Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pilots Precision  
User currently offlineBragi From Iceland, joined May 2001, 218 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1865 times:

The other day I was reading that a good instrument pilot can, while flying an ILS approach stay within +/- 1 degree, +/- 25 fpm and +/- 5 kts boundaries. Is that true?

When I took my private pilot checkride I had stay within +/- 100 feet (in cruise), +/- 5 degrees and airspeed +/- 10 kts. (That was no problem Big grin)
I also read about a B727 captain who often had a hood on himself when he was approaching to land (especially when there was good visibility) and he always managed to "slice" the runway centerline at the ideal touchdown point Smile.



Muhammad Ali: "Superman don’t need no seat belt." Flight Attendant: "Superman don’t need no airplane, either."
21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineB747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1828 times:

Standards to succesfully pass a 747 check ride are:
Steep turns at 45 degrees bank and + or - 100 feet in altitude, 5 kts in speed...
ILS speed within 5 kts, ON glide slope up to 1 dot ABOVE (NOT below)...
Hand flown ILS to 100 feet DH (one engine out)...
Pilot or co-pilot standards are same (all our co-pilots are "captain rated")...
xxx
(s) Skipper


User currently offlineBragi From Iceland, joined May 2001, 218 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1809 times:

That´s pretty strict...... but understandably because I doubt that anyone would want to fly as a passenger in an airliner controlled by someone who didn´t meet the hardest requirements.
But if you are doing great job in your checkride, and "mess" up the approach by drifting just beneath the glideslope, is that enough to get you failed?



Muhammad Ali: "Superman don’t need no seat belt." Flight Attendant: "Superman don’t need no airplane, either."
User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1802 times:

Not sure on type ratings, but on any other ride the examiner will often let you get another crack at it if you ask for it.


At worst, you screw up and die.
User currently offlineThirtyEcho From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 1639 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1773 times:

Those tolerances while shooting an ILS don't mean much. The idea is to stay on the localizer and glideslope, not to nail some numbers on dials inside the airplane. Heading, vertical speed and even airspeed will vary depending on what is needed to precisely hold the localizer and glideslope on the way down. Heading will change because of winds changing as one descends; rate of descent will change for the same reason and also for gusts up and down; speed will change as one adjusts for all of these variables. On a calm day, an experienced pilot should be able to nail a rate of descent, heading and speed that will precisely hold the loc and gs; however, such days are the exception.
What good does it do, for example, to hold plus or minus 1 degree of a heading if a wind gust takes you way off the loc?

Go try it in a 172 without being under the hood on some gusty, thermally unstable day and you'll see what I mean as you head down the ILS. Take a safety pilot along to watch for traffic while you have your head down in the cockpit.


User currently offlineB747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1752 times:

Dear PPGMD -
xxx
Agree with you, a check pilot may or may not be a little more lenient. I often conduct training then, a check ride in the simulator, and based on what I have seen from an individual, I know if he is good or not so good...
xxx
One thing though, the standards of a "type rating" ride (initial) are absolutely the same as a proficiency check... one difference is that "all maneuvers" are required for the initial type rating, while for a proficiency check we can waive a few maneuvers...
xxx
When an individual makes a mistake, - i.e. an approach is not progressing well, if he calls "missed approach" and does it correctly thereafter, this is what I consider good judgment and nothing is criticized...
xxx
Many imagine a simulator check being difficult - in reality most are very uneventful, I say that the last "training ride" before the actual simulator check is probably more demanding.
(s) Skipper  Smile


User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1694 times:

>>Standards to succesfully pass a 747 check ride are:
Steep turns at 45 degrees bank and + or - 100 feet in altitude, 5 kts in speed...

Woah! Steep turns in a 747... that's gotta be fun! Bet that bank angle limiter is going crazy!

