Autopilot

John Gaquin wrote:
".Blueskies." wrote in message

Yup, folks don't realize they are flying in a human monitored
robot...


You don't get paid for pushing the button.

You get paid for knowing which button to push.

And "button pusher" pilots have been making lawn darts out of their aircraft
all over this planet.

--

Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/
-

"Darrell S" wrote in message news:MUyuf.1138
..

And "button pusher" pilots have been making lawn darts out of their
aircraft all over this planet.

Good God! Its a figure of speech, Darrell, a figure of speech!

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...

".Blueskies." wrote in message

Yup, folks don't realize they are flying in a human monitored robot...


You don't get paid for pushing the button.

You get paid for knowing which button to push.



and when to push it! ;-)

"John Gaquin" wrote in message news

".Blueskies." wrote in message

The 747 has been capable of this for years, since ~69 or so. The pilot does have to advance the throttles though...


Not in all cases. I flew -100s and -200s. Some of the -200s were autothrottle equipped.


The autothrottle was for approach, right? Takeoff still needed to be initiated didn't it?

".Blueskies." wrote in message


The autothrottle was for approach, right? Takeoff still needed to be
initiated didn't it?

IIRC, the autothrottle could be engaged in most modes, but there was no
takeoff mode available. When I used it (which was rare) it was in either
cruise or approach. I didn't like it much.

"Grumman-581"

Basically, "If I'm going to die in this plane, I want there to be a
reasonable chance that the pilot will also"...


No, I don't think that's it.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...

".Blueskies." wrote in message


The autothrottle was for approach, right? Takeoff still needed to be initiated didn't it?

IIRC, the autothrottle could be engaged in most modes, but there was no takeoff mode available. When I used it (which
was rare) it was in either cruise or approach. I didn't like it much.


That's the way I understood it. The autopilot et al could handle all the FD stuff, but you still had to set power until
coupled on approach. It's got to be a blast flying one of those birds...The closest I got was flying the PamAm 747 sim
in San Fran way back when.

".Blueskies." wrote in message

It's got to be a blast flying one of those birds...The closest I got was
flying the PamAm 747 sim in San Fran way back when.

The 747 is an interesting and enjoyable airplane to fly, but it is different
due to its size. Without question I preferred the 727.

"John Gaquin" wrote

The 747 is an interesting and enjoyable airplane to fly, but it
is different due to its size. Without question I preferred the
727.

You know John, our PanAm 727s were equipped with autothrottles,
and autoland even with just a single autopilot. They were still
restricted to CATII approach minimums but if you saw any of those
FAR 91.175 things, you could continue the autoland to touchdown.

Bob Moore

"John Gaquin" wrote in message . ..

".Blueskies." wrote in message

It's got to be a blast flying one of those birds...The closest I got was flying the PamAm 747 sim in San Fran way
back when.

The 747 is an interesting and enjoyable airplane to fly, but it is different due to its size. Without question I
preferred the 727.


I remember rolling in to a turn, and it kind of slowly came around. I was able to fly it for about 5 minutes as a part
of a tour of their facility.

I have heard the '27 was much more responsive. There is a video at the Chicago COSI where they have the 727 on display.
It shows them landing it at Meigs field. Only a couple of souls on board and very light. Nice short landing....