Don't Turn On The AutoPilot

[Colonel Sanders]

There is a certain segment of pilots here, that don't
believe in using what's in the panel. They leave the
autopilot off for single-pilot IFR, which blows my mind.

If it's in the panel, learn about it, and use it, to help
you, especially when you are alone in the cockpit.

Which brings me to page 87 of my June 2013 AOPA
magazine, where Steve Coonts relates an experience
of flying a single at night, when his autopilot packed it
in. So he's hand-flying at night in the goo, in the rain,
in the turbulence, when ATC does him the big favour
of a revised routing. His words:

"It was worse than combat"

Even allowing for a little poetic licence there, keep in
mind that Steve Coonts is a veteran of many (night)
bombing missions over North Vietnam, operating off
an aircraft carrier.

Now, if you're the cock of the walk around here, a
grizzled veteran with your "100 bombing missions
over Hanoi" patch on your flight suit, and you never
had any problems getting your Vigilante back on the
boat regardless of the wx at night, you might be in
a position to call Steve Coonts a candy-@ss,
compared to you.

But I really doubt you are. And you have no idea
what you are talking about.

[teh1pilot]

If it's in the panel, learn about it, and use it, to help
you, especially when you are alone in the cockpit.

I completely agree with the statement, but only under a general sense.

At this time, I think it's reasonable to assume that a lot of pilots that don't fly the big tin shutter at the idea of "automating" a flight. I think it only comes back to the idea of "oh well if this goes wrong, I better know how to get us back on the ground safely" This is only partially true.

I think a lack of working knowledge of the systems they use, coupled with inexperience, and a bit of "for the sake of safety", pilots would rather put the fate of the plane in their own hands vs adding that extra layer of separation from the plane.

On the flip side of the coin, I also agree with the fact that every once in a while, sure, throw off the AP and hand fly an approach. Throw a little excitement in the flight while still brushing up your skills "just in case"....Only at the appropriate times and work flow permits.

[trey kule]

Throw a little excitement in the flight

Good idea. I know its an attitude we want all our company pilots to have And
I am sure if those two young guys with this attitude had not killed themselves in the CRJ a few years back, they would wholeheartedly agree with you. Or the pilots who came home with an engine shut down because they decided to throw in a little excitement and could not get a restart.

Why is it that some of you simply think you can just turn things off and do a little training? It is not up to an individual pilot flying at any level of AOC holder to unilaterally determine their training requirements and go to it. If you do not feel competent to do your job properly, let the CP, or training department (if the company has one) know, and get proper instruction.

CS gave some good advice. It is beyond me that for the most part, those who should most trust in the autopilot, don't want to use it. Flying a plane as a CPL is a job. The aircraft is not there for your personal enjoyment. And some people wonder why no one wants to hire low time pilots...


My rant for the week

[teh1pilot]

Throw a little excitement in the flight

Good idea. I know its an attitude we want all our company pilots to have And
I am sure if those two young guys with this attitude had not killed themselves in the CRJ a few years back, they would wholeheartedly agree with you. Or the pilots who came home with an engine shut down because they decided to throw in a little excitement and could not get a restart.

Why is it that some of you simply think you can just turn things off and do a little training? It is not up to an individual pilot flying at any level of AOC holder to unilaterally determine their training requirements and go to it. If you do not feel competent to do your job properly, let the CP, or training department (if the company has one) know, and get proper instruction.

CS gave some good advice. It is beyond me that for the most part, those who should most trust in the autopilot, don't want to use it. Flying a plane as a CPL is a job. The aircraft is not there for your personal enjoyment. And some people wonder why no one wants to hire low time pilots...