- Neil Harrison


User currently offlineB747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1696 times:

All is performed in simulators - Neil
xxx
Besides, a 45 degrees bank turn, is normal training practice in any transport planes, we do it at 280 knots... nothing wild...
xxx
(s) Skipper


User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1716 times:

This may interest you all, the UK requirements for the initial 757/767 type rating. We have to conduct the following:

------------------------------------------------------

In the aircraft (Part 1):

Normal take-off and climb to circuit configuration

Visual circuit, approach without visual or radio glideslope guidance and fullstop landing using reverse thrust and wheel-brakes

In the sim:

Accelerate-stop with simulated failure of one engine before V1

In clean configuration, approach to stall (to onset of heavy buffet) and recovery

In landing configuration, a stall (to nose-down pitch after stick shake) and recovery

High Mach run (at or above 30,000ft) to IMN 0.86 and recovery with use of speed-brakes

Emergency descent starting above 30,000ft AGL through at least 15,000ft with recovery at a pre-determined altitude not below 10,000ft AGL

On standby power and with reference to standby instruments, both engines operating, ILS approach to 500ft AAL followed by a visual landing

In flapless configuration but with slats sealed, approach from 10 miles and landing

With stabiliser simulated jammed in the Vmo cruise position, approach from 1,500ft AAL and landing

Approach and go-around on instruments with both engines operating

With one engine simulated failed, an approach and fullstop landing

In the aircraft (Part 2):

Take-off with simulated failure of one engine between V1 and V2

With one engine silumated failed, climb to circuit

With one engine simulated failed, ILS approach without use of autopilot, with or without flight director, to Decision Height and go-around solely by reference to instruments

With one engine simulated failed, approach and fullstop landing using normal reverse thrust on operating engine

In the aircraft (Part 3 - at night):

Take-off with simulated failure of one engine between V1 and V2

With one engine simulated failed, climb to circuit

Visual circuit with one engine simulated failed

With one engine simulated failed, approach and go-around

With one engine simulated failed, approach and fullstop landing using normal reverse thrust on operating engine

------------------------------------------------------

For the ILS approach we must maintain less than half-scale deflection in azimuth and glidepath (except no fly-up indication is allowed), with plus or minus 5 knots on the appproach speed (except single engine when approach speed can be +10 to -5 knots of target). Start of the go-around must occur at +50ft to -0ft of DH (+100ft to -0ft on single engine).

Otherwise throughout the test we must maintain +/- 100ft, +/- 5 degrees on heading, generally +/- 5 knots on speed although the maximum airspeed error at any time is +/- 10 knots.

We also practice things like steep turns in the sim (45 degrees bank / 250 knots) but these are not assessed all that strictly as part of the "checkride", you just have to have a training record of doing it.

Hope this was all of some interest.



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41x From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4182 posts, RR: 37
Reply 9, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1681 times:

Given the right conditions, sure a good instrument pilot can do it. We had a nice smooth foggy morning the other day. I brought the saratoga in with 1 knot deviation on airspeed and the localizer and glideslope pegged the whole way. If it was more bumpy and windy, things get a little bit more variation in them. It is basically how proficient you are in your scan and how good and accurate your reactions are.


And steep turns are hoot on the heavies (done them in DC-10 and 744).  Smile
You dont have the flight directors on when you are doing them, so it doesnt bother you.

Also stalls (dont really go all the way into the stall, but you know what i mean) are alot of fun, takes a tremendous amount of back pressure if you dont trim the thing right to get it back to the stick shaker.

Quite possibly one of the coolest instrument procedures I got to do was an NDB approach with a sidestep with no automation or flight directors in the DC-10. Really really helps your awareness and accuracy on the approaches.



Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41x From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4182 posts, RR: 37
Reply 10, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1646 times:

Rick767: You guys actually do that in the aircraft flying around?


Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1624 times:

Yes, just the sections under "In the aircraft", not the stalls / high mach run / flapless landing, etc... which are all done in the sim.


I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6533 posts, RR: 55
Reply 12, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1637 times:

We don't have to do any simulated engine failures during takeoff in the aircraft. It's considered far too dangerous. We do a simulated one engine landing in the aircraft, but that's the only engine-out we do for real. Everything else is in the sim. In the aircraft we basically fly circuits and that's it!

User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1612 times:

Really? Do you do a single-engine go-around in the aircraft?

It is actually quite reassuring how well a 757 performs on a single-engine go-around, albeit in a rather lightly-loaded aircraft.

I would safely consider the engine failure after takeoff I did in a Seneca all those times in the IR training (with a visual single engine circuit to a low approach and go-around) far more dangerous than doing it in a heavily overpowered 757! The Seneca hardly climbed at all, the 757 still goes like a rocket on one RB211.



