just not seeing anything to indicate a facility problem. Just like there is a paper trail if you write-up the airplane; if an issue is brought to the attention through the proper channels, the facility has to have corrective action which involves a flight check.

In these examples being provided, there is no such follow up.
And facility performance and continuing ground maintenance checks just aren't sowing such problems.
This is leading me to believe that the issue IS NOT truly false LOC signals from the facility but something else in the airplane or the set up.

Flugkapitan

I keep seeing the automation topic come up. I think most folks don't realize that the lunar lander, with Neil Armstrong, operated one of the first autopilots using essentially similar logic as modern automation (and, or, nor, etc.) It is also a well known example of an autopilot becoming incapable of execution--Neil manually overrode the autopilot and landed. The attempts to make flying automated go back at least that far. Computers are really good at "learning" repetitive tasks given enough iterations to perform it at an acceptable tiny margin of error. However, when one factors in those pesky non-normal events of low occurrence, the computer is going to fail in those scenarios at a rate of 100%--only the human brain at this point has the ability to think outside the box when something different happens. I think of examples including UA 232 where it was "impossible" to loose all hydraulics, US Air 1549 with CA Sullenberger and WN 1380 CA Shults. How steep is that autopilot going to execute an emergency descent with its "default" response? Maybe I don't want an ultra rapid descent because there is a hole the size of Aloha Airlines 243 and the rest of the plane could break up...

$h!t happens...passengers want human pilots to deal with it.

dmeg13021

We get it, ground-based signal gets flight checked to tight tolerances. The aircraft flight directors give false captures of LOC or GS based on the approach geometry sometimes. There’s no reason an FMC can’t get updated to back up a ground-based ILS with an overlay GPS that eliminates false captures.

Taxiing will be the real *****.

USMCFLYR

What I'm getting dmeg - is that there is probably a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding of what false LOC signals truly are. No need to get defensive. I am giving logical insight to what some pilots re reporting as problems. Maybe it is even a terminology between our segments of aviation. But you can't really have FALSE CAPTURE OF THE LOC OR GS signal without a failure in the ground based system. As I put forth in an earlier post - maybe what you are calling false captures are really FMS/FGP set-up errors.

MagooFlew

New thread for this maybe?

USMCFLYR

If anyone is truly interested then maybe - feel free!

Thread drift otherwise is common wouldn't you agree?

I mean exactly how long can you talk about the 1 millionth thread about the 'pilot shortage'? )

WhaleSurfing

He’s on a roll. Change the thread name to “LOC Abnormalities In The Modern World”: The Why’s The Causes And The Myths.

USMCFLYR

Yep!
Of course something beside ‘ oh our contract sucks’ or ‘is the schedule 7/7 or 8/6’ certainly out of place on this board!