My rant for the week

I would beg to say that turning an autopilot off to do a little hand flying isn't even in the same caliber of risk as say "coming home with an engine shut down". I can just hear them now."oh the humanity, how did we ever get to our destinations without autopilot"...... I just simply don't see any risk of hand flying during a non critical phase of flight. A prime example would be while En-route. Not to say in any way for a pilot to evaluate his weak area's and "go to it", but it's something to spruce up the flight, and have you actually sit up in the seat a bit more. It's just like driving a car on a long trip. Is it so wrong to take it off cruise control and just drive the thing for a few minutes, crank up the music and take a swig of your coffee? I would think not.

I'm also saying hand flying shouldn't be a common practice. If the work flow allows it, you're flying in very calm air, no passengers in the back, and say just flying back home.....I don't see anything wrong with throwing off the autopilot at altitude and feel like you're actually flying the plane again. Then, when ready to descend, throw it back on and now that you've hand flown for the last 10 mins enroute, you're awake and propped up on your seat. I completely agree with CS...100%. If it's there, use it. But we also have to look at the other side of the argument. Remember, while its extremely easy to use, autopilots don't get planes back on the ground. The pilots do. I don't care if its turning a few knobs or monitoring instruments.

[frog]

You might make fun of me, but I think that autopilots are not that simple to use properly. It takes a lot of SA and good knowledge of the plane and autopilot to bring a plane properly on automation from the top of descend to a 1000 feet above the ground where you may want to fly it for practice in a busy airspace.

[Doc]

Well frog, just the opposite is true. Nothing helps SA more than letting the "machine" do the work, leaving you free to sit back and "manage" from your "perch" in the left seat. A modern autopilot can fly your ass off. Or mine. Let it do the work. I've flown with pilots who turn "George" off for the descent so they can have "control" of the airplane. I feel they've just lost half the "team" and actually given up control to a less efficient team member.....themselves.

[frog]

True enough doc, maybe I didn't express myself properly. My point is that the AP needs to be managed properly specially in conjonction with the MCP and FMC and it is not as easy as some people would think.

[Xander]

Choosing the right amount of automation for a given phase of flight is one of the most frequent challenges of modern aviation and a very interesting subject.

For those who haven't seen it, there is a cool video called "Children of the magenta" on youtube that adresses this issue.

From my experience, automation can be a 2 edged sword. Sure it's nice and useful to have an autothrust and sophisticated Vnav with many modes, but I make sure to hand fly, conditions permitting, at least once to 10000 and at least one approach with AP or AT off per pairing.

[trey kule]

You might make fun of me, but I think that autopilots are not that simple to use properly

Not making fun of you at all. They also need to be used enough so that piots have absolute trust in their ability to use them properly and in the autopilots ability to fly the plane..Seems like the worst pilots are the ones that least trust the autopilot and would rather fly themselves.

but I make sure to hand fly, conditions permitting

, at least once to 10000 and at least one approach with AP or AT off per pairing

What does your operations manual say about this practice? Are the "conditions" that permit this specified in your ops manual?
So many unnecessary accidents and wasted lives by pilots who determine these issues themselves. It seems that some pilots feel that when a plane has no pax on board it is their plane to play with.
And if they are unable to hand fly the plane safely the best thing to do is not get more training, but simply turn the autopilot off and fly by hand. So who determines when you turn the autopilot off if you are doing a good job of hand flying the plane...Or are you able to do that assessment yourself, as well?

I sound like a broken record, but in the vain hope that some pilot reading this will stop trying to justify doing what they are not supposed to be doing, I will continue.
Lots of accidents...Bad accidents.. Fatal accidents.. Caused entirely by pilots who set "permitting conditions" for treating a company plane as their own plaything...If you cannot hand fly the plane then get more training..

[Rookie50]

I just read an accident report today in one of the recent flying magazines. Fellow, experienced GA pilot with lots of actual IMC time, takes off in a glass loaded SR 22. Engages the AP 5 Seconds! After takeoff. Except he doesnt know this AP well, instead of hitting altitude pre- select he hits altitude hold, leveling the AC at 100 feet off the deck. They know all this from the investigation.

Edit. Forget to say wx was a 200 ft overcast. So it's a good bet he wanted that ap on before penetrating the clouds.

