Auto pilots in IFR trainers.

[DHCdriver]

I know some people will argue that you need to be proficent hand flying in IMC. And I agree. But shouldn't the autopilot also be taught to the student, he/she will use one everyday once you leave the school and head for that big job. What I'm getting at is there is this school my buddy is training at does not have a autopilot in there multi-trainer and just don't agree with that. It helps the student get comfortable with all the IFR excercises then they can start failing the autopilot, because that is going to happen to them. Just curious what others have to say.

[North Shore]

my reply here: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=71725&p=677612#p677612

[Tim]

i think more than anything - especially at a busy school - the time and money required to keep them operational isn't worth it.

autopilots are pretty simple to operate anyways, so there really isn't a ton to learn when moving on from a flight school.

i am in favor of using them if they are available for training, but i think in the end that its not a big deal.

[tonyhunt]

i think more than anything - especially at a busy school - the time and money required to keep them operational isn't worth it.

Private owners who regularly fly single pilot IFR probably have an autopilot in their aircraft, even if it's just a wing-leveler. The newer autopilots don't require lots of maintenance, and are extremely capable. An older autopilot that has been maintained and used regularly doesn't cost anything extra to use.

Perhaps you are thinking of an older autopilot that was not used regularly, in an older aircraft, and instructors who don't have the time or patience to learn how to use it? So they just pull the circuit breaker, placard it and let it atrophy?

[Big Pistons Forever]

autopilots are pretty simple to operate anyways, so there really isn't a ton to learn when moving on from a flight school.
.

There is a lot more to using a 2 axis autopilot than just turning it on. When to fly on autopilot and more importantly when not to, requires judgement and knowledge which should IMO the student should be exposed to as part of their training. When to use nav vs heading mode, things to watch for on coupled approaches, autopilot fail modes etc etc are IMO required knowledge. I think the main reason the IFR training industry doesn't attach any importance to autopilot use is because most of the instructors have never done any real world IFR flying and therefore don't know themselves the value of an operating autopilot. IFR training is by definition single pilot IFR, and 7XX single pilot ops require a working autopilot so for that reason alone a working autopilot should be mandatory for training aircraft.

In any case if the school has an aircraft with a working autopilot (and several do) than I would suggest that is probably an indication of the the fact that school understand something about real world IFR operation

[Flygal]

The Travelair and Baron trainers at Perimeter have full autopilots.

[DHCdriver]

To me it all boils down to, it will help out the student until he/she is comfortable and proficient in preforming the excercises, then start failing the auto pilot,or even start hand flying the approaches and holds. We all remember those days, what such a work load it was. To me and only my opinion, I think will make then a more confident IFR pilot when the day actually happens( A/P fails in IMC).

DHCdriver.

[Tim]

i think more than anything - especially at a busy school - the time and money required to keep them operational isn't worth it.

Perhaps you are thinking of an older autopilot that was not used regularly, in an older aircraft, and instructors who don't have the time or patience to learn how to use it? So they just pull the circuit breaker, placard it and let it atrophy?

no, thats not what i was thinking, nor was it what i said....

i am speaking from my experience as both a student and instructor

[tonyhunt]

i think more than anything - especially at a busy school - the time and money required to keep them operational isn't worth it.

Perhaps you are thinking of an older autopilot that was not used regularly, in an older aircraft, and instructors who don't have the time or patience to learn how to use it? So they just pull the circuit breaker, placard it and let it atrophy?

no, thats not what i was thinking, nor was it what i said....

i am speaking from my experience as both a student and instructor

I guess I quoted what you said, not what you were thinking.

I am speaking as a student, instructor and owner. I owned a couple of airplanes with good autopilots, but my young instructors never let me use them during my CPL and IFR flight lessons. They had no experience with autopilots, so they wouldn't let me use them. I learned how to use them on my own, from the manual and advice from experienced (non-instructor) pilots. I found one experienced IFR pilot who knew the second autopilot (KFC-200) very well and he was able to show me how to use it properly.

The examiner allowed (and encouraged) me to use the autopilot & flight director during my IFR flight tests and renewals. I would have looked like an idiot if I told him I never learned to use it because my instructor wouldn't teach me.

Over six years with those two aircraft, I never had to spend significant money on the two autopilots, the gyros or servos. Understanding their operation and using them frequently (like engines) seemed to help.

During the same period, the Club bought a C-172 with a working autopilot. None of the instructors attempted to learn how to use it. The circuit breaker was pulled and the autopilot placarded inop. I was told this was so renters and solo students would not play with it during flight.

[gaamin]

Multi-IFR training is supposed to make you capable of flying SPIFR.
To fly SPIFR don't you need a working autopilot?

If such is the case, how can someone fly IFR with a student towards a MIFR rating without having a working autopilot, and how can that kind of training be realistic.

One reason Perimeter's planes have working AP is that they're used SPIFR on the bag runs for Purolator (or at least they were when I was there).

[DHCdriver]

When you are on your MIFR flight test, you are SPIFR and your flight test examiner is just along for the ride. That is why I don't agree with this school, not having a A/P.

