The Question - a very interesting article at flightsim

[yallu]

http://www.flightsim.com/main/feature/question.htm

So, would you raise your hand? 

[Maurice_King]

You would have to be a complete cretin to think not, There may well be many things that simulation can't handle like the real thing BUT Radio traffic,  Look Out, Cockpit checks and a host of other things become second nature to us flying the Sim now when you go jump in the real deal everything is intuitive as the instruments work the same the Flap application, Retracts etc all are second nature.

Of course this would only be valid if you were being guided by a licensed pilot or instructor and they cloud well pick anything you were not addressing properly and this would stand you in much better stead when you get to fly in the real world.

When I was in training my instructor had at the flight school FS98 and 2000 as a training aid for navigational exercises. The Sim has progressed to a far higher standard than that now and so has the realism factor, as many here will attest too.

[Meerkat]

I for myself as self-confessed low 'n slow flyer (isn't it the main target group of FTX?  ) surely would say no. Too unfamiliar with the heavies. But impresive article... Would be interesting to know how many Orbx addons this 1 hour sessions was worth. 

[Mithrin]

I wouldn't know anything about the systems on any of these heavies. Still, if no one raises their hand then the best man available should step up I guess!

[Martin Henare]

I have flown a Boeing 737 sim, and found it gret fun and relatively instictive. More instinctive than FS as you get a much better sense of movement.

Where ideas of taking over the controls in an emergency start to get scary is when you have a few rides in the jump seat on the real thing. The first thing that gets you is the shear speed, you never get the the sense of speed until you sit up the from. Take off is incredible as the end of the runway rapidly approaches you, to the point where you think, are we going to take off?

Climb and cruise are fine as that sense of speed reduces as you get higher. I my experience the pilots hand flew the departures, and did so very accurately with respect to the Nav displays flight path.

Descent is where reality hits again. Blasting thorugh the clouds that sense of speed gets to you again. The activity between the the crew grows as you get lower, but you soon understand why there are two in the flight deck. A single pilot airliner pilot would get burned out pretty quickly especially during busy traffic and weather conditions.

Final approach you can see the runway... only just, but the speed at which it arrives, i am way behind the curve, not to mention the wind and weather.

The last 500 becomes a blur and touch down is much further down the runway that you expect. Stopping again the end of the runway rockets toward you an again you have doubts that the thing will stop, you get a sense of the mass of the aircraft.

I'd give it a go if there was no other option, but damn it would be scary! Simulation these days is pretty good, the real world dynamics are different. To give MS credit FSX is the first one where i have had started to get that sense of speed on approach, but only just

[tennyson]

Incredibly, this very thought has haunted me for many years as I have flown internationally up to 3 times a year and nationally as many times again.

I guess that has somewhat formed my fascination with the big jets and I fly the 737 regularly.

I have no doubt that anybody thrown into that harrowing situation would try their best and maybe just knowing ILS or approach speeds or just generally keeping it straight and steady could save a life or many, but as has been mentioned, it is simulation and as such does not afford us the feeling nor the speed that the real thing does.

It is tough to predict how one would cope in such a situation, but just maybe that knowledge could save your life one day.

I thought the article was wonderfully written and I enjoyed it as well, thanx for bringing up the subject, yallu,

Frank

[Boogus]

i've often wondered about this. You've seen movies where this happens but the real thing must be nuts.

I could land a bush plane no problem - everytime, even in bad weather. But a heavy I'd be seriously out of my element. I've tried to fly lear jets in FSX and I always overshoot the runway.

[John Bosch]

Interestingly, Mythbusters attacked this very issue. They both tested their skills in a NASA simulator based on FSX (typically mythbusters though they don't brand the plane). Neither of the two of them had ever had any flying experience and only very little mucking about with flight sims. Both landed the plane with very little issue once guided by an experienced pilot on the ground. When left to their own devices both crashed.

The motto was. The modern jet almost flies itself when there's somebody on the ground to talk a partly savy person through the process. They basically concluded that if both pilots ate bad chicken any person used to the basics of technology (screen, knobs, buttons, etc.) could, most likely, be talked through the process of bringing the plane home. The movies are a little redundant now

[Singletracker]

I'd have a bash 

[John Bosch]

I'd have a bash 

All the time saying ... remember how small it is ... remember how small it is ...

[Appliance]

Naughty, naughty Singletracker. 