We don't know exactly next what happens, but the plane weaves all over the place for a couple of miles, pilot presumably trying to push the right button, before making a big fiery hole.

So why didn't he simply disconnect the AP and hand fly to a safe altitude? Well you tell me, but it seems possible he was not comfortable hand flying this AC when he needed to. Sad. So sure, use the AP. but you'ed better as a GA pilot know how to hand fly too. GA AC dont have 3 redundant autopilots.

[trey kule]

It seems you have already come to your own conclusion about the cause despite asking the question.

I cannot comment on an accident I know nothing about, so this is general based on what you posted.

a. A perfect example of a pilot not knowing how to properly use the autopilot., and apparently not knowing how to correct his original failure.' The solution here is to know how to properly use the autopilot..you know,,,from training ..
What I understand you are advocating is if you cant use the autopilot properly, dont deal with that problem, but instead learn to hand fly the plane...Kind of like suggesting wearing a life jacket because you dont want to fix the hole in the bottom of the boat...But heck...It justifies having fun in the plane doesnt it?

b. Now as to your conclusion about his hand flying. Maybe quite correct.. Maybe not. When things start to go a bit sideways sometimes people dont look for the simplest solution, and instead get distracted trying to solve the problem...(I think everyone should remember the lessons from flight 401)

c. Now as to the possabiity you are correct and he was simply afraid to turn the autopilot off and hand fly.. And here is the point..If that condition pre exists....Get training....Practice...dedicated practice.
My rant(s) are about commercial pilots simply deciding themselves that they need practice and turning off the autopilot..They justify this practice, almost exclusively with the pre-condition that no pax are on board. They determine themselves that practice is necessary but not needed for the company to provide more or recurrent training...It is their attitude towards their responsability to simply use their employer's plane to do what they think is important, or in so many cases, just fun.

[Rookie50]

Both issues, proper AP use and hand flying proficiency, are important to me. Note I only comment on the GA world.

My rant as it relates to GA, is overuse of automation to the point, with G1000 ect, that hand flying skills are degraded.

I have read numerous accidents where it seems like the GA pilot either got disoriented, or simply could not control the AC in IMC. Hate seeing these. More training, yes is needed.

[Doc]

My auto pilot does ALL my flying. I owe it to my pax to give them the safest flight I can. The auto pilot flies, I mind the store. I don't need to prove I can fly. To anybody.

[CpnCrunch]

The FAA thinks that you shouldn't use the autopilot all the time:

http://www.nbaa.org/ops/safety/20130125 ... rcraft.php

[Xander]

You might make fun of me, but I think that autopilots are not that simple to use properly

Not making fun of you at all. They also need to be used enough so that piots have absolute trust in their ability to use them properly and in the autopilots ability to fly the plane..Seems like the worst pilots are the ones that least trust the autopilot and would rather fly themselves.

but I make sure to hand fly, conditions permitting

, at least once to 10000 and at least one approach with AP or AT off per pairing

What does your operations manual say about this practice? Are the "conditions" that permit this specified in your ops manual?
So many unnecessary accidents and wasted lives by pilots who determine these issues themselves. It seems that some pilots feel that when a plane has no pax on board it is their plane to play with.
And if they are unable to hand fly the plane safely the best thing to do is not get more training, but simply turn the autopilot off and fly by hand. So who determines when you turn the autopilot off if you are doing a good job of hand flying the plane...Or are you able to do that assessment yourself, as well?

I sound like a broken record, but in the vain hope that some pilot reading this will stop trying to justify doing what they are not supposed to be doing, I will continue.
Lots of accidents...Bad accidents.. Fatal accidents.. Caused entirely by pilots who set "permitting conditions" for treating a company plane as their own plaything...If you cannot hand fly the plane then get more training..

I won't let you allegate that I use company aircraft as my "playthings".

The OM says that under low workload conditions it may be allowed to hand fly for the purpose of maintaining proficiency.

