Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:23 AM - Updates (kasturi12)
2. 10:07 AM - Re: DIY ELT antenna T106-52 Core Test Data (Steve Stearns)
3. 01:12 PM - The down-side of "glass panels" (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 02:02 PM - Re: The down-side of "glass panels" (Art Zemon)
5. 03:07 PM - Re: The down-side of "glass panels" (user9253)
6. 03:17 PM - Re: The down-side of "glass panels" (Sebastien)
7. 04:42 PM - Re: The down-side of "glass panels" (Tim Olson)
8. 05:36 PM - Re: The down-side of "glass panels" (Charlie England)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
How to handle updates and the user is typing too fast?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489680#489680
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: DIY ELT antenna T106-52 Core Test Data |
Hi Bob,
I'm very interested in your T106-52 core balun results. For my ELT in my
Longeze, I'm using a homebrew fan-dipole (std. length for 406 and shortened
121.5) mounted on the pilot seat back. I didn't bother with a Balun (and
my network analyzer is dead, RIP, so I didn't mess with creating one) but
my VSWRs are good. None the less, I'll add the balun if you get good test
results as it will make the antenna less sensitive to cable routing...
Steve.
[image: image.png]
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | The down-side of "glass panels" |
Subject: 737 MAX...The rest of the story.
For those interested in the recent spate of accidents involving
Boeing's newest 737 variant, the real story of what is going on
behind the scenes is largely not being reported.
It was interesting to note that President Trump alluded to the
problem in a round about way, but unless you are a pilot you probably
missed the point. In essence, President Trump was saying that
technology is a poor substitute for a qualified pilot in command.
One of the most basic skills a pilot learns from day one is energy
management of the airplane. If the plane is too slow, it will
literally drop from the sky. Too fast and the wings/airframe can come
apart with disastrous consequences.
In the history of commercial aviation in the US and western
countries, the first crop of pilots to enter commercial service were
the post world war two pilots. Those guys were the real deal and not
only hand flew almost all of their hours but also in some of the most
demanding conditions. The second wave were the airport kids who just
fell in love with the idea of being a pilot and scrimped and saved to
take lessons. Both categories of pilots were skilled in the art of aviation.
With the explosion of second and third world travel, there were
nowhere near the number of skilled pilots to fly the thousands of new
generation planes coming out of Airbus and Boeing. Unlike Cathay
Pacific, a Hong Kong airline that was almost exclusively piloted by
British pilots, the new Asian airlines wanted Asian pilots to man the
cockpits...often with disastrous results. Asiana flight 214 crashed
in SFO in 2014 because the pilots did not know how to hand fly the
plane when the ground-based approach ILS (Instrument Landing System)
was out of service.
Boeing, the FAA and worldwide aviation agencies track not only
accidents, but also INCIDENTS...crap that was going sideways but
didn't result in a crash. The number of unqualified pilots from Asia
and Africa was plain to see in the number of errors being committed
on a daily basis.
To make a long story short, airbus saw this eventuality decades ago
and implemented automatic safety systems in anticipation of
unqualified aircrews. Boeing resisted for a lot of very good
reasons...but after the Asiana crash, the Chinese government
basically told Boeing to "idiot-proof" the 737 as China would end up
being the biggest purchaser of that model. Since Boeing had opted not
to add automated control systems (which often override pilot's
inputs) they were forced to apply a band-aid solution which,
unfortunately was not done well. Only one sensor was driving some
very complicated algorithms which worked against the pilot's
decision-making inputs.
The fact that the Asian and African pilots were essentially
unqualified is highly embarrassing to the respective governments and
Boeing kept it quiet. When ALPA, the pilot's union reps, found the
system was added without informing the pilots, they went insane...
However, what they DON'T know, is that the MCAS system can be enabled
or disabled per plane, and can be done remotely on a real time basis
via uplink. The US airlines management, due to the superior training
and piloting skills of their pilots, opted NOT to activate MCAS...but
the Asian/African carriers DID. That is why most of the " crappy"
airlines self-grounded while all the major US airlines initially
continued to fly without a problem.
Its a very PC issue, but basically comes down to 30-40% of the global
pilot population are really not qualified to be pilots, but more just
data input managers.
Bob Folken, Capt. Ret.
A friend has suggested that I might
get qualified in his really nice C172
to get back in the air. I think I mentioned
on these pages that his a/c was VERY well
outfitted with all the latest flat screens
including one bolted to the l.h. fwd doorpost!
