Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
747 Better At Precision Flight-Path Control?  
User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1515 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2738 times:

In his book “Handling the Big Jets”, D P Davies mentions that his personal experience with the 747 during UK certification trials was that the very cramped cockpit, though noisy and uncomfortable, was an aid to precision flying. In effect, he outlined that the close proximity of the pilot’s head and body to the windscreen pillar and cockpit side enhanced the impression of flying “in rather than on” the aircraft, giving a higher-fidelity bodily feedback of what the airframe was up to.

Do the pilots out there share this impression? Is precision flight-path control easier on the 747 than, say, the 777 for example?

Faro


The chalice not my son
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3423 posts, RR: 67
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2685 times:

Remember that the 747 was the first twin aisle airplane certified. If Mr. Davies had had the opportunity to fly today's twin aisle airplanes, I doubt he would have made the same statement.


Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2649 times:



Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 1):
Remember that the 747 was the first twin aisle airplane certified. If Mr. Davies had had the opportunity to fly today's twin aisle airplanes, I doubt he would have made the same statement.

I believe his comment was with respect to the cramped nature of the flight deck arrangement and not (in this specific passage) to the 747's flight controls per se. Let me therefore rephrase: Is it easier to maintain precision flight-path control in a cramped flight deck than in a spacious one?

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlineThirtyEcho From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 1639 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2572 times:

What is a "flight path"? That sounds like something out of "Last of the Mohicans."

The primary source for "flight path" control is the autopilot. Autopilots tend to favor very large cockpits, as several have told me at the "Auger Inn" lounge after a few too many.

I think that MSFS has "flight paths," you might want to check with them.


User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2563 times:

Ok, for the terminologically pure: Is it easier to maintain precise control of speed, rate of descent and runway alignment during final approach to a manual landing in a cramped flight deck or in a spacious one?

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2550 times:



Quoting Faro (Reply 4):
Ok, for the terminologically pure: Is it easier to maintain precise control of speed, rate of descent and runway alignment during final approach to a manual landing in a cramped flight deck or in a spacious one?

I've flown the 744, 747, DC-10, 757, A320 and 727. They all do the same job and they all do it quite well. It makes no difference on what aircraft you're flying. It's tough to compare the old technology to the newer aircraft, but click everything off on a 320 and it will be just like the 744. Sure the mass of the aircraft has some stabilizing effect, but at the end of the day, they all do the job extremely well.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2519 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting Faro (Reply 4):
Is it easier to maintain precise control of speed, rate of descent and runway alignment during final approach to a manual landing in a cramped flight deck or in a spacious one?

One factor that I've personally found does make things difficult is a lack of usable armrests. Without a good armrest on which to anchor your elbow, one must manipulate the yoke with his/her entire arm and shoulder. With a good, well-positioned armrest, the movement is mostly limited to the wrist and forearm. I've found this makes precise yoke adjustments much easier.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineJetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2495 times:



Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 3):
What is a "flight path"? That sounds like something out of "Last of the Mohicans."

The primary source for "flight path" control is the autopilot. Autopilots tend to favor very large cockpits, as several have told me at the "Auger Inn" lounge after a few too many.

I think that MSFS has "flight paths," you might want to check with them.

Nothing wrong with the term flight path, so no need for the quotation marks. In fact all modern airliners have the option to display the flight path vector on the PFD.

Autopilots work just as well with small cockpits (I guess I'm missing the joke you appear to be trying to make). Anyway, if pilots are not controlling flight path during manual flight then they are not doing their job properly.

The "flight paths" in MSFS are there to guide less experienced sim flyers through the required manoeuvres. Optional assistance only. It's a way of visualising the required flight path and something that has been considered for real world aircraft too.

Some of Dai Davies comments can be taken with a pinch of salt. Perhaps he felt more in the loop in the 747's small noisy cockpit, rather than the larger office found in most widebodies, but that is his personal opinion, not established fact. Goodness knows what he would have made of a FBW Airbus.  Wink



The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2493 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting Faro (Reply 4):
Is it easier to maintain precise control of speed, rate of descent and runway alignment during final approach to a manual landing in a cramped flight deck or in a spacious one?

I forgot to add - if small, cramped flight decks inhibit the ability to precisely maintain speed, rate of descent, and runway alignment, I can think of a certain group of individuals who never got the memo:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kyle Donagher
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jerome Zbinden




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Anthony Osborne
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas - Jetwash Images



 Wink

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2369 times:



Quoting 2H4 (Reply 8):
I forgot to add - if small, cramped flight decks inhibit the ability to precisely maintain speed, rate of descent, and runway alignment, I can think of a certain group of individuals who never got the memo:

Quite the contrary! The point of this thread if you re-read the inital post is that crampedness allegedly enhances precision flight.

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2338 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting Faro (Reply 9):
Quite the contrary! The point of this thread if you re-read the inital post is that crampedness allegedly enhances precision flight.

Hmm...quite right. Perhaps next time I'll try to thoroughly read and comprehend the original post....