I'll give you some examples of "Low workload conditions" : familiar airport, VMC, daylight, ILS or FMS approach with FD engaged, low traffic, always briefed and agreed with the PNF.

In a 2 crew environment the PNF cross checks and calls any deviations

The AOM states that we are expected to remain proficient in the manual operation of the AC.

As many other people I don't have the luxury to travel to another city on my days off, unpaid, to do some manual flying in the sim. Also, sim is sim. Real-life hand flying is irreplaceable.

I have the necessary judgement and experience to determine when to turn it off and hand fly. I do. And if I need to, it only takes one word to re-engage it.

To me the real danger is to never disconnect it and become complaceant and over-reliant on automation. THAT, my friend, is the real danger.

Go watch "children of the magenta" on youtube. You'll see, it's interesting.

[Rookie50]

What I see is more Air France 447's in our future, as fancy video game players, not pilots, seem to be what the industry wants to train.

CS, you are the stick and rudder expert who hates glass. I don't get your take on this.

[trey kule]

Rookie..I agree with you 100%. The whole movement to replace flight experience with different training, SOP's checklist novels, and automation , I believe is going to have some disasterous consequences.. It is being felt in the US already where the FAA recognized the problem, and changed the experience requirements for regional FOs.
Canada will follow suit, I think, but unfortunately it will be after some accidents where innocent people are killed.
And turning off systems in flight to gain experience is not, in my opinion, a substitute.

Now XAnader.
I was not specifically referring to you or your company, but in rereading my post, I can see how you got that impression.
Allow me to elaborate..On a recent thread discussing turning off some critical navigation equipment for an approach to get practice in basic techniques (read experience here), one of the main points mentioned was it "was briefed" Is that the new flight college mantra? Brief and all will be well?

In any event, I am generally curious now about your procedure.

Please post this.
1. Who initates this hand flying...ie PF, PM, Capt. FO......
2. and would you describe the SOP briefing for this hand flying....I have absolutely no idea how you would brief this on any operational flight, so please share as much detail as your fingers can handle on the keyboard....
I know it cannot be legally done in the flight levels above 290 , but I am particularily interested in what the actions are if the PF by hand flys out of limits and the consequences (would not be in the briefing, but maybe you could add that.) Is the PM monitoring the aircraft flight operation or the practice?

[Colonel Sanders]

CS, you are the stick and rudder expert who hates glass. I don't get your take on this.

Ok. Really simple. If your airplane has equipment and systems, as
the PIC you are obligated to be familiar with their associated normal
and emergency procedures.

Let's say you jump into a little twin, and it has a 3M Strikefinder, or
airborne wx radar. Would you leave them turned off, or would you
turn them on and use them? IMC in the summer, you can guess what
my answer would be.

However, every piece of equipment can fail, and as a competent
pilot you must be prepared for that. Engines can fail. Avionics can
fail. Flight controls can fail. And either you are up for the moment,
or you are not.

[single_swine_herder]

Regarding failures, I'm frustrated by very high time pilots who are operating sophisticated equipment who are not sufficiently familiar with AP operations to write up an AP problem with some kind of useful detail to be helpful without requiring a test flight to figure out what is working and what isn't.

A fault like "AP U/S" is worse than useless .....well, what part is U/S? Is it erratic in VOR/LOC mode? Does it respond to heading inputs? To Turn Knob inputs? Is it slow to respond and if so what axis and source .... is that condition consistent or intermittent? Does it hold Alt but oscillates plus or minus about 200 feet? Does it overshoot on ALT SEL? Is it a FD failure and the rest of the system is following a faulty computation? Does it disconnect without being commanded? Does it follow a approach course on the FMS's output but not when coupled to nav 2?

Put some thought into things folks..... and don't say .... "yeah .. well, it's been like that a long time." So friggin' well report it .... otherwise it'll stay like that for an even longer time! By that time, confidence is eroded in the AP system. Next step in that chain of events is the AP is removed because it's just additional non-revenue weight.