Had a chance to fly in that airplane
as a member of the local airport advisory
committee. We visited some 'small' airports
around Wichita to ask questions of their
operators.
Sitting in the right seat while transiting
Wichita controlled airspace, I was
unsettled with the array of information
being presented while my friend mis-heard
a couple of ATC turns . . . transmissions
that I was attuned to even tho I'd only
heard this 'new tail number' called out
a few times in previous minutes.
I'm not going to pursue his offer. Not
the least concerned about competently
flying his airplane but I'd rather NOT
have to learn how to sift out what's
important from the panel-load of
distractions.
Let us take care my friends lest
we become less pilot and more video
game operators. If you crash-and-burn on
a video game you can hit the reset
button . . . RV's not so much.
Bob . . .
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The down-side of "glass panels" |
Bob,
First, the NY Times did a good accident chain analysis of Boeing's and the
FAA's actions leading up to the 737 Max crashes. See Boeing Built Deadly
Assumptions Into 737 Max, Blind to a Late Design Change
<https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/01/business/boeing-737-max-crash.html>.
Too many people, each focused on their little piece of the puzzle, in too
much of a hurry to talk to each other.
I agree with everything you say but want to emphasize something that you
only alluded to. The pilot is the PIC with "in command" being the operative
part of the phrase. The glass panel is a tool and, like any tool, has to be
properly used.
I opted for 100% glass in my airplane for reliability (plus a couple of
backup instruments). Part of my own training, and something that I paid a
lot of attention to during phase 1 flight test, was which parts of which
screens made sense to pay attention to during each phase of flight.
Including:
- During takeoff and landing and while in the pattern, I use a screen
with only the basic instruments. No maps or other distracting stuff.
Altitude tape. Airspeed tape. HSI. Synthetic vision horizon. (And engine
instruments, of course.) I found that anything else was distracting and I
sure don't need distractions when I'm busy.
- When flying near or under the STL Class B airspace, I like the screen
that is 25% profile info, showing my vertical position vis a vis the
airspace above and ahead of me. It also shows my predicted position 15
miles ahead so I can be sure that I don't bust someone's airspace.
- During cruise, I like the screen that is 50% map and 50% instruments.
The map on my iPad is easier to read and has more info but I like the easy
comfort of confirming that I am on my planned route as I scan my
instruments.
I was a little bit surprised how much additional crap is available on the
screen. For example, why in the heck do I need to know my GPS lat/long???
Now that I have some hours on my airplane, I am beginning to think of my
own screen designs. I will toss out all of the stuff that I don't need.
I hope that student pilots these days are getting that kind of training on
the glass panels in front of them. What parts of the display are important?
When? How can you best focus on the important parts? How do you control the
panel, instead of become victimized by it?
I had to rent planes to knock the rust off my skills before flying my
BD-4C. It was unsettling how differently the stuff in the different Cessna
172s has become. Back in the good ol' day, all of the radios worked the
same: two knobs to set the frequency and a knob for volume. All of the
transponders worked the same: 4 knobs and an ident button. No longer. Each
comm radio has its own user interface. Some transponders use buttons, some
knobs, some have traffic displays, some serve cheese and crackers.
Flying the airplane has become the easy part. Mastering the auxiliary
systems has become harder.
-- Art Z.
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*Pray as if everything depends on God. Act as if everything depends on you.*
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The down-side of "glass panels" |
I spend more time looking out the window now with a glass panel than I used to
with steam gauges. The electronics monitor most parameters so that I do not have
to. If anything is out of range, there is an audio and visual warning. When
I do look at the glass, it is to check for ADS-B traffic and to check my altitude.
On final approach, there is no need to monitor airspeed. The length
of the AOA tone pulses tell me how energy is being managed and the proximity
of stall angle of attack. After flying with glass, I have do desire to go back
to antique gauges.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489695#489695
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The down-side of "glass panels" |
Dear Bob, you're forwarding fake news.
MCAS is not optional and is on all 737 MAX. It was part of the
certification of the aircraft. The launch and major customer of the 737 is
not the Chinese government but Southwest airlines. It is not possible to
disable MCAS depending on the skin color of the pilots.
I'm a 40 year old white guy with time on the 737. I am not at all certain
that I could have done better with the situation presented to the Ethiopian
Airlines pilots (unreliable airspeed and stall warning, followed later by
the aggressive trim down while they were dealing with the former).