A380 pilots don't count in this thread. 

[flyingblind]

I remember talking to an ex fighter pilot one day as to why they are almost always short of pilots. Apart from the education and high demands of the training his comment was along the lines of  "theres plenty of loud mouths on the ground.....get up there and it sorts them that can and them that can't out, most can't,simple."

Same kind of thing when I'm putting around in the club PA28, get a few pax friends who are keen as mustard on the ground come time to get up and let them shadow my controls and its normally no-way!

Flying solo is challenging but doing it in a heavy @140knots (ish) approach speed takes a very special person and quite frankly i'd not take them up unless the only other option was our death!  

[Tim Harris]

mumbled something about my experience with Microsoft Flight Simulator. He nodded understandingly and I got the distinct feeling that I had just been categorized

lmao!! every simmers nightmare

that was a great read...so perhaps all this simming will have a use one day..

[Heiko Glatthorn]

Great read indeed  . I was landing the 15 Million USD Thai Airways 777 motion simulator manually at Bangkok Intl. in calm conditions ( vid http://www.flightsimworld.com/downloads/viewfile/526.html ). No problem, BUT everything was completely set up and i could concentrate 100% on flying, trim, FD, ect. I believe if you are completely on your own and you have to set up everything yourself in a cockpit you never saw before, you are in serious trouble. If there is enough time and somebody can give you precise instructions and explanations, you have a chance. I think so...

[yallu]

Well, the question was: can an experienced 737 PC simulator pilot land a real 737 (well, it happened in a simulator too, but since Boeing guarantees it performs the same as the real thing...), not if just anyone pulled from the street can do it. There's a difference. I don't know how big it is but judging from the article, there is a difference...

[Martin Henare]

The motto was. The modern jet almost flies itself when there's somebody on the ground to talk a partly savy person through the process. They basically concluded that if both pilots ate bad chicken any person used to the basics of technology (screen, knobs, buttons, etc.) could, most likely, be talked through the process of bringing the plane home. The movies are a little redundant now

I saw that one, was pretty cool. But they were flying an A320, which has a lot of automation. The 737 NG depends, Boeing offer Autoland as an option, but i don't think many customers take up the option as few airports have autoland rated ILS systems, so you sort of need to hand fly the last few hundred feet.. the scary part. So yes an instructor on the ground will be able to guide you onto an automated approach assuming the airport in question has ILS, but more than likely you will have to take over eventually.

Now theres a good question assuming you are to land at YMML and the wind is a moderate Northerly, do they put you on a crosswind 27 ILS approach or get you to hand fly a 34 approach.  \

[yallu]

IMHO the wise thing to do would be to turn the AP off... Just to get some feel for the plane and the other vital controls (throttle, trim, flaps etc) before trying to land it. Might be too late for that if you switched AP off during the final moments before landing...

BTW, in 737 (or Airbus) where is the button you need to push to talk? I might be able to select the proper channel and tune the proper frequency (if I found some charts in the cockpit to get the frequencies) and even set 7700 as squawk. But it would all fall into a very basic problem: where's the button you need to push to talk? In the yoke/stick? Hehheh...

[tom]

I don't think that simming would really put us in a position to think we could successfully land a tube, BUT ...  if the professionals were for whatever reason disabled, I would certainly prefer that whoever elected to (or was elected to) deputise, was an accomplished simmer, than just some yobbo prepared to " 'ave a go!".  .

Cheers

[mal998]

Lovely article! He obviously knows a hell of a lot more about flying a 737 than I do .

As a side note, many years ago, I had the occassion to fly Eastern Airlines 727 simulator at KMIA. I don't know how realistic it was compared to the real plane, but I can tell you, it wasn't anything like I expected it to be. I gingerly proceeded to crash the poor thing several times. Of course that was many years ago, well before flightsimming existed! No telling how I'd fare today, but I have a feeling, probably not much better! 

[yallu]

I don't think that simming would really put us in a position to think we could successfully land a tube

Well, the guy in the article did it successfully... It wasn't the real thing but it wasn't FSX either...

[Holy Cheese]

I flew in the old Swissair 747 simulator a few years ago, did the Checkerboard approach at Kai Tak and managed to land safely  Mind you, the Swissair pilot beside me did most of the work, all I had to do was follow the flight director and put her down.

I'd be inclined to agree with those here who said that given the assistance of somebody qualified on the other end of the radio, the chances of a safe landing should not be so bad providin all systems on the aircraft were still intact.