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 1624 times:

The type-rating requirements here in the U.S. are the same for all turbine-powered aircraft. They're found in the FAR's. It's possible to do the entire checkride in a properly certified simulator IF you meet all of the experience requirements. For the airline guys, the only thing they would need to accomplish in the airplane would be the IOE (Initial Operating Experience). For us Part 91 Corporate guys, just give us the keys, legally, we're good to go. (That's one of those cases where what's legal isn't always safe. I got type-ratings in the simulator and was fully qualified in the aircraft without ever having been in a real one. Not a problem, but I had to have someone show me how to work the door mechanism.)

Flying to such tight tolerances isn't that difficult; but you have to pay attention. I've said this before - one of aviation's little secrets is the larger the airplane the easier it is to fly. Large civil aircraft, as a rule, have a tendency to be quite stable in all axis and their sheer mass means that once you've got your desired speed established it usually doesn't take a lot to keep it in the ballpark. Like I said, they're much easier to fly than your typical light aircraft which, at times, can be quite challenging to fly - like herding puppies.

Back in my early days I had an instructor that told me to always fly exact altitudes, headings and airspeeds. If you wanted to cruise at 7,500 feet, for example, then fly at exactly 7,500 feet - not 7,400 or 7,550. Same with headings and airspeeds. When you're just out putzing around VFR, it's pretty easy to get lazy and to just "take what you get". Discipline yourselves to fly with precision initially and you will have a much easier time when you get your chance to upgrade.

Jetguy


User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 1608 times:

"Back in my early days I had an instructor that told me to always fly exact altitudes, headings and airspeeds. If you wanted to cruise at 7,500 feet, for example, then fly at exactly 7,500 feet - not 7,400 or 7,550."

I had an instructor who taught me exactly the same. At first I thought he was mad, and that the +/- 100 ft tolerance is there for a reason. He actually wanted me to cover the '0' at the top of the altimeter if flying at a 1,000ft interval, or cover the '5' if at a 500ft interval.

But I came to learn that it is actually much more achievable than you think. Learn the precision, predict the changes, and drive the thing "like a chauffeur driven limo" (as he used to say). Works in a Seneca and helps a great deal when they let you loose on a 757  Big grin



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 1608 times:

It may be of interest to some here to realise that just a few years ago, nearly all maneuvers for large aircraft type ratings were done in the actual aircraft. This was due primarily because there was no sim available for the type or the sim that was available was not certified.
Two of the heavies on my ATPL (B707 and L1011), all maneuvers were done in the aircraft, taking 'round about three hours to complete, with an FAA inspector, not designee. In both cases, altho a sim was available for training, it was not certified. In addition, approximately six hours of training was done in the aircraft, prior to rating.


User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 1586 times:

To go along with what 411A said, I got my Gulfstream G200 type rating two years ago, about a year before the simulator was up and running. The design was new on the market and there was no one with any significant amount of time in the airplane. (I ended up with the 9th type rating issued for the airplane.) The "instructor" I was provided with had less than 20 hours in the airplane and no time in anything comparable, so he was very little help. Long story short, it was a matter of going out and flying flying the airplane for a few hours until I felt ready to "invite" the FAA along to administer the type rating check ride. The ride in the airplane was thorough, but uneventful. Most examiners aren't willing to do too many "weird" things to you in the actual airplane other than the obligatory engine loss stuff. Not so in the simulator. Sim rides tend to be much more demanding. When the examiner doesn't have to fear for his life if a mistake is made he/she tends to be a lot more demanding. After all, when they've got you in the box for a couple of hours they really don't have anything better to do than to push any "systems failure" button they can find.  Big grin

Jetguy


User currently offlineB747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

Dear Rick767 -
I am surprised that UK CAA still requires flying the aircraft for all those maneuvers... As you know, almost everyone else does "all simulator training"...
xxx
When I got into the 747 - got the endorsement (type rating) at the end of my simulator training and had never been a second in the aircraft... The first time I sat in the LH seat in the 747 was for my 25 hours of IOE (initial operating experience) with a check captain in the RH seat, and some 380 passengers in the cabin, who whould have been concerned to know that it was my first flight ever, as a 747 pilot, and my first landing would be with them.
xxx
I did not realize you still do all that in the aircraft... must be expensive... I personally flew the 747 (out of the simulator) with no concern, and within minutes, found the aircraft easier to handle... than the simulator...
xxx
As you know, I have respect for the conservative training programs approved by the UK CAA - but I am convinced that actual aircraft flying in training does not provide anything better than simulator only training.
xxx
(s) Skipper