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 16:17 Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>
> Subject: 737 MAX...The rest of the story.
>
> For those interested in the recent spate of accidents involving Boeing's
> newest 737 variant, the real story of what is going on behind the scenes is
> largely not being reported.
>
> It was interesting to note that President Trump alluded to the problem in
> a round about way, but unless you are a pilot you probably missed the
> point. In essence, President Trump was saying that *technology is a poor
> substitute for a qualified pilot in command*.
>
> One of the most basic skills a pilot learns from day one is *energy
> management* of the airplane. If the plane is too slow, it will literally
> drop from the sky. Too fast and the wings/airframe can come apart with
> disastrous consequences.
>
> In the history of commercial aviation in the US and western countries, the
> first crop of pilots to enter commercial service were the post world war
> two pilots. Those guys were the real deal and not only hand flew almost all
> of their hours but also in some of the most demanding conditions. The
> second wave were the airport kids who just fell in love with the idea of
> being a pilot and scrimped and saved to take lessons. Both categories of
> pilots were skilled in the art of aviation.
>
> With the explosion of second and third world travel, there were nowhere
> near the number of skilled pilots to fly the thousands of new generation
> planes coming out of Airbus and Boeing. Unlike Cathay Pacific, a Hong Kong
> airline that was almost exclusively piloted by British pilots, the new
> Asian airlines wanted Asian pilots to man the cockpits...often with
> disastrous results. *Asiana flight 214 crashed in SFO in 2014 because the
> pilots did not know how to hand fly the plane* when the ground-based
> approach ILS (Instrument Landing System) was out of service.
>
> Boeing, the FAA and worldwide aviation agencies track not only accidents,
> but also INCIDENTS...crap that was going sideways but didn't result in a
> crash. The number of unqualified pilots from Asia and Africa was plain to
> see in the number of errors being committed on a daily basis.
>
> To make a long story short, airbus saw this eventuality decades ago and
> implemented automatic safety systems in anticipation of unqualified
> aircrews. Boeing resisted for a lot of very good reasons...but after the
> Asiana crash, the Chinese government basically told Boeing to "idiot-proof"
> the 737 as China would end up being the biggest purchaser of that model.
> Since Boeing had opted not to add automated control systems (which often
> override pilot's inputs) they were forced to apply a band-aid solution
> which, unfortunately was not done well. Only one sensor was driving some
> very complicated algorithms which worked against the pilot's
> decision-making inputs.
>
> The fact that the Asian and African pilots were essentially unqualified is
> highly embarrassing to the respective governments and Boeing kept it quiet.
> When ALPA, the pilot's union reps, found the system was added without
> informing the pilots, they went insane...
>
> However, what they DON'T know, is that the MCAS system can be enabled or
> disabled per plane, and can be done remotely on a real time basis via
> uplink. The US airlines management, due to the superior training and
> piloting skills of their pilots, opted NOT to activate MCAS...but the
> Asian/African carriers DID. That is why most of the " crappy" airlines
> self-grounded while all the major US airlines initially continued to fly
> without a problem.
>
> Its a very PC issue, but basically comes down to 30-40% of the global
> pilot population are really not qualified to be pilots, but more just data
> input managers.
>
> Bob Folken, Capt. Ret.
>
> A friend has suggested that I might
> get qualified in his really nice C172
> to get back in the air. I think I mentioned
> on these pages that his a/c was VERY well
> outfitted with all the latest flat screens
> including one bolted to the l.h. fwd doorpost!
>
> Had a chance to fly in that airplane
> as a member of the local airport advisory
> committee. We visited some 'small' airports
> around Wichita to ask questions of their
> operators.
>
> Sitting in the right seat while transiting
> Wichita controlled airspace, I was
> unsettled with the array of information
> being presented while my friend mis-heard
> a couple of ATC turns . . . transmissions
> that I was attuned to even tho I'd only
> heard this 'new tail number' called out
> a few times in previous minutes.
>
> I'm not going to pursue his offer. Not
> the least concerned about competently
> flying his airplane but I'd rather NOT
> have to learn how to sift out what's
> important from the panel-load of
> distractions.
>
> Let us take care my friends lest
> we become less pilot and more video
> game operators. If you crash-and-burn on
> a video game you can hit the reset
> button . . . RV's not so much.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The down-side of "glass panels" |
I would like to add one thing. It is important to also note that there is a s
ignificant difference between just saying the problem is glass panels or gla
ss cockpit, versus the problem is pilot skills that are eroding.
