Stick & Rudder skills lacking in bigger Jet pilots?

[invertedattitude]

It's an old argument... sorry if this was posted already....

CALGARY — The pilot of an Airbus forced in 2008 to make an emergency landing in Calgary after hitting severe turbulence should have been offered more extensive training to manage the rare, inflight incident.

That conclusion is found in an 18-page Transportation Safety Board report into Air Canada Flight 190, en route from Victoria to Toronto on Jan. 10, 2008, when it flew into the vicinity of a United Airlines Boeing 747 over Washington state.

The force of so-called “wake turbulence” from the Boeing caused the smaller Airbus to pitch violently and plummet, sending passengers, flight attendants and food carts flying. Three people on board were seriously hurt during the 18-second ordeal, while eight others suffered minor injuries.

The TSB investigation findings, released Tuesday, praised the actions of Air Canada crew members who came to the aid of passengers while suffering personal injuries of their own. But to avoid the risk of future incidents, the report suggests that new guidelines be developed to better equip pilots to respond appropriately to wake turbulence.

The rare phenomenon happens most frequently during takeoffs and landings.

In November 2001, wake turbulence was cited as a factor in the crash of American Airlines Flight 587, which plunged into a New York City suburb, killing 265 people.

In the case of Flight 190, it’s likely that more extensive training on how to manage wake turbulence would have better prepared the pilots to handle the frightening mid-air encounter.

“The low expectancy of experiencing such an upset in cruise flight, combined with little or no warning . . . likely startled the pilots, who then responded with potentially hazardous flight control inputs,” the report said.


In fact, some actions taken to steady the rolling Toronto-bound Airbus were similar to those that contributed to damage to the vertical stabilizer attachment fittings on the ill-fated American Airlines jet in 2001, investigators noted.


Since the incident, Air Canada said it has enhanced pilot training and made adjustments to its traffic collision avoidance system to reduce the possibility of such encounters.

Canada’s largest air carrier is also working with Transport Canada to better understand wake turbulence, a challenge because it is impossible to precisely replicate the violent pockets of shifting air in a training simulator.

“Our review of the findings is with a view to further improve passenger and crew safety,” said Air Canada spokeswoman Angela Mah.

But air carriers aren’t the only ones tasked with the job of preventing further incidents, noted TSB investigator John Pearson.

“It’s in the hands of the manufacturers, the regulators and the operators themselves,” he said. “Everyone is working hard to try to prevent reoccurrences of this type of thing.”


Pilots constantly undergo rigorous training to deal with inflight emergencies, but severe turbulence can happen unexpectedly and take even the most experienced crew members by surprise, said Mark Benson, an aviation instructor at the Calgary-based Mount Royal University.

“The reality is when things happen on an airplane, they are generally intense, very quick and pilots need to react immediately,” he said.

“Could we do more training across the whole system? That would be great. But it sounds to me like the Air Canada pilots did what they were ultimately trained to do: they got the airplane down safely. That’s really all that matters.”


The Transportation Safety Board is also recommending a closer examination of the potential dangers associated with unsecured trolleys used to serve beverages and meals in the air.

Calgary Herald

© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service


Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/business ... z0pfwwuh2T

[f13]

You can't possibly expect the airlines and the manufacturers to put the realities and potential dangers of flight ahead of the $$$! Are you nuts? Do you know how much they would loose? And heaven forbid a pilot should actually fly the plane. Have you any idea what kind of experience that would take and how many years would be spent in hard working conditions on getting it? How could the little Johnny possibly be expected to get all those shiny certs within a matter of a few years, before reaching his 18th or 19th birthday, THEN? And how would he possibly get a job flying a $hitbus three-something before even experiencing a real in flight emergency while on a long cross country solo flight, hundreths of kilometers away from nearest civilization? It might be something that was condoned in the aftermath of WWII, but here we have the stinking rich people to think about. They can't possibly be concerned with all this stuff. There are standards we must keep in mind man! Besides, they themselves said it's OK, so surely since they know everything they must be right. We'll just put our lives in their...or rather the computers' hands.

[. ._]

Did the pilots spill any espresso on their laptops?

[Liquid Charlie]

Stick and rudder skills has replaced CFIT (Part 121 carriers) at the top of the safety concerns list. This is because of the extent of automation with it going even farther in "next gen" aircraft. Right now there are only ( I believe) about 3 simulators in total capable of true jet upset simulation. There is a push for more and I suspect that eventually it will become mandatory for all crews to go through this dynamic simulation.

While wake turbulence encounters are rare here at altitude they happen on a regular basis in crowded compact airspace such as in Europe.

