Co-pilots May Sim instead of Fly to Train

Mxsmanic wrote:
The average airliner pilot has spent vastly more time in a real
cockpit fighting off boredom than in a simulator coping with
emergencies.

No surprise here, it's a part of the job. What great insight did you
pull this from?

Simulators are an excellent (and necessary) part
of pilot training, but there are situations that can never be
simulated ...

A lot more situations can be simulated than experienced in real life
(if one wishes to survive the experience), and it is thanks to
simulators that pilots are better prepared for emergencies today.
Many of the things they practice on simulators would never be safe to
attempt in real life, and others are so rare that they are never
likely to see them (but at least they'll be prepared if they do).

No argument here, this is the simulator's purpose. Reread my statement
"Simulators are an excellent (and necessary) part of pilot training" My
point was (and still is) there are situations that can't be duplicated
in a sim due to its limitations. When these rare situations occur it's
up to the crew's experience & piloting skills (CRM too) to save their
own butts

Without that simulation experience, quite a few of them would be killed when the real thing
comes along. The real world doesn't train you for potentially deadly emergencies.

Again, no argument. You're just being repetitive here.


The best example I can think of is United #232 (Sioux City, 1989). I
doubt Al Haynes was ever trained to control a DC-10 without hydraulic
power to the flight control surfaces. Yet he managed to steer the jet
with differential thrust to a (scary) landing without the loss of all
aboard.

Actually, there were four people controlling the plane, and it was
being steered by a DC-10 flight instructor who had been deadheading on
the flight.

You're nitpicking here, Haynes was PIC and coordinated control of a
crippled aircraft. As nobody had ever dealt with this severe of an
emergency before they were using their experience & CRM and "thinking
outside the box" to save the plane. You are wrong when you say
real-world experience was irrelevant as it saved most of the people on
that plane. Steering a jet with thrust control only was probably never
taught - it was the airmanship of Capt Haynes & crew that kept all from
being lost.


The crew succeeded in part because of proper CRM, not because of technical skills with something this foreign.

Okay, you have just showed your total ignorance on this subject.
Without technical skills, CRM alone wouldn't have kept the plane from
becoming a lawn dart.


Luck also played a substantial role in this crash. The combined 103 hours of experience of the flight deck crew was definitely a factor, but it was experience that could have been acquired in either real life or a simulator.

Luck was absolutely a factor, even if you can't quantify it. The bigger
factor IMHO was the "103 hours of experience" (not sure where you got
that metric from) of the flight crew. That experience could not have
been gained in a sim because nobody (then) ever thought it possible
that all three hydraulic systems could be lost on a DC-10 so I suspect
it was never part of the sim profile. Aircraft designs have been
updated since that accident. Nowadays, having learned from UAL232 I'm
guessing there are a few more emergencies that are handled in sim
training. Included are probably double flameouts, probably fallout from
the Pinnacle CRJ crash two years ago.


It (CRM) was important in keeping them calm and cooperative and organized; flying the plane was only a small part of it.

That's what being a professional pilot is about - keeping your cool
when things aren't going exactly by the book. If you think "flying the
plane was only a small part of it" you just haven't learned a thing
from participating in this forum...

I didn't notice if you mentioned this to our Albatross (my eyes tend to
glaze over even when his crap is just being quoted...) but AFAIK, to this
date, no one has been able to bring the Al Haynes scenario to as successful
a conclusion as Capt Al did...

In A Simulator...!

Go figure.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

Kingfish writes:

You're nitpicking here, Haynes was PIC and coordinated control of a
crippled aircraft. As nobody had ever dealt with this severe of an
emergency before they were using their experience & CRM and "thinking
outside the box" to save the plane. You are wrong when you say
real-world experience was irrelevant as it saved most of the people on
that plane. Steering a jet with thrust control only was probably never
taught - it was the airmanship of Capt Haynes & crew that kept all from
being lost.

Nobody had ever done what that crew did in terms of flying. None of
their real-world experience helped. The cooperation and
professionalism of the crew had nothing to do with flying.

Okay, you have just showed your total ignorance on this subject.
Without technical skills, CRM alone wouldn't have kept the plane from
becoming a lawn dart.

The technical skills required were not especially great.

Luck was absolutely a factor, even if you can't quantify it. The bigger
factor IMHO was the "103 hours of experience" (not sure where you got
that metric from) of the flight crew. That experience could not have
been gained in a sim because nobody (then) ever thought it possible
that all three hydraulic systems could be lost on a DC-10 so I suspect
it was never part of the sim profile.

It was never part of real life, either. Nobody had any experience
with it, period.

That's what being a professional pilot is about - keeping your cool
when things aren't going exactly by the book.

That has nothing to do with flying. A great many professionals in
other domains are exactly the same way. The situation would be the
same during brain or heart surgery, with no airplane in sight.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Nobody had ever done what that crew did in terms of flying. None of
their real-world experience helped. The cooperation and
professionalism of the crew had nothing to do with flying.


You've contradicted your earlier position with this statement. Without
crew cooperation (how many did it take to control the crippled acft?)
all would have been lost.


Okay, you have just showed your total ignorance on this subject.
Without technical skills, CRM alone wouldn't have kept the plane from
becoming a lawn dart.

The technical skills required were not especially great.


Remind me again, how someone with no flight time would have *any*
insight into this?


That's what being a professional pilot is about - keeping your
cool
when things aren't going exactly by the book.

That has nothing to do with flying. A great many professionals in
other domains are exactly the same way. The situation would be the
same during brain or heart surgery, with no airplane in sight.

Yes it has everything to do with flying - WTF was the subject of this
thread? This forum?
It seems to me your reality disconnect makes it impossible for you to
follow a rational discussion (which leads to argument) When you
contradict yourself, and make broad statement without the life
experience to back it up, what little credibility you have goes down
the sh!tter.

Other than that I enjoy reading your posts : )

Kingfish writes:

You've contradicted your earlier position with this statement. Without
crew cooperation (how many did it take to control the crippled acft?)
all would have been lost.

In part, yes. But that's not flying skill.

Remind me again, how someone with no flight time would have *any*
insight into this?

Flight time is not a prerequisite for such reasoning.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.