It is entirely possible to fly an airplane where the glass panel is solely a
reference to engine gauges in flight instruments, and that no auto pilot or
any other automation is used. When used in that way, there really is no sig
nificant difference that would causes the instrument panel to be a major dif
ference. The issue with the eroding flying skills is completely separate, an
d has more to do with the fact that people are relying on their auto pilot t
oo much perhaps, and also that they don=99t go out and spend enough ti
me practicing regular maneuvers. Look at it this way, if you were talking to
a highly skilled aerobatic pilot who had a glass cockpit,Are you going to s
ay that the glass cockpit is causing him to erode his stick and rudder skill
s? That would be ridiculous. I also further agree with the other reply that s
aid that they have more time to look out the window now thanks to the integr
ated warnings. That makes perfect sense to me, because if there is any kind o
f serious issue, I will hear it in my head said before I will even catch it w
ith my eyes.
Automation can definitely be a problem. But trying to link automation under t
he category of glass cockpit just confuses the issue and they are not necess
arily related.
Tim
> On Jun 17, 2019, at 5:16 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Bob, you're forwarding fake news.
>
> MCAS is not optional and is on all 737 MAX. It was part of the certificati
on of the aircraft. The launch and major customer of the 737 is not the Chin
ese government but Southwest airlines. It is not possible to disable MCAS de
pending on the skin color of the pilots.
>
> I'm a 40 year old white guy with time on the 737. I am not at all certain t
hat I could have done better with the situation presented to the Ethiopian A
irlines pilots (unreliable airspeed and stall warning, followed later by the
aggressive trim down while they were dealing with the former).
>
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 16:17 Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aeroele
ctric.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Subject: 737 MAX...The rest of the story.
>>
>> For those interested in the recent spate of accidents involving Boeing's n
ewest 737 variant, the real story of what is going on behind the scenes is l
argely not being reported.
>>
>> It was interesting to note that President Trump alluded to the problem in
a round about way, but unless you are a pilot you probably missed the point
. In essence, President Trump was saying that technology is a poor substitut
e for a qualified pilot in command.
>>
>> One of the most basic skills a pilot learns from day one is energy manage
ment of the airplane. If the plane is too slow, it will literally drop from t
he sky. Too fast and the wings/airframe can come apart with disastrous conse
quences.
>>
>> In the history of commercial aviation in the US and western countries, th
e first crop of pilots to enter commercial service were the post world war t
wo pilots. Those guys were the real deal and not only hand flew almost all o
f their hours but also in some of the most demanding conditions. The second w
ave were the airport kids who just fell in love with the idea of being a pil
ot and scrimped and saved to take lessons. Both categories of pilots were sk
illed in the art of aviation.
>>
>> With the explosion of second and third world travel, there were nowhere n
ear the number of skilled pilots to fly the thousands of new generation plan
es coming out of Airbus and Boeing. Unlike Cathay Pacific, a Hong Kong airli
ne that was almost exclusively piloted by British pilots, the new Asian airl
ines wanted Asian pilots to man the cockpits...often with disastrous results
. Asiana flight 214 crashed in SFO in 2014 because the pilots did not know h
ow to hand fly the plane when the ground-based approach ILS (Instrument Land
ing System) was out of service.
>>
>> Boeing, the FAA and worldwide aviation agencies track not only accidents,
but also INCIDENTS...crap that was going sideways but didn't result in a cr
ash. The number of unqualified pilots from Asia and Africa was plain to see i
n the number of errors being committed on a daily basis.
>>
>> To make a long story short, airbus saw this eventuality decades ago and i
mplemented automatic safety systems in anticipation of unqualified aircrews.
Boeing resisted for a lot of very good reasons...but after the Asiana crash
, the Chinese government basically told Boeing to "idiot-proof" the 737 as C
hina would end up being the biggest purchaser of that model. Since Boeing ha
d opted not to add automated control systems (which often override pilot's i
nputs) they were forced to apply a band-aid solution which, unfortunately wa
s not done well. Only one sensor was driving some very complicated algorithm
s which worked against the pilot's decision-making inputs.
>>
>> The fact that the Asian and African pilots were essentially unqualified i
s highly embarrassing to the respective governments and Boeing kept it quiet
. When ALPA, the pilot's union reps, found the system was added without info
rming the pilots, they went insane...