[cgzro]

“The low expectancy of experiencing such an upset in cruise flight, combined with little or no warning . . . likely startled the pilots, who then responded with potentially hazardous flight control inputs,” the report said. In fact, some actions taken to steady the rolling Toronto-bound Airbus were similar to those that contributed to damage to the vertical stabilizer attachment fittings on the ill-fated American Airlines jet in 2001, investigators noted.

Hmmm .. from that limited statement it appears the pilots used the rudder aggressively and risked loosing the vertical fin as a result. Now most stick and rudder pilots that I know, myself included, don't give any thought to over use of the rudder and the stress it may put in the vertical fin. If you put me in big jet sim and caused an upset , i'd react instinctively and probably hammer the rudder too.

Lack of training for sure is a problem, but its not stick and rudder but rather type specific upset training that is lacking by the sound of it in this case.

[mel gibson]

Being Top Gun pilot at Fl370 and 5000ft are two different
animals. The thin air up there is not very forgiving.
My biggest fear is a TCAS avoidance up there , you would
be very surprised that we are all balancing on a pin .

Mel

[Ogee]

I looked at the title of this thread and I said to meself, "Bullshit, I know a few fat men who can fly with the best of them".

[xsbank]

I read it that way too, Ogee!

When, in the normal course of an Airbus flight, all you do is hold it straight on the runway, rotate, engage the autopilot and then spend the rest of the flight messing with the FMS; the landing is auto, the rollout can be on autobrakes... so when exactly are these Heros of The Sky supposed to practise hand-flying? Keep the seat-belt sign on longer and hand-bomb it? SOPs 'probably' forbid it.

Next-gen aircraft, all you will do is press the 'Engage' button and then pull out the Sudoku.

[KAG]

I think more of us should hand fly depatures and approaches from time to time. I make it a point to do some handflying every pairing just to keep some actual flying skill.
We also rarely use auto land, I've seen it online twice in 3 years. I'm thankful 737 is a dumbed down version of Airbus.

[jjj]

xsbank, that was a rediculous post at the end. You speak of something that you are obviously not qualified to have an opinion on.

My plane has the NG tag I can assure you that a hell of a lot more happens than watching auto do the work.

Auto lands are used less than 1 percent of the time as stated by KAG above. On a 5 leg day there is enough stuff happening that would make your head spin xsbank.

You've never done the course and never flown the line on one of these things and are as likely as many others to be the one who would wash out.

I don't bash your niche of aviation - don't bash mine.

Stick to what you know son.


JJJ

[Truckpilot]

Will the AC Pilot's union even allow more than 18 seconds without the AP on...?

[Doc]

At least if I have to ditch, I've had the full U-Boat Komander's course!

Hedley, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

Ogee, sorry mate, but a 1960's DC8 driver could "fly" circles around the average Airbus driver. It was a requirement.
KAG...good to hear you guys don't use auto land much. Nice tool...as a back up.

[J31]

Normal hand flying will do little to prepare one for a high altitude upset, CFIT escape manuver, low energy go-around, V1 engine failure, etc. nor is it practabale to practice on line. That is why we train in the sim. More items to be added to the list for sim training.
More fun stuff

[cjpilot]

Check out the CTV article on this incident. It reads like a story out of the Daily Mail...

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20 ... ce-100602/

[c170b53]

NG is an oxymoron, just an advancement of the Classic born from the Jurassic. Its mission is well known and has always been a pilots plane for those that like to fly (and sleep in their own beds more often) rather than observe.
Newer designs for main routes are highly automated and are continuing to evolve. Note the B777 is flown by computers all the time albeit following the direction and instructions of the operator. Although flight operation in Direct mode is available, its only there as The last resort and even then, the electrons still play a role.
So chastise XS all you want, it may seem from your present seat that its Status quo, but it seems to me that the early version of the FMC, the PDCS was first installed in a -200, just to save gas by displaying basic flight profile and EPR.setting.

[yycflyguy]

Will the AC Pilot's union even allow more than 18 seconds without the AP on...?

When, in the normal course of an Airbus flight, all you do is hold it straight on the runway, rotate, engage the autopilot and then spend the rest of the flight messing with the FMS; the landing is auto, the rollout can be on autobrakes... so when exactly are these Heros of The Sky supposed to practise hand-flying? Keep the seat-belt sign on longer and hand-bomb it? SOPs 'probably' forbid it.

*Sigh* Sad that our fellow aviators actually believe that.

Been on the Bus at AC for just over 2 years. I have only seen 1 (one) autoland flying the line and it was only because I asked the Captain to demonstrate it. It is a powerful tool to get the airplane safely on the ground in low vis ops or at the end of a very tiring pairing. The autobrakes, in my opinion, suck and I only use them when dealing with contaminated surface or nasty x-winds. Otherwise, I do it. In normal ops I normally hand fly up to 10,000 and knock the A/P off around the FAF. How is that any different that other planes?

Any time I am in sim they encourage us to hand fly on the line without any automation when conditions are appropriate.

