Me.Who is the old feller on this board who keeps saying that they "never killed anyone by refusing to fly"?
I'm not old, just advancing in years.
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Me.Who is the old feller on this board who keeps saying that they "never killed anyone by refusing to fly"?
So, in your books pilots should rotate and engage AP at lowest permitted altitude (paying customers deserve "safety") and only hand fly from mins to the runway. However, twice a year they get to practice in the sim and that will keep them proficient at hand flying, basic IFR cross check etc? If you think it's that easy to maintain the skills then surely it can't be a reduction in safety to (for the love of God) hand fly.ReserveTank wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:40 pm I disagree-twice per year comes around quickly. The sim should be a tool to keep you sharp, not bring you back from regression.
So, if it's never that difficult, how could it be such a safety issue to hand fly with passengers? This is a contradiction. You say passengers are paying for the highest level of safety so AP on all the time, yet you also so it should never be that difficult, in which case where's the safety issue?ReserveTank wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:40 pm
It should never be difficult to follow the cue with the AP off anyhow.
But, if we're so confident that pilots can follow "a cue", why the concern about using your hands with passengers? Again it doesn't make sense. It's either deathly unsafe, or so easy that the safety factor is a non issue, you can't have it both ways.ReserveTank wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:40 pm
If you need it, I question your general skills. If you aren't confident that you can follow a cue by hand if the AP fails, again I question your basic skills.
I'll agree with you there, while I don't fly commercially anymore I have gone the extra mile at my current job and used methods which are frowned upon by management to " get the job done and make everyone happy". Just to get shit on for doing so. I just don't bother anymore. The job just doesn't get done then. It's all about covering your ass I guess nowadays.ReserveTank wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:51 pmjakeandelwood wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:37 am It's like your kid wanting to do math in their head because they want to stay sharp and you saying no, use the calculator, it's more accurate.
I haven't met many people that are better than the computer. Case in point from one man's observation-There's a stack of flight logs that show up on the CP's desk every week because the captains try to out-math the calculator. Repeat offenders get the carpet dance and some get a boot to the rear.
jakeandelwood wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:37 am This world is gotten itself into a sad state of affairs. What mr. Jansen said about canceling flights because of an inop auto pilot just sums it all up completely.Generally, airline pilots don't CANCEL flights. That's an operational control decision. The crew can write it up and decide if they want to operate with an MEL on the AP system. These days, an airline crew must think twice before being released with MELs because it is a legally binding decision. If the cards are stacking against the crew, like they're getting tired, they have bad weather, and/or other MELs which require constant crew attention, the crew can decide that it's not the safest option for the flight. The system is overly litigious and doesn't forgive crews for their mistakes. The company is not going to help you if you bung up a flight related to an MEL. We just had a captain get knocked back to the right seat for "helping out." He agreed to dispatch the plane, they got busy in bad weather, exceeded an aircraft limitation, and the CP busted him back indefinitely. The captain was not a bad stick, either. Just not his day...but still no one defended him. That's what we are dealing with out there.Eric Janson wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:14 am There's a thread running on Airliners about Pilots cancelling flights because the auto-pilot is INOP. WTF?
Who is the old feller on this board who keeps saying that they "never killed anyone by refusing to fly"?
It’s very contextual. Sure an aircraft computer can fly more precisely than I can. But it cannot make decisions. If the Apollo computer didn’t have an override function, the Eagle lunar module would have crashed into boulders.ReserveTank wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:51 pm
I haven't met many people that are better than the computer. Case in point from one man's observation-There's a stack of flight logs that show up on the CP's desk every week because the captains try to out-math the calculator. Repeat offenders get the carpet dance and some get a boot to the rear.
But you probably will fly on the 737 Super. My predicted new name for modified Max’s.
How long a flight? I did that once on a five hour overnight flight....not fun. Then again, the chief pilot(or was it future chief at the time) was snoozing away beside me. Best to get a block of airspace if you can.Eric Janson wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:14 am There's a thread running on Airliners about Pilots cancelling flights because the auto-pilot is INOP. WTF?
I get there's an issue with RVSM but if the company is happy with the extra fuel burn I'd be quite happy to fly below RVSM Airspace without an auto-pilot.
And that is one of the most troubling things about this whole situation. Maybe airlines should better train their pilots......The training and instructions need to be calibrated for pilots with lesser training and experience, he said.
There’s your white male privilege card, Complex
Thats overly simplistic and blind to the real cause. Complex is correct in everything he said.Not still being blamed for an accident after the cause was found to be the failure of a poorly designed system
The system didn't fail, it did what it was supposed to do it was the single point failure that drove the MCAS to do exactly as per its foolish design!failure of a poorly designed system