Atlas 767 (Amazon livery) Down

[Orbit]

13 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

 

For clarity: AF stall/upset training is largely unchanged and only good for small aircraft like our trainers. Maybe our fighters, I don’t know I don’t fly them.

FAA AC 120-109 and AC 120-111 are the changes to which I was referring. If you’ve gone through an enhanced stall/upset recovery syllabus it is eye opening.

Executive summary: “max relax roll” and minimizing altitude loss in most large aircraft is not the best way to recover.

 

The 217 is gone, the AF is not teaching "max relax roll" any longer. 

At least we should not be teaching that.  Kinda hard to stay on top of all of these pubs changes in the last year or two.  

[ThreeHoler]

The 217 is gone, the AF is not teaching "max relax roll" any longer. 
At least we should not be teaching that.  Kinda hard to stay on top of all of these pubs changes in the last year or two.  

The 217 isn’t gone. It is just one pub with the 202 because it is a digital pub.

Stall recovery should be a per airframe procedure. Sadly, most AF simulators can’t accurately reproduce a stall. It is a pretty big upgrade for civilian sims from what I’ve heard.

[Hacker]

On 7/25/2020 at 5:16 AM, brabus said:

It amazes me how much some professional pilots (mil and civ) can lack humility/scoff at other types of flying or specific training. I have a couple thousand hours in fighters, but landing a tail wheel the first couple flights felt like I might as well be back in UPT. It’s been fun as hell learning TW/GA aerobatics, and it has absolutely made me a better pilot overall. Every pilot should do it as soon as they can afford to. 

Most pointy-nosed guys I take out for an hour in this thing find it one of the most humbling (and most fun!) stick-and-rudder experiences of their flying career.

Edited July 26, 2020 by Hacker

[HuggyU2]

That’s cool!  I got a ride in one in Uvalde Texas a few years ago.  Just beautiful!

[hindsight2020]

5 hours ago, Orbit said:

The 217 is gone, the AF is not teaching "max relax roll" any longer. 

At least we should not be teaching that.  Kinda hard to stay on top of all of these pubs changes in the last year or two.  

wut? Stay in your lane bruh. As a T-38 stall sortie IP, I can tell you it's the cornerstone of what we do, and there's valid reasons for that. If you want to advocate these are not handling characteristics that lend themselves for big airplane pilots to recover their wagons, by all means. But that perspective is clueless in the tac trainer realm. Horses for courses.

If it makes you feel better, we're going into a T-6 direct to FTU simulators. So the herbies should have a pretty blank slate to work with here coming real soon with "UPT 2.5". 

The -217 is not gone. It's embedded in the 202, as  @ThreeHoler alluded to.

Edited July 26, 2020 by hindsight2020

[Bobsan]

12 hours ago, FLEA said:

Thanks for the circular #s. I'm going to look them up. 

https://www.faa.gov/pilots/training/air_carrier/enhanced_pilot_training/ they're all linked to from here, as well as the new sim requirements

[ThreeHoler]

That’s a great link thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[herkbier]

AFFSA had any interesting article on the origins of max, relax, roll and why GA is abandoning that for relax, roll, max (or relax, max, roll). 
 

As a blown wing, constant speed prop, instant power and lift C-130 dude, I’ve found that just bumping up the throttles a bit is generally sufficient.. but I can see how trading altitude for airspeed makes sense for anything that has a spool up time. 

i dunno, I just have a degree in social sciences. 

[AirGuardianC141747]

It was great to see upset recovery training on a much deeper level enter our training environment. I had asked for years why not have something more focused beyond basic departure/approach stall recovery in the commercial sector. Unfortunately like in the Air Force or any other entity it seems - it takes a bloodshed moment to address the situation. Biggest takeaway for myself was crew communication and actually had time for self induced upsets to reiterate to myself it’s back to the basics as it was during the AF days. Always floors me when we have extra sim time and all my partner wants to do is leave half the time. I just drag it out with raw data, engine out (multi sometimes), and standby instrumentation flying, etc. Come up with some challenging variable - It’s there, use the time given. 

[FLEA]

18 minutes ago, AirGuardianC141747 said:

It was great to see upset recovery training on a much deeper level enter our training environment. I had asked for years why not have something more focused beyond basic departure/approach stall recovery in the commercial sector. Unfortunately like in the Air Force or any other entity it seems - it takes a bloodshed moment to address the situation. Biggest takeaway for myself was crew communication and actually had time for self induced upsets to reiterate to myself it’s back to the basics as it was during the AF days. Always floors me when we have extra sim time and all my partner wants to do is leave half the time. I just drag it out with raw data, engine out (multi sometimes), and standby instrumentation flying, etc. Come up with some challenging variable - It’s there, use the time given. 

