Slashdot Mirror
A Worry For Some Pilots: Their Hands-On Flying Skills Are Lacking (nytimes.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Pilots now spend more time learning automated systems than practicing hands-on flying, so newer pilots are less comfortable with taking manual control when the computer steers them wrong, according to interviews with a dozen pilots and pilot instructors at major airlines and aviation universities around the world. "The automation in the aircraft, whether it's a Boeing or an Airbus, has lulled us into a sense of security and safety," said Kevin Hiatt, a former Delta Air Lines pilot who later ran flight safety for JetBlue. Pilots now rely on autopilot so often, "they become a systems operator rather than a stick-and-rudder pilot."
As a result, he said, "they may not exactly know or recognize quickly enough what is happening to the aircraft, and by the time they figure it out, it may be too late." [...] While automation has contributed to the airline industry's stellar safety record in recent years, it has also been a factor in many of the crashes that have still occurred around the world. A 2011 study by a federal task force found that in about 60 percent of 46 recent accidents, pilots had trouble manually flying the plane or handling the automated controls. Complicated automation systems can also confuse pilots and potentially cause them to take action they shouldn't, pilots said.
As a result, he said, "they may not exactly know or recognize quickly enough what is happening to the aircraft, and by the time they figure it out, it may be too late." [...] While automation has contributed to the airline industry's stellar safety record in recent years, it has also been a factor in many of the crashes that have still occurred around the world. A 2011 study by a federal task force found that in about 60 percent of 46 recent accidents, pilots had trouble manually flying the plane or handling the automated controls. Complicated automation systems can also confuse pilots and potentially cause them to take action they shouldn't, pilots said.
This is nothing new. It is a recurring topic, especially after Asiana in SF. Hand flying is a no-no these days so skills go away.
Children of the magenta line...
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
I would never pilot a plane without a physical connection, wires or hydraulics.
But I'm not an airline pilot nor can I afford any plane that doesn't have wires, let alone a fly by wire system.
But at some point a decision will need to be made...do we have pilots or do we have cockpit managers?
Fly by wire is probably unavoidable in the future, but I think that every airliner will need a mode that provides a direct link to the control surfaces without a computer making decisions and overriding input.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Of course, this will go spectacularly wrong when someone manages to program a plane to do something that it's not supposed to, and the pilots will have no ability at all to correct it, even if they *ARE* trained to.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
they have lost the ability to think correctly
just do tests
and not even understand that 95% sensitivity is actually pretty fucking terrible
How about training pilots how to fly?
Also, does anyone else read this story as, "I don't know how to do my job, but I want to keep getting paid to do it."?
Fucking stupid.
"Alexa, pull up. Alexa? Alexa! Alexa, pull up! Alexa, PULL UP ALEXA ALEXA PULL UP ALEXA OH MY G--------"
While automation has contributed to the airline industry's stellar safety record in recent years, it has also been a factor in many of the crashes that have still occurred around the world.
And here we are were the humain brain is noteably bad at: Estimating rare risks. Is there a "sweet spot" on how much pilots should lidten to technology and how much to their seat?
bickerdyke
That sounds representative, particularly if they volunteered because this wished to express their concerns.
The article says automation is the cause of "stellar" safety. So is this a numbers game? We accept the odd crash caused by the difficult interface between human and computer control in return for fewer crashes overall. I'd rather go with the numbers. Perhaps they just need even better automation response in these situations rather than ever giving pilots the ability to crash the plane.
This issue has been a concern for more than a decade. The more pilots use automation, the more their manual flying skills languish. Manual flying is a skill that one must practice to stay current. It may be like riding a bicycle, you never forget, but the fine skills required to fly accurately without the automation is something you can loose. It takes practice to stay current and proficient. It takes practice to be smooth and accurate, like playing a musical instrument it takes regular playing to keep your skills sharp.
There have been a couple of instances where the pilots where faced with the loss of automation and made mistakes with their manual flying. Or situations like Asiana Airlines Flight 214 where the automation wasn't set properly and the manual flying skill and experience wasn't enough to notice and avoid the accident. Pilots and airlines LOVE automation. Pilots like it because it makes their job easier (when it works). Even an unskilled pilot can fly like a pro using automation. I've been in simulators, and although I've never flown anything more complicated than a Cessna 172, I can get the simulator on the ground without balling it up, usually. Airlines love it because it allows the aircraft to be operated in the most efficient way, saving them fuel and maintenance costs.