Jack

[Jay Kae]

Well.. if noone else would put their hand up... we would be the next best thing and the only slight hope everyone has I suppose so yeah... for sure :)

[Martin Henare]

BTW, in 737 (or Airbus) where is the button you need to push to talk? I might be able to select the proper channel and tune the proper frequency (if I found some charts in the cockpit to get the frequencies) and even set 7700 as squawk. But it would all fall into a very basic problem: where's the button you need to push to talk? In the yoke/stick? Hehheh...

On the 737 and probably all Boeings, there are 6 ways to PTT.

On either Yoke there is a trigger switch on the outboard grip handle at your index finger position, it is a two position PTT, the upper switch is you selected radio PTT, the lower one is the Intercom PTT. (Warning the Trim Switches are on the top operated by your thumb, dont touch this!!!)

On both Audio control panels is a toggle switch with R/T and I/C

On either side below the side windows is a hand held mic which operates like any mic.

All will transmit on the selected comms system. Now the issue is to ensure you have the right one selected and that your on a frequency that some one will hear you on. 

Would suggest you put the headset on so you can hear, though you will most likely hear all comms through the cockpit area speakers.

This is where Helios fell apart as the young guy who tried to call for help did not know how to use the radios, or if he was transmitting on a frequency that any one was hearing him on.

So for the 737 its simple, most likely the VHF will be selected to the last used radio contact so that would be your best bet. To check (from Capt pos) look down to your right, and identify the Audio Cont Panel ( A row os rectangle buttons along the top, and two rows of small knobs below), the row of mic selector buttons will have one illuminated. The Illuminated one is the Comm system that will be used when you use the PTT. Ensure it is one of the VHF, most likely VHF1. If your out over the ocean HF would probably be your best bet as VHF is line of sight.

Then call for help, if no response after a few goes, try VHF2.

I wouldnt attempt any changes of frequency until you have given the VHF1 and VHF2 frequencies a go.

If it was a Decompression, put on the oxy mask if you can find it and put the bugger into a dive immediately, idle the throttles and push the yoke forward, this will override the Autopilot, which will disconnect when enough force is applied to the yoke. I think the argument now days is that an overstressed airframe but a few people alive, is better than everyone dead. Just remember to level off at 10000ft. 

Ok so perhaps being an NG LAME i might fair better that the average sim pilot, but it would still be damn scary!

I cant speak for the Buses, though i imagine the ACP is similar if not the same, and there is probably a similar range of PTT options.

[John Dow]

Further to TheodKiwi...

If it became obvious there was no way to contact anyone on the radios a non-standard approach to the nearest ILS equipped airfield should alert ATC that something was amiss.  The safest place to cross an airfield is right across the middle.  Once the airfield has been alerted, two large circuits at 2000' agl using the autopilot to keep airspeed and altitude safe, should signal to those on the ground that the aircraft is under control but unable to talk.

As for the landing phase, if you have ATC then it would be best to hold the aircraft in a pattern until an experienced type-rated pilot could be used to talk you down.  Once contact has been established, he (or she) should be able to vector you into an ILS capture and use the APP mode to bring the aircraft down to as close as possible.  If it has autoland then it sould be used!  Otherwise let the APP mode bring you in, with the right airspeed and in the ILS beam you can take over at the last possible moment, once you hear 50' an idle setting and a flare would almost certainly result in a survivable landing, even if you got it wrong and bounced or went sideways.

Without any outside help, I think an ILS capture with the APPR mode, for the longest available runway, would be the best bet.  With the right airspeed over the threshold, an autopilot disconnection as soon as you hear the 50' call shouldn't result in any surprises, and moving the throttles to idle and flaring, even a little, ashould result in a survivable landing.  My guess is that even without a flare, an ILS approach of 3 degrees at 150kts unflared would result in a heavy bounce but a survivable landing.  Better to have the big bounce of a hard landing than a stall at 50' because of excessive flare.

