Thanks, DUDE!
[youtube]https://youtu.be/HxUWrHTB3fQ
[/youtube]
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMt7C3COiVMtelex wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 8:16 amThanks, DUDE!
[youtube]https://youtu.be/HxUWrHTB3fQ
[/youtube]
Kettle: "Hey Pot..."
We're not. The "tech savvy" people are trying to defend themselves against those who don't see the need for new tech and label those who use it as inferior.confusedalot wrote: ↑Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:41 pmAnd, why are the tech savvy people putting down the older generation in the first place? Are the tech savvy somehow naturally superior? Perhaps the real heros are the old people who actually developed and implemented the new tech, the newbies are merely users of the equipment and had nothing to do with advancement.
I would say it's purpose is to make operations more efficient from the pilot perspective. It allows complex operations to be conducted with relative ease by the crew. It increases safety by performing the actual task and/or calculation at hand and, once all variables are input and confirmed to be correct, reduces the pilot to a monitoring role. This is ideal because it frees up the human computing power element that would otherwise be consumed with said monitoring as well as physically making the inputs required to correct deviations detected by the monitoring. Even if you consider the two distinct yet concomitant tasks (of monitoring and physically manipulating the controls to achieve a desired performance state) as equally taxing, which I personally do not, automation cuts the pilot workload by at least 50%. This makes it easier, there's just no way around it. Undoubtedly automation has it's own unique traps and pitfalls, but that does not equate to increased difficulty, only the requisite increased level of awareness of, and vigilance for those particular snares.Rockie wrote: ↑Sat Apr 21, 2018 1:09 pm
Curious comment. Have you never done a visual? Ever clicked off the autopilot because what you were doing was far too dynamic to keep up with on the MCP? Ever gotten rid of the AP because...well...it's just easier? Ever got caught with your pants down around your ankles because you were a FMS drone instead of the person supposed to be in control? Ever scratched your head wondering what the airplane was doing when you not only should have known, but should have anticipated? Have you ever, even once in your career as a FMS drone, intervened in the FMS programming by using direct modes on the MCP or even hand flew.
Really, who's being disingenuous here, unless you really are the FMS drone you say you are (I like your self-description better than "Child of the Magenta", but they're the same thing). If that's the case you'd be doing everyone a favour by going back to bush flying.
Automation's real purpose is to make aircraft operation more efficient, not easier. It also allows safe operations in weather conditions unsuitable for hand flying and its necessary visual conditions. It is also very good at mindless level flight and following a predetermined track. It does not however fly the aircraft....that's what you're for.
The more complex the task the less automation is appropriate usually. We still have to do the "Cleared left hand visual keep it tight traffic following" approaches which are far beyond a autopilot's capability. Back to stick and rudder. Windshear can exceed the autopilot's ability and will require very delicate hand flying in very rough conditions, GPWS requires hand flying. Landing requires hand flying except in very defined circumstances which I'll get to. Taking off always requires hand flying regardless of the circumstances. Autopilots are good at some clearly defined tasks over long periods of time which is what makes them efficient from a company's point of view. They are also sometimes mandatory which I will also get to.shimmydampner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 02, 2018 12:18 am I would say it's purpose is to make operations more efficient from the pilot perspective. It allows complex operations to be conducted with relative ease by the crew. It increases safety by performing the actual task and/or calculation at hand and, once all variables are input and confirmed to be correct, reduces the pilot to a monitoring role.
That isn't what I said at all. I said "It also allows safe operations in weather conditions unsuitable for hand flying and its necessary visual conditions" Here I am talking about Category 3 landings where you cannot see the runway until the wheels are down. Perhaps I should have been more specific. Autopilots are also mandatory to fly above FL290 in RVSM airspace and to do certain performance based procedures (RNP AR) to ensure safe separation from other aircraft and the ground respectively.shimmydampner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 02, 2018 12:18 am Furthermore, I take umbrage with your assertion that hand flying requires visual conditions.
I have a very thick skin and take very little personally. Certainly not that. I am merely correcting the blanket statement that automation makes flying planes easier. It does in many circumstances. It also makes it much more difficult in abnormal circumstances and many normal circumstances where a pilot needs to know how to properly use the automation, which is a skill itself that purely manual pilots do not need to know. Automation doesn't think and cannot anticipate, that's the pilot's job and he/she must incorporate automation modes and limitations into that thinking. Automation is also not always reliable and can never...ever...be left alone or fully trusted.shimmydampner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 02, 2018 12:18 am I still don't understand why you would take it so personally that an internet stranger thinks that automation makes flying planes easier.
I've made it clear that flying highly automated aircraft can be very challenging and much more complex than simple aircraft for a whole host of reasons. I have flown a wide variety of aircraft in a wide variety of roles with a wide degree of automation from full to none. None of these aircraft I would describe as "easy" because we tend to use aircraft to the extent of their capabilities whatever they may be. Most pilots who fly highly automated aircraft have also flown non-automated ones and would likely agree with me. People (pilots included) who think automation is easy and making pilots redundant probably haven't flown highly automated aircraft and do not really know automation's limitations or its capability to mess things up.shimmydampner wrote: ↑Mon Jul 02, 2018 12:18 am You've made it clear that you find flying highly automated aircraft very challenging, so I'd be curious to hear your experiences with non-automated, hand flown aircraft that was such a breeze by comparison. I can only imagine it must be quite different from mine.
I started on the ramp at a company in the NWT that is almost universally despised on this site.
Ouch!Meatservo wrote: ↑Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:16 am You can drag your wheeled map-case, with no actual maps in it, through a terminal with the gold braid on your cap and the rings that don't even go all the way around your cheap sleeves, and perhaps enjoy the reflected remnants of the respect laypeople have for people like you that was earned by pilots of the past who actually did something worthy of note.