But button pushing and turning dials isn't flying. Pilots are spending lots of their time managing and monitoring the automation and very little flying the aircraft. It's hard to keep your manual flying skills in top form, when you do mostly button pushing and turning dials
When the automation fails, and you are forced to grab the controls and fly while trying to diagnose what's wrong with your aircraft, Navigate, Communicate with ATC under high stress, you really want those "stick and rudder" skills sharp and current. It's one less thing to think about while you are trying to wrap your head around what is wrong with the aircraft.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Would it be that hard to just require that all pilots must fly one entire flight a week in full manual mode, just to keep their skills up?
My cousin's husband has been an airline pilot for about four years. Pilots with less experience usually get the "crappier" routes. So he has to fly down to the Caribbean pretty regularly. According to him, it's pretty good training, as you are sometimes landing on airstrips where air traffic control consists of one guy on a raised platform with binoculars and a radio. It's usually all manual when taking off and landing down there. He lives in the south-east, so it's probably common for his area.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
There's really no way for a pilot to take direct control of an aircraft?
There are ways(*).
According to TFA, the young one are more reluctant to use these ways and switch into manual.
(Or even *realise* that they need to switch into manual).
---
(*) /. pilot to pop-in for the details with their real-world experience.
e.g.: Airbus' Normal law vs. Alternate law - which basically dictate who has the last say regarding what controls what. But we'll need a
(in McCoy voice) "Dammit Jim, I'm a Doctor not an aircraft pilot!"
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
But let's not let that be a concern here.
If you can't feel the airplane motions with your stomach, you are not flying material.
Automation doesnt breed greater safety... it breeds greater dependence on automation.
I wear a necklace, cause I wanna know when I'm upside down. - Mitch Hedberg
#DeleteFacebook
A preview of self driving cars ... the question is whether the risks are greater from the autopilot than from the human.
The human is not going to be as well practiced if they normally use autopilot. That's unavoidable.
I bet this is a general problem though and occurs across all automated systems and AI systems - the degradation of human knowledge, skills, and abilities. And from those things come the next advances. Automated systems and AI will kill advances by freezing systems into the current state of knowledge. Advanced Technology-caused Stasis.
E Proelio Veritas.
program a plane to not reject bad sensors!
This is why I detest, generally, all these automated driver assists and they way the industry talks about auto-pilot for cars.
It makes the average person a worse driver.
It teaches people they don't have to be mind-full of their surroundings.
... and, despite vigorous activity, never left the Earth.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Since when is going to Caribbean countries "crap"? It seems like a fun (and relatively inexpensive, depending on country) trip.
Because, when flying from the southeast US, most of the Caribbean is *just* short enough to be considered a "day trip" so you don't get to stay overnight. You fly there, deplane, load up, then fly back. Also, you are mostly flying over water, which is boring. The quality of the airports is pretty variable, as well. Anywhere from a typical modern airport to the aforementioned landing strip. For the more "rustic" airports, the pilots tend to have to do more mechanical work as the ground crews can be unreliable or nonexistent. This means crawling around the plane checking everything in the Caribbean heat.
A "good" route would be flying from Chicago to Dallas, hang out in the nice pilot's lounge for an hour, do a quick check of the plane, fly back to Chicago, hang out in the lounge... repeat...
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
... because I used to have a solid memory for most of the landline numbers I needed to call.
Now, I say, "Hey Siri? Call Sue."
I got no fucking idea what her phone number is.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
As people adopt autonomous vehicles, they will either slowly forget or never learn in the first place how to drive in the conditions that make the computer freak out. This is why handing control back to a driver is, at best, a stopgap solution. Within a generation of cars that drive themselves 98+% of the time, most of the population will be unable to drive manually.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
The other problem with automation is that it can't handle the unforeseen. I doubt that any company building aircraft would program an airliner with both engines out to ditch in the Hudson.
If the pilot can't take full and confident control in an emergency, you can probably kiss a lot of irreplaceable lives goodbye.