User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (11 years 6 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1519 times:

"When I got into the 747 - got the endorsement (type rating) at the end of my simulator training and had never been a second in the aircraft... The first time I sat in the LH seat in the 747 was for my 25 hours of IOE (initial operating experience) with a check captain in the RH seat, and some 380 passengers in the cabin, who whould have been concerned to know that it was my first flight ever, as a 747 pilot, and my first landing would be with them."

I would say (like Jetguy said before) this is one of those cases where legal isn't always safe.

You may consider that actual aircraft training adds no benefit to a thorough simulator programme, and you are perfectly entitled to that opinion. You have been doing this much longer than I have. But my own opinion is that the CAA training worked very well and provided the confidence needed to take a plane with 235 people on board down to sunny Tenerife one cold December morning on my first ever "proper" flight.

Didn't do a simulated engine failure and asymmetric circuit and go-around on that flight of course, but nevertheless I knew I could, and in the real thing. My personal feeling is the confidence those training flights provided was, and still is, a real asset.

I assume that the cost of this air training (like you pointed out) will in the future mean more sim and less flight time, ultimately to the same set of rules you follow - going straight from the sim to a plane load of passengers. In the UK at the moment, that is just a theory.



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineB747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 6 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1488 times:

I fully agree with you, Rick - that "having been in the aircraft" as part of your training is a factor in confidence level... but honestly, modern simulator technology is such, that doing a few "circuits and overshoots" is a rather expensive solution...
xxx
When you will transition to your next type aircraft, who knows what model, you will be a seasoned 757-767 pilot... I honestly do not believe, out of the simulator training, that an hour in the aircraft would make you any safer or better pilot... I believe that pilots who are "virgins" in a type of aircraft are far more careful than pilots with some 100+ hours experience on type, with a few hours of experience, we all come to be victims of complacency...
xxx
(s) Skipper  Smile


User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3451 posts, RR: 47
Reply 21, posted (11 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1426 times:

>The other day I was reading that a good instrument pilot can, while flying an ILS approach
>stay within +/- 1 degree, +/- 25 fpm and +/- 5 kts boundaries. Is that true?

True, if his instrumentation is that accurate and the ride is smooth.  Wink/being sarcastic
Having just returned (literally) from recurrent training I can safely recall the required deviation "callouts" as being +/- 5 knots from final approach speed, 1/3 dod deviation on localizer (half that when in expanded mode) and 1/2 dot deviation on glideslope. When flying the HUD, any deviation equal to about 20% of the above values would be cause for additional training time.... the HUD instrumentation really is that good!  Big thumbs up



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Pilots Precision
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...
Cessna 421 Pilots posted Wed Nov 1 2006 04:51:55 by Squakin1200
Health Of Pilots posted Thu Oct 12 2006 02:23:51 by PlymSpotter
2 Pilots + Engineer On BBJ (Privatair) posted Tue Aug 15 2006 20:03:10 by BlueFlyer
When Do Pilots Turn Tail Light On? posted Tue Aug 8 2006 23:54:43 by Eastern023
Do Pilots Use The Handholds In The Cockpit? posted Tue Aug 8 2006 17:08:56 by MechEngineer
Pilots And Mechs: Best And Worst Days At Work? posted Sat Jul 29 2006 11:18:42 by Matt72033
Need Help From Airline Pilots (FORMER And CURRENT) posted Tue Jul 25 2006 16:51:03 by V22
Pilots And Antidepressants posted Fri Jul 7 2006 10:10:34 by AR385
Random Alcohol Testing Of Pilots And Ground Staff posted Sat Jun 24 2006 01:48:58 by Julianuk
Question For Actual A340 600 Pilots posted Tue Jun 20 2006 20:42:01 by Tarzanboy

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format