I honestly don't understand why we stand on this pedestal of "we make the worlds best pilots" because of this. I mean you look at our entire history of how we teach aviation its reactive. The origin stories of AIS, IRC, CRM etc... in the military are written in blood. Its really sad. I could see this being another one on the list in 5-10 years. 

[Bender]

The 217 is gone, the AF is not teaching "max relax roll" any longer. 
At least we should not be teaching that.  Kinda hard to stay on top of all of these pubs changes in the last year or two.  

Do you teach primary pilot training? Last I check (today), we are.

~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

[Tulsa]

Relax
Roll
Power - As Required
Yaw - Control

works in tubroprops

What is being taught in turboprops vs jet these days?

Edited July 28, 2020 by Tulsa

[arg]

We still run guys through stall recovery in the AC-W sim. Pilots who have done it during test flights say the sim duplicates it pretty well.

[TreeA10]

In my last couple of passes through the AA schoolhouse for 787 and 777 recurrent training, we have done full stalls clean at altitude, @FL400,  and stalls configured inside the FAF.   The stall series requires pulling the throttles to idle and holding attitude allowing the speed to bleed off while ignoring the warnings and using enormous back pressure on the yoke to hold attitude to allow the stall and sink rate (i.e. Air France 774) to fully develop.  Unload while applying full throttle to recover works nicely but altitude loss, no surprise,  will occur in both cases.  We've also done severe upset recoveries on departure or vectors to approach.  The stalls you knew were coming, the upset not so much but in both cases you knew something was going to happen.   How you simulate a complete unknown and generate a startle effect with the subsequent confusion, I'm not sure, but shoving the nose of a big jet 30 degrees nose low ANYTIME is just not right and how to prevent that through training might be a question to ask.

[FourFans]

I keep coming back to the CRM bit.  Upsets happen, whether crew induced, automation mismanagement, turbulence, or spacial-D.  Doesn't matter how it happened, any crew member in the seat should always be aware and ready to take the controls.  In multi-place aircraft that have a small enough flight deck, NOTHING communicates "I have the aircraft" and snaps the offending dude out of it as quickly as physical contact (i.e. backhand to the shoulder), ESPECIALLY when the guy on the controls is unconscious of his error.  The flinch mechanism is strong when you're stressed, and usually works quick.  I have yet to fly with a kid that A: didn't want me to smack him, or B: failed to appreciate it's effectiveness afterwards (a memory check says I've used this avoiding 2 pattern stalls, 3 unrecognized spacial-D's and 1 bad habit of calling the gear down before they're down).

People may not like it, but there is no denying the effectiveness of physical contact as a confirmation or intervention reinforcement.

My question for this 777 crash remains: what was the Captain doing, especially when flying with a known low performer?  The audio makes is sound like he was completely unaware.  

As for stall training, I find it laughable that we as professional pilots going back for refresher training would NOT want to explore upsets and deep stalls to a PhD level.  I personally see no reason to ever delay power inputs in these situations (ALL engine have a spool up, even if it's 4 seconds).  I also advocate pilots exploring the effectiveness and energy saved by unloading the aircraft before maneuvers in upset and stall situations (constraining this type of training to the sim only).  Amazing how quick an aerodynamically unloaded aircraft responds to inputs, regardless of attitude or energy state.

The only hard and fast I stand by: Recognize, Confirm, Recover.  Beyond that I don't believe any recovery should ever be rote.

Edited August 4, 2020 by FourFans130
words

[Prozac]

On 7/27/2020 at 11:49 AM, FLEA said:

I honestly don't understand why we stand on this pedestal of "we make the worlds best pilots" because of this. I mean you look at our entire history of how we teach aviation its reactive. The origin stories of AIS, IRC, CRM etc... in the military are written in blood. Its really sad. I could see this being another one on the list in 5-10 years. 