If you think automation is going away as aircraft become more advanced, you're living in a dream world. It's mastery of the equipment not because to do otherwise may end in your demise, do it because it's simply neat stuff that is damned interesting.

There's one thing about an AP .... it can concentrate a lot longer than you can without getting tired. And a second thing .... when it came out of the factory, it was certified to fly an approach, hold altitude and heading better than darned near any pilot reading this post ...... so keep it in that kind of operational condition.

edited to correct a couple of typos

[trey kule]

it can concentrate a lot longer than you can without getting tired. And a second thing ....

Truer words were never said...In looking at accident stats, the FAA concluced that a typical pilot can fly on a limited panel for about 15 minutes in real IMC before losing concentration and control of the airplane..In a high workload envirorment, or a very boring enviroment my unscientific observation is that it is about the same on a full panel..fortunately pilots are seldom put in very high workload situations, but are usually hand flying when it is not boring. I have never understood how flying straight and level, by hand, was going to give anyone a feel for the plane..The trim switch maybe.

[JungianJugular]

There's something called an autopilot?! Like automatic pilot? Great Scott!

[Xander]

Rookie..I agree with you 100%. The whole movement to replace flight experience with different training, SOP's checklist novels, and automation , I believe is going to have some disasterous consequences.. It is being felt in the US already where the FAA recognized the problem, and changed the experience requirements for regional FOs.
Canada will follow suit, I think, but unfortunately it will be after some accidents where innocent people are killed.
And turning off systems in flight to gain experience is not, in my opinion, a substitute.

Now XAnader.
I was not specifically referring to you or your company, but in rereading my post, I can see how you got that impression.
Allow me to elaborate..On a recent thread discussing turning off some critical navigation equipment for an approach to get practice in basic techniques (read experience here), one of the main points mentioned was it "was briefed" Is that the new flight college mantra? Brief and all will be well?

In any event, I am generally curious now about your procedure.

Please post this.
1. Who initates this hand flying...ie PF, PM, Capt. FO......
2. and would you describe the SOP briefing for this hand flying....I have absolutely no idea how you would brief this on any operational flight, so please share as much detail as your fingers can handle on the keyboard....
I know it cannot be legally done in the flight levels above 290 , but I am particularily interested in what the actions are if the PF by hand flys out of limits and the consequences (would not be in the briefing, but maybe you could add that.) Is the PM monitoring the aircraft flight operation or the practice?

I wouldn't know about new flight college mantras, I finished Chicoutimi 10 years ago.

I can tell you that it's common practice at the major airline I work for.

Normally, in the TO briefing, as PF, I will brief my intention to manually fly by asking the PNF if he's okay with it.

Same thing for the approach.

I won't get into my SOP details, but I can tell you that the tasks are absolutely clear about who does what at all times with the AP on or OFF, and I trust my colleagues, who are the most professional individuals I have had the chance to work with so far, to do what is necessary to ensure the AC remains within limits at all times, same as I would do for them.

As PNF, If you see a deviation, you call it, and you step up a notch until you take control of the AC or re-engage automation as you need to.

Usually the PF's answer is "correcting" and it doesn't go any further.

[trey kule]

Does your ops manual, ops specs, state what preconditions are required ?
When you brief the intention, do you also mention the conditions?
What is the role of the Captain in all this, as opposed to Pnf/pf?

I have a bit of experience with a major airline or two. Never seen anything like this so any detail you can offer would be a great help in understanding it and analyzing for possible value. In fact, one of the majors that I was ver familiar with was very clear....this was not to be done under any circumstances so it is more than a bit interesting to see a major promoting this.

[Xander]

PM sent.

[pelmet]

Never used an autopilot for my first several thousand hours of IFR. Was never one installed. When it came to flying one particular type with a flight attendant on board, you really preferred not to fly with the fat ones. It makes a big difference when they walk back and forth compared to the skinny ones.