[ravemtech]

I'm into VFR flight simming.  23 yrs ago had my pilots licence but got married to that ended that.  3 yrs ago,  I had a 1 hr flying lesson and got heavily into flight simming flying the 150 and 172 as a result.  Two months ago,  I had my second flight in 23 years, and my first ever flight in a 172.  The instructor was a bit shocked that I did not need the cheat sheet for start up and runup, and was a little surprised over my ability to keep fairly accurate turns.  When the landing came,  we had a 10 kn + cross wind.  Other than a little drift at the end, no problems.  2 more circuits with no problems.  The aircraft felt familiar,  except this 172 had carby heat where FSX does not.  I got asked repeatedly if I was telling the truth about when I last flew, but was not game to tell him about my flight simming (incase of a rude comment.  There is no doubt having an instructor next to me was a confidence boost knowing that if something went wrong, he was there,  but even so,  the sim made a massive difference.

[yallu]

Another "little" thing that is not often fully modeled in the most realistic FSX paywares is after the landing. What if the landing wasn't exactly center line and you need to turn the plane a little to avoid skidding out? Rudder will loose it's effect quite soon right? But how soon? Below 80 knots it's gone? Then there's the toe brakes, are they enough during the landing roll to straighten the plane? How soon do the brakes burn or do they? When do you touch the nose wheel and does it need to be unlocked somehow?

Heh, this is fun speculation. I'm sure most cold headed FSX people could even select a proper STAR for the FMC IRL, config ILS etc., but do they know how to operate the nose wheel - get my point? Things that seem minor when it comes to modeling complex FSX payware jet addons might be the most important if you suddenly had to land the plane in an emergency.

[VH-WCE]

I hav the Level D 767 and PMDG 747. I love flying the heavies when i need a bit of a break from flyin low and slow.. which is how i mainly fly I would love to have a flight in a proper sim. Hopefully i can get a flight in the flight experience sim for my b'day this year lol \

would be great!

yallu this is pretty true! there must be some minor things not in these planes that are in the real thing.

but..... I would really love a flight in the flight experience sim! It looks really good and would be great fun!!!!

cheers,

[Singletracker]

In all seriousness, you would find those who fly FSX complex heavies, would have a pretty good chance at landing one in real life.

But if your life depended on it the best bet would be not to disconnect the autopilot at all. Jets at high altitude are very unforgiving when flown manually (not modeled in FSX), that's why we tend not too.

Even in the case of an Incapacitated pilot, training dictates you use the Auto flight Systems to the maximum. So if you had NO ONE qualified you would really want to make sure you don't disconnect (workload triples). If you followed instructions, you would need to just sit there and pull idle when told and let the auto pilot and auto brakes stop the aircraft on the runway (Reverse not required). Even a non AUTOLAND capable airliner would still touchdown at a half acceptable ROD anyway.

The advantage a flight simmer has, is knowing what the person on the ground is talking about as far as instruments and MCP/FCU selections go.

It's like me having a go at flying the space shuttle out of the HAC to a safe landing. Love to have a go! But probably not if I was doing it for real with no training LOL 

[maxter]

Thanks for the the perspective ST, what would be the minimum ground equipment you would need to facilitate some level of successful autoland or in todays world of GPS's etc, all that is required is contained internally within the aircraft's own navigational databases.

Cheers,

[Singletracker]

Minimum for Autoland is an ILS, At this stage there is no stand alone Autoland capability in any aircraft, GNSS approaches aren't accurate enough for an Autoland function, and as such at MDA -50 the Autopilot kicks out (Airbus) so you would have to land manually. The 380 for example has an approach function called FLS, which gives the pilot an ILS style display for any non precision approach (GNSS,VOR and NDB). If it is a runway aligned approach you can leave the display up and it's just like an ILS but the Autopilot will still drop out at Minima -50ft.

GLS approaches are coming in now but they still require ground based augmentation to the GPS guidance, this improves the accuracy of the system to allow Autoland (and a lot cheaper to install). GLS appears identical to an ILS from a pilot perspective.

So I guess if our would be pilot/flight simmer passenger was at YPLM for example and didn't have enough fuel to make YPPH they'll be hand flying the landing. And as I said previously, I'd say most with a lot of FSX jet experience would probably pull it off. It might not look good, but hey better than crashing. As the guy in the article found out, the biggest hurdle was trying to stop over controlling, and that takes practice. Something you won't get in the above scenario.

Hell, I have to flare 3-5 times to find the ground in the Carenado 182, it just looks wrong. By the 3rd circuit I seem to find the wheel height. Someone should do a study on "Can a real pilot fly FSX as well as a flight simmer" I'd say it would read much like the article above! 

[maxter]

Thanks mate,

Much appreciated,  Cheers.