Landing, taking off, and recovering from a stall are the difficult maneuvers for a jumbo jet. The highjackers didn't have to contend with any of those since they took control after takeoff and they were going so fast that stalling would have been near impossible.
My friend the airline mechanic told me that accident reports are designed to protect profits. The pilot will always be blamed. Any suggestion of bad design, poor construction or mismanaged maintenance has dire consequences for manufacturers, airlines and others including politicians who depend upon political donations.
My friend has often told me of his discoveries as he goes about his work. Inside a jumbo jet wing he may find beer cans, panties, drug related garbage, as well as tools and loose parts. He found this shocking so he took it upon himself to investigate every airline accident.
Each accident results in a huge report after a multi year investigation. Those reports are available to anyone willing to study hundreds or thousands of pages. The summary will say the pilot was at fault, but if you read carefully you will discover many disturbing facts about the condition of the aircraft.
It shouldn't be necessary to explain to jaded Slashdot readers that money is the motivator in most corporate and government behavior. Blaming the pilot is the way to reduce costs and bad publicity. If there is a flaw in the airplane, it will be fixed quietly.
...omphaloskepsis often...
so besides pilots incapable of actually piloting, we'll have drivers incapable of actually driving (no pun intended).
because unlike dumbass californians sleeping while in teslas, pilots still need to be awake and paying attention while flying in that mode.
I did fly around in glider planes now and then. That's very visceral. Stall the thing, you *know* you're losing control. So regularly when I'm watching mayday / aircrash investigation episodes, I'm like "nose down! pick up speed! get control back! THEN try and get back on track", or something like that. A number of crashes might possibly have been avoided if the pilots had caught on to stalling and remedied it in the obvious way.
Frankly I find it amazing, but intellectually I understand that big airline pilots need stick shakers for them to even notice a stall. Apparently this lack of viscerality is how air france 447 managed to fly into the sea and nobody noticed. That and a couple other things with pilots not being in full control, being kept by a smart aleck computer confined to "safe spaces" that weren't so safe after all. A glider plane will really just lose lift, drop its nose on its own, and you'll *know* when that happens. You can feel the air flow disengaging and so your wings lose lift and your control surfaces lose control. If that didn't wake you up, that violently dropping nose will, hopefully. At that point you steer with it until you get control back, then ease out of trouble. Of course, you lose a good bit of height while doing that, so doing it too close to the ground can end with you sitting on the ground in the remains of the airplane, and you can count yourself very lucky if all you got is a few scratches. Apparently big aircraft, even just motorised aircraft, work differently. They certainly crash differently.
Anyhow, I'd be very uncomfortable flying if I knew the pilot didn't have hands-on experience with stalls and the like, or was even the slightest bit uncomfortable with taking manual control. Who's the pilot here, hm?
It also makes me a little jealous. Back when, prospects for pilots were dim. Expensive training (and now I'm like "but what tf do they even teach the kids there?!?") and probably no job. So I skipped on that "opportunity". Fast forward a couple decades, and they can't find enough experienced pilots so they'll just hire almost anyone? Why, maybe I should fire up the old flight sim for a bit again, eh. Haven't hit 50, so maybe. But no, the cut-off for pilot school was something like 29 and three quarters, and I'm way past that. Oh well. I'll take the train when I need to be somewhere, and plan accordingly. Only 80 days around the world, what.
u stop. ur a dumbass who doesn't know better than to denigrate others far more knowledgeable than u just to feel better about urself.
The freedom to fly is greatest in two countries - the US and Canada, where anyone suitably trained and documented can get in and fly. And the little Cessnas and Pipers aren't the highly automated Boeings or Airbuses, they're quite manual. If you're lucky, you'll have a partial autopilot - one axis (elevator) usually, fancy pants ones have two (elevator and aileron).
One could fly from one end of the country to the other, avoiding controlled airspace and thus not talking to anyone if anyone so desired.
Some other countries notably Europe, imposes fees on flying. Lots of taxes. Sure they have some GA flights, but to do so requires a fair bit of perseverance and money.
The vast majority of countries though, make such thought of flight impossible.
