tom355uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, RR: 3 Posted (10 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4143 times:
Well, today I achieved a longtime ambition and sat in the right hand seat of a 737, and I flew it!
Well of course, this was in a fixed base simulator (formerly of Sabena, for reference) but it was as close as I'm going to get - and man it was difficult. My 'landings' were atrocious - the stuff Air Crash Investigation episodes are made of. My general flying was 'very good' I was told (HDG within 5 degrees and ALT within 300ft most of the time), but came I away with the following observations:
- it is incredibly easy to become fixated on the PFD, particularly the Flight Director bars while manoeuvring. Is this common in people new to this type of aircraft, and how do you avoid this?
- the sprung force yoke has very strange control forces, it seems extremely easy to overcontrol due to the very gentle forces around neutral - especially in conjunction with the FD fixation. Does this cause a problem with newly qualified pilots?
- the aircraft carries a hell of a lot more inertia than you would expect - even standard rate turns require substantial forward planning! How does this affect curved final approaches I.e Funchal/Kaitak?
- finally, I watched the instructor make a smooth manual landing using almost constant adjustments on the yoke - I tried in a similar fashion and got the aircraft into some serious PIO - don't think the passengers were too impressed
I can safely say that it really opened eyes. I can grease every touchdown on my laptop with FS9 but it's a world away from even this level - so all those Hollywood 'could you land' questions: NO!!
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 1, posted (10 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3981 times:
I've had the pleasure of "flying" a sim as well (full motion 767 landing at Kai Tak). I didn't have significant issues landing it (clear weather and no wind), but I think I was used to the inertia from FS9 (FSX had not come out yet). Then again if memory serves I did not use the standard FS models, but custom ones which were way more accurate. I always "fly" with all realism settings turned to max. Finally, I use stick/throttle/pedals on the PC so I was kinda used to the feel of that.
My impressions:
1. You have to stay way ahead of the aircraft.
2. You have to make gentle, gradual adjustments. The aircraft has a lot of inertia but it also has very large control surfaces. Overcontrolling is easy.
3. Not so hard in good conditions. Wouldn't do as well in a typhoon...
I would definitely agree that it is harder than it looks. Then again airline pilots have had a lot of practice. You and I came into it with no practice. Even a fresh F/O has hundreds of hours on various types. I bet they've all had some dodgy landings back when they flew a Cessna 172.
And sure I could land it. Just tell me how to set up the autoland systems and I'll sit there with my hands in my lap.
[Edited 2012-07-24 17:56:15]
[Edited 2012-07-24 17:56:29]
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 2, posted (10 months 1 day ago) and read 3932 times:
I've run several dozen people who've never flow an airliner before (some with prior pilot experience, some without) through simulators (737, 747, 777, 787). Your experience is very common.
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): it is incredibly easy to become fixated on the PFD, particularly the Flight Director bars while manoeuvring. Is this common in people new to this type of aircraft
It's extremely common. Once they realize what the FD is telling them, they fixate on it and fly the PFD/FD like a video game, to the exclusion of all else.
Keep looking up. For folks without prior experience, I don't even bother trying to teach them an instrument scan and just get them to look out the window as much as they can.
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - the sprung force yoke has very strange control forces, it seems extremely easy to overcontrol due to the very gentle forces around neutral - especially in conjunction with the FD fixation. Does this cause a problem with newly qualified pilots?
I'm not sure about newly qualified pilots...in order to get qualified, they should have sufficient experience to be used to it. However, those new to the type (and especially those who haven't flown large jets) are extremely prone to overcontrolling and PIO. This is partly an impatience thing...due to the high inertia, people don't see the response speed they expect. They naturally put in more control and, by the time the airplane finally starts responding to their original input, they're *way* overcontrol. Then it repeats going the other way.
It takes a lot of practice and discipline to get used to making small continuous corrections and giving the plane enough time to respond.
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - the aircraft carries a hell of a lot more inertia than you would expect - even standard rate turns require substantial forward planning! How does this affect curved final approaches I.e Funchal/Kaitak?
You have to stay ahead of the airplane. If you get even, or especially behind, you're screwed.
mandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6180 posts, RR: 74 Reply 3, posted (10 months 19 hours ago) and read 3807 times:
Congrats! I've flown light twins (real ones) and also a 732 full simulator. (2 of them).
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - it is incredibly easy to become fixated on the PFD, particularly the Flight Director bars while manoeuvring. Is this common in people new to this type of aircraft, and how do you avoid this?
How to avoid it? Don't get fixated on it. Being on the 732 sim, the FD was basically useless, so I flew on the raw data... even when doing VOR or ILS intercepts, I used the FD as cues and reference, but not as a hypnotic order-giver... (I've seen someone get disoriented following the FD to intercept the extent that somehow, the aircraft ended up on a 45 deg bank and sideslipping well into the intercept convergence before crashing!).