[Cat Driver]

Reading this discussion depresses me.

How in the name of God can anyone not understand the importance of an autopilot?

We are living in the twenty first century, why not learn to use the technology and make flying easier and safer?

So, of course airplanes used for IFR training should be equipped with a working auto pilot.

And the student must be taught how it works and how to use it.

[BTD]

SPIFR doesn't require an autopilot.

SPIFR in commercial operations does.

I think that a good IFR student will be a good one with an autopilot or without, and a not so good student will be the same. It certainly would be beneficial to have the advantage of an autopilot during training, but if you have found a good school with a good instructor, it shouldn't be a deal breaker. There is a slight shift in mindset when flying with an autopilot vs hand bombing, but nothing that a good student can't overcome with relative ease.

BTD

[SuperchargedRS]

Autopilot training is not really a big deal, yes if they have it they should know how to use it, also they should know how it works its limitations and how to disable it.

[fish4life]

If the school your learning at doesn't have functioning Autopilot's I'd consider finding a different school to start learning at. It doesn't have to be anything fance just something to hold a heading and maintain altitude, one of the first rules I was taught about IFR was if your head was down in the cockpit (either briefing an approach, writing down a clearance, looking for that pen you dropped or even grabbing your lunch) either the autopilot should be on or your FO/CPT should be handed control.

[BEFAN5]

I can teach you to use a basic autopilot in 15 minutes.. It will cost you a beer though.

Further to another comment in an earlier post. Not every airline has autopilot. The only autopilot I have ever touched was in my IFR training. And I was limited to only using it when I needed to write something down.

Excessive use of AP in a training environment upsets me. This is the root cause of so many air accidents in the 21st century. Even pilots with thousands of hand flying hours are getting into the flight decks of fancy A330s and 777 and not knowing what to do when things go bad. I can think of at least four Mayday episodes where turning the AP off would have saved hundreds of lives.

AP can be your friend, but don't let it destroy your basic skills. Further, don't be using it if you don't have the skills in the first place.

[Cat Driver]

AP can be your friend, but don't let it destroy your basic skills. Further, don't be using it if you don't have the skills in the first place.

What I find puzzling is these situations where pilots are being trained to fly in the IFR environment and they are not yet competent with flying an airplane properly by hand.

How does that happen, how do they get that far without the system correcting this flaw in their airplane handling skills?

When that question is addressed this discussion about auto pilots would not even come up.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I can teach you to use a basic autopilot in 15 minutes.. It will cost you a beer though.

Further to another comment in an earlier post. Not every airline has autopilot. The only autopilot I have ever touched was in my IFR training. And I was limited to only using it when I needed to write something down.

Excessive use of AP in a training environment upsets me. This is the root cause of so many air accidents in the 21st century. Even pilots with thousands of hand flying hours are getting into the flight decks of fancy A330s and 777 and not knowing what to do when things go bad. I can think of at least four Mayday episodes where turning the AP off would have saved hundreds of lives.

AP can be your friend, but don't let it destroy your basic skills. Further, don't be using it if you don't have the skills in the first place.

The thread is autopilots in IFR trainers, so I would suggest the issue of automation induced skill degradation in heavy long haul widebody airline jets, while certainly a timely issue for the airline industry, isn't very relevant to training for the initial IFR rating. The bottom line, of course, is ensuring good hand flying skills is a non negotiable prerequisite skill for the initial IFR rating. However after those manual skills are developed the training should move on to the cognitive skills of managing the flight and attaining/maintaining situational awareness. Autopilot use should be taught in this context not as a substitute for hand flying. Effective integration of autopilot use into a real world IFR flight not the pretend FTU version (a round robin with a planned missed, hold, and return) requires IMO a lot more than "15 minutes" of training. In addition the advantages of proper autopilot training/use apply to more than SPIFR. Most of the considerations of the when/where/why of autopilot use are directly relevant to effective non autopilot two crew operations in the context of appropriate delegation of hand flying to the other pilot.

[BEFAN5]

I can teach you to use a basic autopilot in 15 minutes.. It will cost you a beer though.

Further to another comment in an earlier post. Not every airline has autopilot. The only autopilot I have ever touched was in my IFR training. And I was limited to only using it when I needed to write something down.

Excessive use of AP in a training environment upsets me. This is the root cause of so many air accidents in the 21st century. Even pilots with thousands of hand flying hours are getting into the flight decks of fancy A330s and 777 and not knowing what to do when things go bad. I can think of at least four Mayday episodes where turning the AP off would have saved hundreds of lives.

AP can be your friend, but don't let it destroy your basic skills. Further, don't be using it if you don't have the skills in the first place.