I’ve been at the Airline thing for a few years now and here’s what I’ve learned on this subject. There are excellent aviators and sub par aviators that come from both military and civilian backgrounds. However, the military trains (for the most part) all of its pilots to a known standard. While there are a few who slip through the cracks, I think the range of skill levels of military trained people tends to be a fair bit tighter than for the group with purely civilian backgrounds. Of course “civilian background” encompasses a wide range and I’ve seen some absolutely shit hot pilots with backgrounds in aerobatics, firefighting, bush flying, and a wide range of truly impressive flying experience. But you can make fewer assumptions about a civ vs mil guy. I know I’m generalizing here but here’s a personal example: When I get paired with a person for training, if they are a prior mil aviator, I can generally expect them to show up prepared, practice good CRM, competently execute a V1 cut, and generally have my back in the sim. When paired with civ only guys, I’ve seen the gamut of skill levels, and significantly, a much larger percentage seem to approach training with trepidation rather than as an opportunity to learn and receive feedback. Like I said, I’ve seen some downright stellar aviators with pure civilian backgrounds and not trying to knock that group. My own experience tells me that the military puts out a more consistent product though. 

[FLEA]

2 minutes ago, Prozac said:

I’ve been at the Airline thing for a few years now and here’s what I’ve learned on this subject. There are excellent aviators and sub par aviators that come from both military and civilian backgrounds. However, the military trains (for the most part) all of its pilots to a known standard. While there are a few who slip through the cracks, I think the range of skill levels of military trained people tends to be a fair bit tighter than for the group with purely civilian backgrounds. Of course “civilian background” encompasses a wide range and I’ve seen some absolutely shit hot pilots with backgrounds in aerobatics, firefighting, bush flying, and a wide range of truly impressive flying experience. But you can make fewer assumptions about a civ vs mil guy. I know I’m generalizing here but here’s a personal example: When I get paired with a person for training, if they are a prior mil aviator, I can generally expect them to show up prepared, practice good CRM, competently execute a V1 cut, and generally have my back in the sim. When paired with civ only guys, I’ve seen the gamut of skill levels, and significantly, a much larger percentage seem to approach training with trepidation rather than as an opportunity to learn and receive feedback. Like I said, I’ve seen some downright stellar aviators with pure civilian backgrounds and not trying to knock that group. My own experience tells me that the military puts out a more consistent product though. 

That's a good way of putting it and I hadn't thought about the known standard. I just find it hard to hang out hat on pedestal when our emperical data shows we don't really grossly out perform the civil sector in anyone area and often underperform in many others. Class A mishaps for one. Some years we do better, others worse, yes I understand we undertake more risk than civil sector but a lot of our mishaps are basic shit, not tactical. Anyway, I'm just being jaded. We do have some phenomenal aviators in the AF. I'm just annoyed at how good aviation skills is consistently put on the back burner in the AF. 

[SurelySerious]

30 minutes ago, FLEA said:

We do have some phenomenal aviators in the AF. I'm just annoyed at how good aviation skills is consistently put on the back burner in the AF. 

Yep. I thought we had kinda gotten better about this in the last few years, and then I watched a person in our wing who is tactically dangerous and useless, who prioritizes qweep above flying at all junctures, and essentially needs as much flying oversight as a CGO that you give to senior officers get pushed for tons of awards and receive a top push line. 

Edited August 4, 2020 by SurelySerious

[Hacker]

As Ernie Gann wrote back in the 60s:

“All airline pilots are subject to the high cock-o-lorum of seniority, whether they like it or not. The system was established to banish favoritism and to provide some basis for assignment of bases, routes, flights, and pay. Its great fault, as in any seniority system, is the absolutely necessary premise that all men are equal in ability. The dullard and the genius must both live with the ostrich philosophy that one man can fly as skillfully as another. No one, of course, maintains this to be a truth. But the seniority system must ever persist if only because it is a protection of the weak, who are everywhere in the greatest number.”

Edited August 4, 2020 by Hacker

[arg]

On 7/28/2020 at 5:31 AM, TreeA10 said:

In my last couple of passes through the AA schoolhouse for 787 and 777 recurrent training, we have done full stalls clean at altitude, @FL400,  and stalls configured inside the FAF.   The stall series requires pulling the throttles to idle and holding attitude allowing the speed to bleed off while ignoring the warnings and using enormous back pressure on the yoke to hold attitude to allow the stall and sink rate (i.e. Air France 774) to fully develop.  Unload while applying full throttle to recover works nicely but altitude loss, no surprise,  will occur in both cases.  We've also done severe upset recoveries on departure or vectors to approach.  The stalls you knew were coming, the upset not so much but in both cases you knew something was going to happen.   How you simulate a complete unknown and generate a startle effect with the subsequent confusion, I'm not sure, but shoving the nose of a big jet 30 degrees nose low ANYTIME is just not right and how to prevent that through training might be a question to ask.

Our crews are on their best game in the sim so it's tough to surprise them with a stall, we don't do it. We do gradually fail flight instruments though, like ADI precession, that makes for some good recoveries.