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - the sprung force yoke has very strange control forces, it seems extremely easy to overcontrol due to the very gentle forces around neutral - especially in conjunction with the FD fixation. Does this cause a problem with newly qualified pilots?
If you're talking about pitch, trim it trim it trim it! 1st try was +/-500ft... by the 3rd attempt, was down to +/-50ft handflying.
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - the aircraft carries a hell of a lot more inertia than you would expect - even standard rate turns require substantial forward planning! How does this affect curved final approaches I.e Funchal/Kaitak?
Forward planning is always required regardless of aircraft type.
If you think that's fun, next time try being high on downwind (I mean HIGH!), turn to the final, configure for landing, and dive! Full flaps gear down idle thrust and chase the flap limit speed! (See how fast the altimeter can spin and how far your VSI can go without overspeeding), and then recover onto the visual slope... and be on Vref and stable thrust by the time you go over the threshold...
Lesson 1: vertical inertia and load factor drag!
Lesson 2: Engine idle rpm inertia!
Lesson 3: Now you can fully appreciate the stable approach criteria and why it's there!
Lesson 4: Damn it! It's fun! (but don't do it for real!)
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - finally, I watched the instructor make a smooth manual landing using almost constant adjustments on the yoke - I tried in a similar fashion and got the aircraft into some serious PIO - don't think the passengers were too impressed
Simple, practice practice practice! He had some, you hadn't! His advantage!
Hope you had fun doing it! Because that's what counts!
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13336 posts, RR: 64 Reply 4, posted (10 months 17 hours ago) and read 3707 times:
I agree. A few months ago I had to undergo engine power run training in a B747-400 full flight simulator at LH traing in FRA (We went through everything whioch can go wrong when you run aircraft engines at full power, starting from hot starts, hung starts, fires, going through surges and stalls to what to do if the brakes fail when the engines are running at max power and the aircraft jumps over the chocks). We still had an hour or two left at the end of the training, so the two training captains of our airline, who operated the simulator for us, set the simulator up for flight.
I´ve got to say that I flew it as if I was drunk and that I only avoided crashing into FRA´s runway by initiating a go-around. It is VERY easy to overcontrol the aircraft and to get it into oscillations.
I found flying a real aircraft much easier. On the other hand the 747 taxies much easier than the Socata Ralley I did some flying lessons in.
tom355uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (10 months 11 hours ago) and read 3574 times:
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 1): Just tell me how to set up the autoland systems
If that's all it was then it would have been easy-peasy! It was the hand-flown CAT 1 ILS into HKG that really finished me off, especially descending into a fog layer at 600ft and losing the visual reference!
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 2): people don't see the response speed they expect. They naturally put in more control and, by the time the airplane finally starts responding to their original input, they're *way* overcontrol. Then it repeats going the other way.
This is exactly what I did! Even though I was conciously saying 'wait for the response, wait to see what that does' I just couldn't help myself and got into a phugoid pretty quickly!
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 2): You have to stay ahead of the airplane. If you get even, or especially behind, you're screwed.
I couldn't believe by how much you had to stay ahead - at least 8-12 seconds for a standard turn. As part of the session, I flew over Victoria Harbour and into Kowloon Bay at 400 feet so you have to weave between the buildings - it was close on a few occasions, all while trying to keep another 2.5 degrees on the pitch to hold your altitude.
It was actually a former 732 Level-D, but the motion system has been disabled, it has an NG MCP and EFIS displays, and the vision system isn't quite up to scratch yet (there is no peripheral vision, it's basically a flat screen in front of the cockpit window).
I found the dual trim switches quite difficult to get used to (why not just have one for both ailerons??), plus the fact that the trim wheels didn't rotate so it was hard to judge sometimes just how much trim you are putting in.
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 3): Hope you had fun doing it! Because that's what counts!
I most certainly did! I've been offered the chance to return for a discount when all the details are ironed out, which I'm prety sure I will!
The instructor actually said it is easier in the real aircraft, the peripheral vision really helps with landings and the aerodynamic effect on the controls helps to damp out some of the oscillations.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 6, posted (10 months 9 hours ago) and read 3458 times:
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 5): I found the dual trim switches quite difficult to get used to (why not just have one for both ailerons??)
It's actually the stabilizer, not the ailerons, but that's not the point. Dual switches is a really easy way to provide greatly increased protection against stabilizer runaway due to a faulty (stuck closed) switch.
Doh!! Of course it is, try engaging brain before typing.
I understand that I guess, but don't the stab trim cutout switches on the pedestal have the same function? I just found it awkward, probably comes with experience
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 8, posted (10 months 6 hours ago) and read 3332 times:
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 7): I understand that I guess, but don't the stab trim cutout switches on the pedestal have the same function?
Not exactly. If you just had a single yoke switch and it froze closed (a not-that-unusual failure mode for most switches) you'd have to engage the stab cutout switches and fly the rest of the flight with no stab.