The thread is autopilots in IFR trainers, so I would suggest the issue of automation induced skill degradation in heavy long haul widebody airline jets, while certainly a timely issue for the airline industry, isn't very relevant to training for the initial IFR rating. The bottom line, of course, is ensuring good hand flying skills is a non negotiable prerequisite skill for the initial IFR rating. However after those manual skills are developed the training should move on to the cognitive skills of managing the flight and attaining/maintaining situational awareness. Autopilot use should be taught in this context not as a substitute for hand flying. Effective integration of autopilot use into a real world IFR flight not the pretend FTU version (a round robin with a planned missed, hold, and return) requires IMO a lot more than "15 minutes" of training. In addition the advantages of proper autopilot training/use apply to more than SPIFR. Most of the considerations of the when/where/why of autopilot use are directly relevant to effective non autopilot two crew operations in the context of appropriate delegation of hand flying to the other pilot.

I will try to re-summarize my point without getting up onto another soap box of mine.

I do not feel that the instrument rating gives pilots the skills they need to safely conduct flight in IMC. Add an autopilot into the training; it is worse.

Ask yourself this question... If your wife/husband, your son/daughter, or a close friend were to approach you and say "my buddy just got an IFR rating and wants to take me up to St John's NL and shoot some NDB approaches down to minimums". What would your suggestion be to that person? I know what mine would be.

So yes. I do think AP training should be a part of everyone training; but only as an "educational experience". Not as something to be used commonly throughout training.

[Big Pistons Forever]

[

I do not feel that the instrument rating gives pilots the skills they need to safely conduct flight in IMC. Add an autopilot into the training; it is worse.

So yes. I do think AP training should be a part of everyone training; but only as an "educational experience". Not as something to be used commonly throughout training.

You sure won't get any argument from me about the unfortunate chasm between what is todays typical IFR training program, and actually flying IFR in the real world. However were we part ways is your contention that adding autopilot training will degrade initial IFR training. I think properly integrated into the training in the ways I touched on in my earlier post represent a bridge between the theoretical world of FTU IFR training and the real world of A to B IFR flying.

I also obviously don't think your "15 min of autopilot training" represents an "educational experience" that is going to be of a lot of practical value.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one

[Dagwood]

If there are instructors who don't use the autopilot, are there instructors who don't use a gps? weather radar? stormscope? tcas?

A person's training would be incomplete if they did not know when, and when not to use every piece of equipment that is installed in the aircraft.

[Gannet167]

The basics of IFR probably need to be taught in a hand flown situation. I agree that these basic, core skills should be taught first and need to be the solid backbone of a competent pilot's skill set. Once able to hand fly IFR properly ; however, the use of automation is the next step. This is the 21st century and realistically, a lot of aircraft are flown using automation.

Using automation I don't think is a 15 minute exercise in what button to push. There is a whole new, different dynamic in the cockpit and between the crew in using this kit. To do it well and fully utilize the safety and operational benefits of automation, you need to have good and strong SOP's that address the limitations and dangers of using it and maximize it's advantages. When you're hand flying, your mind is occupied with actually driving the aircraft around. When you're on automation, a completely different part of your mind is active. Now, rather than "doing" your "monitoring" and humans are very poor monitors - particularly of reliable equipment.

Using automation, you tell the equipment what you want it to do and then monitor for performance accuracy and adjust as required. Which mode you use, how you switch between them, what to do if the system doesn't do what you want, knowing how to manipulate the equipment, what to do when thing go wrong, how to effectively involve the other crew member(s) etc, can be a very complex skill set to learn properly.

I think training should initially be conducted without any automation. However, once a pilot is at a commercial multi-IFR level, understanding the professional conventions of using automation is very important.

[hairdo]

I think training should initially be conducted without any automation. However, once a pilot is at a commercial multi-IFR level, understanding the professional conventions of using automation is very important.

Agreed. Not every IFR aircraft you run into in 70X operations will have an autopilot (SPIFR excluded), so proficiency at hand flying in the soup is needed (yes, this is the 21st century, but we still fly a lot of aircraft from the 20th). That said, a pilot should know how to properly use every piece of equipment available to them. Just start with the basics and work from there. That's not a new concept, unless I'm terribly mistaken...

[5x5]

It seems to me that there is a contradiction in some threads in this forum. There are numerous ones that go on about schools "milking" the students. More hours than actually necessary. Others that carry on about the high cost of getting your licence.

Then there are ones like this that think that "extra" items should be incorporated into training. People complain that new pilots don't have all the line skills they need at their first job. At $5/min (representative cost of dual twin time) do students really need to spend the extra time while in school?

Flight training is intended to provide the basic skills. A pilot's first few jobs are intended to further their training by gaining experience under the guidance and instruction of a captain and/or company training pilot.

Why should students have to absorb extra cost for their training?

Isn't it better for new pilots to get the additional training and experience while actually on the job and getting paid?

[tonyhunt]

Isn't it better for new pilots to get the additional training and experience while actually on the job and getting paid

What about those of us who didn't take the training in order to get a "job" and "get paid"? Why should our IFR training only cover the flight test basics?

That is why private owners have to turn to more experienced IFR pilots (NOT the FTU instructors) to learn how to fly in the system and use the advanced equipment in our own aircraft - after we log the required 15 hours dual IFR training at the FTU.