>>
>> However, what they DON'T know, is that the MCAS system can be enabled or d
isabled per plane, and can be done remotely on a real time basis via uplink.
The US airlines management, due to the superior training and piloting skill
s of their pilots, opted NOT to activate MCAS...but the Asian/African carrie
rs DID. That is why most of the " crappy" airlines self-grounded while all t
he major US airlines initially continued to fly without a problem.
>>
>> Its a very PC issue, but basically comes down to 30-40% of the global pil
ot population are really not qualified to be pilots, but more just data inpu
t managers.
>>
>> Bob Folken, Capt. Ret.
>>
>> A friend has suggested that I might
>> get qualified in his really nice C172
>> to get back in the air. I think I mentioned
>> on these pages that his a/c was VERY well
>> outfitted with all the latest flat screens
>> including one bolted to the l.h. fwd doorpost!
>>
>> Had a chance to fly in that airplane
>> as a member of the local airport advisory
>> committee. We visited some 'small' airports
>> around Wichita to ask questions of their
>> operators.
>>
>> Sitting in the right seat while transiting
>> Wichita controlled airspace, I was
>> unsettled with the array of information
>> being presented while my friend mis-heard
>> a couple of ATC turns . . . transmissions
>> that I was attuned to even tho I'd only
>> heard this 'new tail number' called out
>> a few times in previous minutes.
>>
>> I'm not going to pursue his offer. Not
>> the least concerned about competently
>> flying his airplane but I'd rather NOT
>> have to learn how to sift out what's
>> important from the panel-load of
>> distractions.
>>
>> Let us take care my friends lest
>> we become less pilot and more video
>> game operators. If you crash-and-burn on
>> a video game you can hit the reset
>> button . . . RV's not so much.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The down-side of "glass panels" |
In other words, it's what I would have expected:
A Management Problem.
Airline pilots probably have the most extensive and repetitive training
regimen of any 'common' occupation. They know, and do, as they're
trained. If they can't hand-fly the plane, it's because Management made
a bean-counting decision to not train them to fly the plane.
I've been on both sides, in both private and Government jobs (though not
aviation), and invariably, it's either management failing in its
expectations and equipping the employee to do their job, or failure to
take action when the employee can't or won't do their job.
Charlie
On 6/17/2019 6:41 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
> I would like to add one thing. It is important to also note that there
> is a significant difference between just saying the problem is glass
> panels or glass cockpit, versus the problem is pilot skills that are
> eroding.
> It is entirely possible to fly an airplane where the glass panel is
> solely a reference to engine gauges in flight instruments, and that no
> auto pilot or any other automation is used. When used in that way,
> there really is no significant difference that would causes the
> instrument panel to be a major difference. The issue with the eroding
> flying skills is completely separate, and has more to do with the fact
> that people are relying on their auto pilot too much perhaps, and also
> that they dont go out and spend enough time practicing regular
> maneuvers. Look at it this way, if you were talking to a highly
> skilled aerobatic pilot who had a glass cockpit,Are you going to say
> that the glass cockpit is causing him to erode his stick and rudder
> skills? That would be ridiculous. I also further agree with the other
> reply that said that they have more time to look out the window now
> thanks to the integrated warnings. That makes perfect sense to me,
> because if there is any kind of serious issue, I will hear it in my
> head said before I will even catch it with my eyes.
>
> Automation can definitely be a problem. But trying to link automation
> under the category of glass cockpit just confuses the issue and they
> are not necessarily related.
>
> Tim
>
> On Jun 17, 2019, at 5:16 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com
> <mailto:cluros@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Dear Bob, you're forwarding fake news.
>>
>> MCAS is not optional and is on all 737 MAX. It was part of the
>> certification of the aircraft. The launch and major customer of the
>> 737 is not the Chinese government but Southwest airlines. It is not
>> possible to disable MCAS depending on the skin color of the pilots.
>>
>> I'm a 40 year old white guy with time on the 737. I am not at all
>> certain that I could have done better with the situation presented to
>> the Ethiopian Airlines pilots (unreliable airspeed and stall warning,
>> followed later by the aggressive trim down while they were dealing
>> with the former).
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 16:17 Robert L. Nuckolls, III
>> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com
>> <mailto:nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Subject: 737 MAX...The rest of the story.
>>
>> For those interested in the recent spate of accidents involving
>> Boeing's newest 737 variant, the real story of what is going on
>> behind the scenes is largely not being reported.