Now tell me which pilot will likely have the best flying skills? The one who can on a spare day roll up to their little airport, get out and fly, or one who can only fly the bit iron and the simulator because the only other flying is military..
It's why I worried less about the US and Canada being late to the grounding party for the 737 MAX - the pilots here simply have better access to flight on their spare time than pretty much everyone else.
The only way to maintain stick and rudder skills is to fly stick and rudder, and really, that's stupidly easy to do in the US and Canada - you literally get to the airport and fly - no permits, no flight plans (within limits), and other than fuel, no taxes to just punch holes in the sky.
In China, they noticed this and the Chinese military let civilian pilots have a narrow slice of sky to fly between two airports in China. But you tell me - who will be the better pilot - one who has to put down their wings at the end of the day, or one who has access to the same sky they were just in?
And no, you don't have to own your own airplane Renting is popular, as is renting an instructor.
Tesla drivers are going to be in the same boat.
I have to brake? Which one's the brake again?
We're over automating everything. We're robbing people of purpose and centralizing control in fewer and fewer technocrats. Ever wonder why the tech companies seem to identify with socialism and communism? It's because tech is about control. Taking control from the people operating and giving it to the political leaders. It's not just planes folks, look around. When is the last time you did something that is not tracked by some automation? Hell, you know what is a great DDOS attack? Cut off one of those new Toyotas with the auto obstacle detection systems...big fun. Because you're too stoopid to drive people...too stoopid...here, let us do that for you so that you can focus on more strategic tasks...
Pilots becoming Uber Safety drivers in shock when reality intervenes. But Idiocracy predicted this you may recall
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
A common joke is that being an airline pilot pays well enough for pilots to afford flight hours.
Flying used to be a passion. The traditional path is to first start as a student pilot at a young age, then get a private pilot licence and get a bit of experience on light aircraft. But flying is expensive, so the next step is usually to become a flight instructor. Next is IFR qualification, larger aircraft, professional pilot licence and finally airliners. But airliners are pretty boring when it comes to actually flying, so it is not uncommon for pilots to fly light aircraft or gliders during their free time.
It results in awesome pilots. Being a flight instructor in particular is excellent training: not only you are pilot in command, but you also have to let your student make mistakes so that he can learn from them, only taking back control when safety requires it. Gliders are the best when it comes to stick and rudder handling. Because your goal is to stay up for as long as possible, you really need to feel the air and be extremely precise. Every small mistake and unnecessary movement come with a cost in term of altitude and speed.
But there seem to be a new breed of pilots who just go to a flight school, do the minimum number of hours to pass the test and reach the status of airline pilot as quickly as possible. And while these guys are definitely hard working and competent, they spent most of their time as students. They are not used to being responsible for their own safety and that of their passengers when an instructor or captain have their back for almost all of their flight hours. And they may not have the passion needed to think about flying during their free time after a week of flying professionally. And while these pilots are perfectly capable of operating airliners in normal conditions, when shit hits the turbofan, that's when it makes a difference.
Case 1) Before "The Miracle on the Hudson" there was "The Miracle at Gottrora" https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Executive summary...
* Scandanavian Airlines flight 751 (MD-80) took off
* The wings were not properly de-iced by the ground crew.
* Clear ice broke off from the wings and was ingested by the 2 engines, located at the tail end of the plane.
* The left engine caught fire, which was extinguished, but it was basically dead
* The crew reduced throttle to limit further damage to the one functioning engine
* With a competent pilot, the plane should have been able to limp in back to the airport, on one engine, for an emergency landing
* But at this point the ATR (Atomatic Thust Restoration) algorithm kicked in. It basically said, "thou shallst not reduce throttle whilst climbing during take off".
* It tried to to get 2 engines worth of thrust out of the one remaining engine.
* Not a good idea. Just like redlining the shit out of your car engine, this quickly destroyed the remaining functional engine.
* The crew managed to dead-stick crash-land in a snow-covered field without killing anybody.
* Of the 129 people on board, 25 were injured, 2 seriously, but no fatalities. That's why it was called the "Miracle at Gottrora".