If you have two switches and one freezes closed no functionality is lost (you don't get a stab runway and you still have full control). You only have a runway if they both freeze closed at the same time, which is really really unlikely.
tom355uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (10 months 5 hours ago) and read 3279 times:
Oh, ok. I assumed that they controlled separate sides of the stabiliser. So, they are basically duplicates that can only operate the stab when both are closed? How does it function if one froze in the up position? Does the frozen switch automatically become redundant - and in normal ops is only one switch used at a time?
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 10, posted (10 months 5 hours ago) and read 3267 times:
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 9): Oh, ok. I assumed that they controlled separate sides of the stabiliser.
The stabilizer is all one piece; it can only move together. In some designs there are two channels to the stabilizer drive motor(s) but they work together.
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 9): So, they are basically duplicates that can only operate the stab when both are closed?
Yes.
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 9): How does it function if one froze in the up position?
Then you use alternate stabilizer trim (also a dual-system), located on the pedestal near the throttle levers.
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 9): Does the frozen switch automatically become redundant - and in normal ops is only one switch used at a time?
You always push both switches together. If one freezes closed, the other provides the intended switching function and life continues normally. If one freezes open, you use alternate stabilizer trim (a seperate set of dual switches). If both freeze open you use alternate stabilizer trim. If both freeze closed (the situation that you really are trying to avoid) you have a stabilizer runaway and you use the stab trim cutout switches to stop it.
BEG2IAH From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 827 posts, RR: 12 Reply 12, posted (10 months 5 hours ago) and read 3262 times:
I was lucky enough to fly a full motion A320 simulator at DEN and what I see tom355uk described here is exactly what I was doing. I took off with port side engine flame out at V1 and that was still ok (tons of fun too pressing the pedals). I kept overcorrecting at landing and the instructor kept telling me "the less is more", but the response to my inputs was too slow for my taste and by the time I see an effect I'm trying to overcorrect to the other side. I would typically be too high from the rwy threshold. We (crash-)landed and simulator didn't shut down, so I guess it was a nasty landing, but we survived it. Oh and this landing was with that engine still out, but the instructor pre-programmed yaw input so I didn't have to hold the pedals, which would be tough if I needed to keep doing it.
I also had a chance to take off in a CS100 static sim and I think taking off is not too hard. We'll see what happens when I finally start my PPL soon.
Use of approved electronic devices is now permitted.
tom355uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, RR: 3 Reply 13, posted (10 months 4 hours ago) and read 3237 times:
I kind of imagined an A320 might have been easier, what with the autotrim function and g-demand rather than pitch and roll rate demand controls. Probably not, but that's what I told myself!!
tb727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1375 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (10 months 2 hours ago) and read 3179 times:
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - the sprung force yoke has very strange control forces, it seems extremely easy to overcontrol due to the very gentle forces around neutral - especially in conjunction with the FD fixation. Does this cause a problem with newly qualified pilots?
Quoting tom355uk (Thread starter): - the aircraft carries a hell of a lot more inertia than you would expect - even standard rate turns require substantial forward planning! How does this affect curved final approaches I.e Funchal/Kaitak?
Sims are built to be a bit more sensitive than the real plane, believe me the real thing is easier. They do this on purpose so you keep your scan going and if you can fly the sim, you can fly the plane.
A sim is just a big video game, more or less. I only have experience with older ones since I fly old airplanes, but you know all the tricks after spending some time in them with the instructor. You know the exact heading correction for a crosswind every time, how to touch down smoothly(bank slightly on touchdown) and how much to lead a turn when close to the ground to line up with the runway. On short final in the 727 sim, it's easy to over correct to the centerline so you just use the rudders, something you wouldn't necessarily do in the real airplane. The lack of depth perception is particularly tricky and takes some getting used to, at least in the Level C I have been flying the last few years.
A bit of self gloss, I just spent 12 days in a sim and got my 727 PIC type rating yesterday I guess I knew all the tricks!
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 15, posted (10 months 2 hours ago) and read 3155 times:
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 5): As part of the session, I flew over Victoria Harbour and into Kowloon Bay at 400 feet so you have to weave between the buildings - it was close on a few occasions, all while trying to keep another 2.5 degrees on the pitch to hold your altitude.
Was the terrain the same as it was at the time of Kai Tak ops, or as it is now? Because if all the new buildings were in the model you'd have a very hard time!
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
tom355uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, RR: 3 Reply 16, posted (9 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3034 times:
Quoting tb727 (Reply 14): Sims are built to be a bit more sensitive than the real plane, believe me the real thing is easier.
That's what the instructor said. He's a 20,000hr captain who has spent his entire career on the 737 and said that the sim was only really any good for procedural use - as a tool to teach people how to 'fly' its pretty useless.
I believe the terrain textures were about 8 or 9 years old; for example I recognised both The Center and 2IFC on HK island. It was a very hard time, at 190kts/F5 the turn radii were just about tight enough. After passing Kai Tak we climbed out to 5000ft heading towards Tung Lung. Great fun though!!
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6180 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13336 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 827 posts, 
I guess I knew all the tricks!
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