>>
>> It was interesting to note that President Trump alluded to the
>> problem in a round about way, but unless you are a pilot you
>> probably missed the point. In essence, President Trump was saying
>> that *technology is a poor substitute for a qualified pilot in
>> command*.
>>
>> One of the most basic skills a pilot learns from day one is
>> *energy management* of the airplane. If the plane is too slow, it
>> will literally drop from the sky. Too fast and the wings/airframe
>> can come apart with disastrous consequences.
>>
>> In the history of commercial aviation in the US and western
>> countries, the first crop of pilots to enter commercial service
>> were the post world war two pilots. Those guys were the real deal
>> and not only hand flew almost all of their hours but also in some
>> of the most demanding conditions. The second wave were the
>> airport kids who just fell in love with the idea of being a pilot
>> and scrimped and saved to take lessons. Both categories of pilots
>> were skilled in the art of aviation.
>>
>> With the explosion of second and third world travel, there were
>> nowhere near the number of skilled pilots to fly the thousands of
>> new generation planes coming out of Airbus and Boeing. Unlike
>> Cathay Pacific, a Hong Kong airline that was almost exclusively
>> piloted by British pilots, the new Asian airlines wanted Asian
>> pilots to man the cockpits...often with disastrous results.
>> *Asiana flight 214 crashed in SFO in 2014 because the pilots did
>> not know how to hand fly the plane* when the ground-based
>> approach ILS (Instrument Landing System) was out of service.
>>
>> Boeing, the FAA and worldwide aviation agencies track not only
>> accidents, but also INCIDENTS...crap that was going sideways but
>> didn't result in a crash. The number of unqualified pilots from
>> Asia and Africa was plain to see in the number of errors being
>> committed on a daily basis.
>>
>> To make a long story short, airbus saw this eventuality decades
>> ago and implemented automatic safety systems in anticipation of
>> unqualified aircrews. Boeing resisted for a lot of very good
>> reasons...but after the Asiana crash, the Chinese government
>> basically told Boeing to "idiot-proof" the 737 as China would end
>> up being the biggest purchaser of that model. Since Boeing had
>> opted not to add automated control systems (which often override
>> pilot's inputs) they were forced to apply a band-aid solution
>> which, unfortunately was not done well. Only one sensor was
>> driving some very complicated algorithms which worked against the
>> pilot's decision-making inputs.
>>
>> The fact that the Asian and African pilots were essentially
>> unqualified is highly embarrassing to the respective governments
>> and Boeing kept it quiet. When ALPA, the pilot's union reps,
>> found the system was added without informing the pilots, they
>> went insane...
>>
>> However, what they DON'T know, is that the MCAS system can be
>> enabled or disabled per plane, and can be done remotely on a real
>> time basis via uplink. The US airlines management, due to the
>> superior training and piloting skills of their pilots, opted NOT
>> to activate MCAS...but the Asian/African carriers DID. That is
>> why most of the " crappy" airlines self-grounded while all the
>> major US airlines initially continued to fly without a problem.
>>
>> Its a very PC issue, but basically comes down to 30-40% of the
>> global pilot population are really not qualified to be pilots,
>> but more just data input managers.
>>
>> Bob Folken, Capt. Ret.
>>
>> A friend has suggested that I might
>> get qualified in his really nice C172
>> to get back in the air. I think I mentioned
>> on these pages that his a/c was VERY well
>> outfitted with all the latest flat screens
>> including one bolted to the l.h. fwd doorpost!
>>
>> Had a chance to fly in that airplane
>> as a member of the local airport advisory
>> committee. We visited some 'small' airports
>> around Wichita to ask questions of their
>> operators.
>>
>> Sitting in the right seat while transiting
>> Wichita controlled airspace, I was
>> unsettled with the array of information
>> being presented while my friend mis-heard
>> a couple of ATC turns . . . transmissions
>> that I was attuned to even tho I'd only
>> heard this 'new tail number' called out
>> a few times in previous minutes.
>>
>> I'm not going to pursue his offer. Not
>> the least concerned about competently
>> flying his airplane but I'd rather NOT
>> have to learn how to sift out what's
>> important from the panel-load of
>> distractions.
>>
>> Let us take care my friends lest
>> we become less pilot and more video
>> game operators. If you crash-and-burn on
>> a video game you can hit the reset
>> button . . . RV's not so much.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|