Case 2) As for the 737 MAX, at worst, MCAS should sound an alarm, it should *NOT* over-ride the pilot, and drive the plane nose-down into the ground. If the 737 MAX can't be easily flown by a competent pilot without the MCAS band-aid, the 737 MAX should have its airworthiness certificate revoked.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
This is news because of Luddites afraid of flying and computers and tech they don't understand. The risk of aircraft crashes is trivial. The total casualties are trivial compared to other modes of transportation.
Aviation "safety" before modern systems was ghastly. Don't have too much respect for meatbags in cockpits. Some are awesome but most aren't. In WWII the US crashed nearly as many aircraft in CONUS as it lost in combat.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
I am not a pilot, but I recognize concerns that effect other life-and-death professions and skills. The wisdom of the comments above is that automated flying is safe and efficient, but it can go wrong, and when it does, somebody with skills needs to be at the helm. But, if automation robs pilots of hands on experience, their knowledge to handle the emergencies is compromised. The focus in pilot training should be to ensure that they get the hands on flying time.
My anesthesiologist colleagues always describe their profession as hours upon hours of sheer boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror. Automated ventilators, monitors, and iv fluid pumps regulate most of the mundane tasks, making modern anesthesia one of the safest things you can possibly do. But, when something goes wrong, no system of automated controls or AI powered technology can take over for the seasoned anesthesiologist. It's a matter of life and death, not 150 lives at a time as on a 737, but one life at a time, which can add up.
As a surgery resident, I learned the tried and true statistics that hernias are mostly a natural condition, and that post-surgical incisional hernias were infrequent. When they did happen, they were usually for legitimate reasons, and later on, they could be fixed, reliably, by the same experienced surgeons who knew how to avoid them in the first place. Then, circa 1990, surgeons started to use the laparoscope to do abdominal surgery without incisions. Mostly, that has been a huge benefit to the public, reducing hospital lengths of stay, minimizing many conventional surgical complications, and making once difficult operations safe and effective. The downside though is that surgeons have since forgotten how to properly make an abdominal incision, and especially, and more important, how to repair it. Since 1990, there has been an exponential rise in the rate of incisional hernias, the rate of failed hernia repairs and recurrent hernias, and severe morbidity to accompany those bad results. Furthermore, instead of focusing on acquiring the lost skills, surgeons have turned to companies who manufacture a boatload of flawed plastic implants that have made the problems far worse. (Search if you will on terms such as "hernia mesh complications" or "hernia mesh lawsuit".) The problem has reached epidemic numbers, and the death rate from complications of that sort now almost certainly exceed the casualty rate from commercial air accidents. As someone whose career has become ever more focused on fixing those unnecessary messes, it is all too obvious that a new technology that is valuable for ordinary everyday simple affairs robs the professionals and practitioners of vital skills needed for the unusual and extreme problems.
A while back I saw a short on TV, sad but true. A man and woman, professionals in business suits and brief cases, enter a huge high rise office building and start riding the long tall escalator from the lobby to the third floor. Half way up, there is a power outage. The escalator stops. They look around bewildered, and call out for "Help, is there anyone who can help us?" They knew not how to walk up or down the escalator, idiots of the technology era. Technology is wonderful. But when the lights go out or the software balks or nature doesn't cooperate, people need to have foundational skills. We as a society have made a mistake putting so much focus on teaching new exciting chi chi technologies, and forgetting the reasons for learning the ABC's, the 3-R's, and other essential skills. For a surgeon, sewing up an incision so it does not fall apart is a fundamental skill. People suffer when surgeons fail to do so. I am not a pilot, but I can appreciate that stick and rudder skills are of the same essential importance. Our educational systems need to be corrected to supply those essential skills.
Nice grammar there... American.
Another study from 2011 shows that the new Firefox 4.0 browser is steadily losing market share to a new upstart "Chrome" browser from Google. I'll be sure to keep monitoring these trends...
Captain Warren Van der Burgh gave a lecture at American Airlines in 1997 that addressed this topic. It was an engaging study of several scenarios where aircraft automation can defeat the intentions of and task-saturate flight crews.
From his conclusion:
It was especially true decades ago, given the accident history of the 1990s, and remains poignant even with our better understanding of the limits of automation.
We're talkin bout planes, not trains, nor automobiles. Also, please do not throw your momma from any of these.