Like JJJ said. I find it offensive to the way you present airline flying... it is something I would expect to hear from an "aviation enthusiast" who doesn't know any better... not from an experienced colleague.

FYI: Heroes is with an "e" just like Volcanoes and Potatoes

[bcflyer]

Will the AC Pilot's union even allow more than 18 seconds without the AP on...?

What a load of crap from a bunch of guys who have no idea what they are talking about. AC and ACPA encourages pilots to hand fly when ever possible. Most guys I fly with hand fly as much as they can however there are alot of instances where the safest way to operate is with the AP engaged.

[yycflyguy]

Forgot to mention that the Embraer was not auto-land capable when I was on it. Cat II only... and that is the plane that does the bulk of the YYT YHZ flying! It did not have auto-brakes installed either.

[bcflyer]

Forgot to mention that the Embraer was not auto-land capable when I was on it. Cat II only... and that is the plane that does the bulk of the YYT YHZ flying! It did not have auto-brakes installed either.

Still no autoland and still no autobrakes.. We do have ovens now though!

[xsbank]

OK, so I have been accused of being rude to airline pilots - attacking me means nothing to me so fill your boots. You must be very sensitive so I promise to try and be more thoughtful next time.

The question was, do "large airline pilots" have good stick and rudder skills? I still think the answer is largely no. You have a side stick that is totally controlled by a bunch of computers. You have yaw dampers that are engaged as soon as you energize the IRSs. Yes, you might push a little on a rudder on a crosswind landing and yes, perhaps a bit of tiller and some rudder on a crosswind departure, but I would suggest that any Beaver pilot, sailplane pilot or Cub Captain could fly the bag off any driver who only flies a 'Bus. I have seen it in corporate on big ones and small ones and unless you also own a Nanchang my bet's are on the float pilot. You do not fly attitude or airspeed, you fly a flight director.

How many of you toast the flight director on your "hand flying?" I know the JAA requires a hand-flown raw data ILS for a type rating, done in the sim. My money is on the flight director. But why not, after all? Why do you think they have all that 'magic?' Must be a reason - wonder what that is? The skills that a "large pilot" uses are different than those used by a Beaver pilot and why not?

I still see guys, while practicing stall recoveries in the sim, try and hold the nose up when they pooch it and get pusher. Completing the exercise to standards is more important than flying the aircraft. I think that IN GENERAL, stick and rudder skills in complex airplane pilots are a dying art.

Heroes.

[Doc]

Of course xsbank, does one really need great hands and fee to fly an A380? I think we're in an era where computer skills out weigh flying skills.

[xsbank]

That too, was kind of my point....

Edited to add, you must admit that The Heroes of The Sky are a sensitive lot, though. I'm glad that when I fly to YVR this summer I will be comforted knowing that fact, despite the blizzard of serving carts floating in the aisles.

[Liquid Charlie]

but I would suggest that any Beaver pilot, sailplane pilot or Cub Captain could fly the bag off any driver who only flies a 'Bus.

I got to call bull shit on that one - - we should all have "stick and rudder skills" - especially in Canada where most work up through the ranks - it's about training and availability of more sophisticate simulators for the jets - not one simulator out there that is used for training and rides will simulate "jet upset" other than giving you a video game - there are no G forces or turning motion -- so no inner ear input. These simulators are being developed. It's aircraft type or class related - if you drive and handle your car at the speed limit how would every know what to do in a skid at twice or three times the speed if you have not been trained for it.

Take anyone who has experience out of their next gen jets - give them a super cub or a beaver or anything else you want to through at them and they will get back on that bicycle in no time --

After all to quote an infamous NWO operator -- "Pilots are a dime a dozen and you can train a monkey to fly" -- man he was an obnoxious bugger --

[scopiton]

Take anyone who has experience out of their next gen jets - give them a super cub or a beaver or anything else you want to through at them and they will get back on that bicycle in no time --

umm, not sure
I had the opportunity to fly with some Air Transat pilots who wanted to rent a c172 to take their familly for a ride.
they needed around an hour and a bit more to feel comfortable on a machine they hadn't touch in more than 10 years.
then they didn't remember the spin recovery procedure and didn;t use their rudders at all and were afraid to stall on approach at 60knt.
that's what I saw and I don't generalize, I just saw two of them and they didn't get back on that bike in no time.
it's not the same job.

[SAR_YQQ]

Every different facet of aviation requires their own experts. Those same "Stick and rudder" bush pilots that could fly circles around Bus drivers would also have no clue about advanced FMS operation, high density airspace, oceanic procedures etc. (Generalization sucks, I know)

We each our the masters of our particular niche - I am not too concerned about raw flying skills when it comes to the heavy metal - I am more concerned about their advanced skills at handling level 4 automation.