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4143 posts, RR: 76
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2279 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Faro (Thread starter):
D P Davies mentions that his personal experience with the 747 during UK certification trials was that the very cramped cockpit, though noisy and uncomfortable, was an aid to precision flying. In effect, he outlined that the close proximity of the pilot's head and body to the windscreen pillar and cockpit side enhanced the impression of flying "in rather than on" the aircraft, giving a higher-fidelity bodily feedback of what the airframe was up to.

The point you're making has been a *selling point* of the 747 in some circles and I happened to share Davis's comment : The dimensions of the cockpit give the impression of flying a much smaller airplane. As a matter of fact, putting one's harnesses on was like strapping the airplane to one's back, like a hiking backpack. It was quite a comforting feel. But like all feelings, it is just subjective.

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 3):
The primary source for "flight path" control is the autopilot.

I disagree. Flight path refers correctly to the trajectory of an airplane in the three dimensions, to the point that we are now, in terms of piloting / flying / moving the control surfaces, talking in terms of *flight path control* and use, often on manual visual flying the FPV -flight path vector, aka *the bird*- as Jetlagged mentioned.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 8):
if small, cramped flight decks inhibit the ability to precisely maintain speed, rate of descent, and runway alignment, I can think of a certain group of individuals who never got the memo

 rotfl 

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 7):
Autopilots work just as well with small cockpits (I guess I'm missing the joke you appear to be trying to make).

No, you didn't ,you straight-faced hypocrite !  cheeky 



Contrail designer
User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2210 times:



Quoting Pihero (Reply 11):
The point you're making has been a *selling point* of the 747 in some circles and I happened to share Davis's comment : The dimensions of the cockpit give the impression of flying a much smaller airplane. As a matter of fact, putting one's harnesses on was like strapping the airplane to one's back, like a hiking backpack. It was quite a comforting feel. But like all feelings, it is just subjective.

Merci de votre input positif, il me semblait que cela allait de soit, cette question de precision dans l'exiguité, mais les gentils posteurs avaient leurs propre conception de la chose...

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6289 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2010 times:



Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 3):
The primary source for "flight path" control is the autopilot. Autopilots tend to favor very large cockpits, as several have told me at the "Auger Inn" lounge after a few too many.

I think that MSFS has "flight paths," you might want to check with them.

 hyper   hyper   hyper 

Huh, that's the best joke I have heard today.

BTW, when was it last time a commercial pilot looked out of the window? Except for enjoying the view of course (after all they always have a window seat). Or for checking that the runway hasn't moved much since yesterday.

BTW2, where do I find Auger Inn? I know "auger in", haven't tried it, but I'm sure Auger Inn is a lot more pleasant.

747-100 pilots have round eyes because they watch round gauges. 747-400 pilots have square eyes because they watch TV.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 747 Better At Precision Flight-Path Control?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Should Boeing Had Kept The 747 Wing At 40 Degrees? posted Mon Apr 16 2007 04:01:23 by 747400sp
747 Slat Extension In Flight/cruise? posted Wed Jan 24 2007 23:13:58 by Siren
Wierd Flight Path - Picture posted Thu Jul 13 2006 10:09:37 by Darrenthe747
Net Flight Path And All-engine Performance posted Sun Dec 4 2005 16:40:15 by BKAA
Flight Path From CDG - MIA posted Wed Nov 9 2005 01:24:21 by AMSMAN
SAA 747-4 Problem At IAD Today posted Mon Jul 25 2005 23:41:44 by Mcdonobr
Flight Path Vector? posted Wed Oct 13 2004 18:14:37 by Popee
Cruising At Uneven Flight Levels posted Wed May 26 2004 03:39:57 by WakeTurbulence
What Caused First 747 Crash At Nairobi? posted Thu Feb 19 2004 21:38:54 by Osteogenesis
Why Was Our Flight Path As Follows? posted Tue Aug 27 2002 01:52:03 by Mirrodie
EWR-HKG Flight Path Question posted Thu Jan 3 2008 08:16:06 by Nbseer
Graphical Flight Path posted Thu Sep 13 2007 23:43:02 by Hush-Kit
Should Boeing Had Kept The 747 Wing At 40 Degrees? posted Mon Apr 16 2007 04:01:23 by 747400sp
747 Slat Extension In Flight/cruise? posted Wed Jan 24 2007 23:13:58 by Siren
Wierd Flight Path - Picture posted Thu Jul 13 2006 10:09:37 by Darrenthe747
Net Flight Path And All-engine Performance posted Sun Dec 4 2005 16:40:15 by BKAA
Flight Path From CDG - MIA posted Wed Nov 9 2005 01:24:21 by AMSMAN
SAA 747-4 Problem At IAD Today posted Mon Jul 25 2005 23:41:44 by Mcdonobr
Flight Path Vector? posted Wed Oct 13 2004 18:14:37 by Popee
Cruising At Uneven Flight Levels posted Wed May 26 2004 03:39:57 by WakeTurbulence

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format