Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
garf25
Topic Author
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 8:26 pm

757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Thu May 24, 2018 6:26 pm

I have a massive interest in the human factor and CRM.

Are there any pilots that have driven using the more classic FMC and basic EICAS setup and then the more modern 350/787 cockpit setup?
For me, the man machine interface between pilot and say the 757 was just about right. Nothing too complex, but you could get what you want from the FMC, clearly depicted on the navigation display with plenty of mental capacity to maintain situation awareness.
The newer technology is fantastic, with some incredible displays that must aid SA in a different way. Does it ever distract in anyway?

Which did you feel more comfortable flying? There is so much technology on the new, it must confuse from time to time. I.e. "I didn't know that function existed...".

Please don't turn this into an A v B, and please don't think I am against modern technology.
 
mmo
Posts: 2059
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: 757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Thu May 24, 2018 7:32 pm

I originally entered commercial aviation on the 727 after spending 11 years in the military as a pilot. The transition was simple to say the least. I have flown the 747, DC-10, A320, B757, 747-400, 777 and 787. To be honest, the transition was never an issue.

Personally, the advances in technology have aided SA exponentially, I have never felt uncomfortable flying the new technology. While the technology might be new, the basic systems are pretty much the same. The biggest change has been the implementation of more automatics, but the basic flying hasn't changed.

I don't agree with your opinion of the 757 at all. While the technology on the 757 was a leap, compared to what is available now, it is fairly rudimentary. Again, I think you are of the opinion more information is too much. I disagree. I think the more information you have allows you to make better decisions. If you get overloaded or distracted, you might want to consider a new career.

I do think, for younger pilots especially, the advent of the technology has made them more dependant on having it available. As an instructor, I have seen this time and time again. Try watching a low time FO do a visual from abeam the airfield. 90% of them, especially if they know what they will have as an approach will try to build one in the FMS. As I try to point out, flying the visual is the same as it is on a 150 or other light aircraft. Our aircraft is just bigger and faster.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16320
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: 757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Thu May 24, 2018 8:55 pm

I fly both the A330/A350, it is not difficult.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20760
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: 757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Fri May 25, 2018 1:36 am

Maintaining situational awareness is about extracting the information you need from the instruments, the view outside, and comms. The information you require is the same whether you're flying a 6-pack or a modern PFD/MFD setup. Improved presentation makes the process easier.

Can it be overwhelming? Not if you're properly trained and practice your scan. IMHO flying a standard 6-pack can be more overwhelming early on. The difference with modern instrumentation is that it "exposes functionality" much more clearly. With a 6-pack you really need to work on learning how to mentally integrate the information. With a modern PFD and so on, the "path to understanding" seems shorter. Just my €0.02.

Can you get all the information you need from the 757 instruments? Obviously yes. But look at where your eyes need to go, and the inconsistency in presentation between different gauges and screens.
Image

Can you get all that information more easily from more modern instrumentation? Obviously still yes. But in comparison it is all nicely collected and consistent.
Image

Will pilots in 50 years wonder how the heck we managed with our primitive 2010s era instrumentation? I don't doubt it. :D


garf25 wrote:
Which did you feel more comfortable flying? There is so much technology on the new, it must confuse from time to time. I.e. "I didn't know that function existed...".


The only planes I've flown with steam gauges are some light pistons, and most light pistons I flew were glass. I feel more comfortable flying glass, but much of that is probably habit. I'm sure if I flew an old 172 for a few hundred hours I would develop all the skills needed to a high level of proficiency.

Training should ensure you know the functions needed to do the job. You might not know everything about every function, but you know what you need in order to fly the plane safely and efficiently. In the end, if you need to do something, you'll learn and work out what steps are needed to do that something.

The "I didn't know that function existed" sort of statement mostly comes up with minor details. Like on the 350 you can enter a track offset by typing the number of NM, then clicking the Right or Left radio buttons. Or you can just type "3R" or "5L" directly in the offset box. Many don't know you can do the latter, but it's hardly hindering them from doing the job.
 
Max Q
Posts: 9051
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: 757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Fri May 25, 2018 2:25 am

Boeing vs Airbus is always worth discussing, it’s interesting comparing the two different philosophies no matter your preference so I’m not sure why you find that so objectionable.


The 757 and 767 were a substantial leap in technology when they were introduced and a great improvement in situational awareness compare to, say a 727



As stated, subsequent aircraft like the 777, 787 and the Airbus products have only increased this vital ‘SA’



The Automation is generally a significant workload reducer with one vital proviso


You MUST understand what it’s doing !
 
garf25
Topic Author
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: 757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Sun Jul 01, 2018 4:02 pm

Great responses on this, thank you.
In short, you have got to the point I suppose I was trying to make. If you are not well trained in the technology, then things could run away from you quickly.
I suppose one thought is that if you qualify under the mpl in glass cockpit single engines, and spend your career flying the newest birds, a complete failure leaving only standby instruments at night in IMC would need to be routinely trained for.....

Thanks.
 
stratclub
Posts: 1382
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:38 pm

Re: 757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:51 pm

I'm not a pilot, I'm an AMT (retired) and so I remember the old steam gauges on the 707 and do have a fair knowledge about systems on the 787 and would say that a modern aircraft could be mind boggling with the shear amount of information available about the aircraft's systems. In design, there was a lot of consideration for human factors designed in. So the aircraft mostly tells you what you need to know and monitors everything else.

It sure makes the man/machine interface a lot simpler than in the steam gauge days. If the engines have a problem, the EICAS engine display goes expanded mode and you get an EICAS message. It's the same with a lot of the other systems. I think they originally called it "The Dark Cockpit Concept" meaning instead of having to continually monitor a bunch of steam gauges, you watch for EICAS messages, which display at one of 3 different importance levels with a Master Warning light and aural warning for the important warnings.

I found that once I got my head around the concept, the familiarization and operational aspects of a modern aircraft were easy to learn. The cool part about it is all the information is still available to you if you just bring up the right screen all though some of the functions of the system (ground test etc) are only available for maintenance when the aircraft is in ground mode.
 
greg85
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:45 am

Re: 757/767/747 Technology or A350/B787 ??

Mon Jul 02, 2018 10:11 pm

garf25 wrote:
Great responses on this, thank you.
In short, you have got to the point I suppose I was trying to make. If you are not well trained in the technology, then things could run away from you quickly.
I suppose one thought is that if you qualify under the mpl in glass cockpit single engines, and spend your career flying the newest birds, a complete failure leaving only standby instruments at night in IMC would need to be routinely trained for.....

Thanks.


The standby instruments are also glass cockpit these days.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: WyomingWind and 9 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos