Position: SAE (Searle VOR; Ogallala, Ne.)
Altitude: 32,000 feet
Groundspeed: 415 knots (477 mph)
Compass Heading: 278 degrees
Equipment: A321 EnhancedPax-on-Board: 183 + 5 jumpers
Airborne... Day number three of four.
I am in the 321 groove again. I flew months without even sniffing a 321, and now almost every leg... Not complaining for I love this aircraft. Anyway, the methods and mysteries of aircraft routing is not for the great unwashed of the Line to understand.
We have been paralleling a line of Level Six thunderstorms for hundreds of miles and it appears to stretch all the way to the Rockies. The 321's multi-scan digital radar shows a clear depiction of those gigantic atmospheric water pumps to our left; to our right, another area of Level Six storms in a circular cluster about 200 miles in diameter. In between is a hole about 75 miles across; that is where we are, over SAE, along with many other airliners. The blow-off from the storm tops to our left has filled the gap with IMC (instrument meteorological conditions). We cannot see a thing outside except a gray nullity; no shape or form.
Light turbulence here... I asked the flight attendants to be careful with the carts, then flipped the seat belts sign switch to ON. The 321 is almost fun to ride through turbulence, as it has so much flex in the fuselage. The flight deck gently whips and twists on the forward end of the pressurized tube. The effect is mildly hypnotic...
My co-pilot is a thirty something guy that captains either love or hate... About half of my buds do not care for this guy, but I have no complaints. I have flown with him numerous times over the eight years he has been on the Line and I do not see the problem. He is high strung and very intelligent, one of the best aviators on the Line. There in might lie the problem... Not hard for such a co-pilot to make the captain's flying look ham-fisted. When I have a co-pilot like this, I give them all the flying; keep them busy and everyone is happy. That also allows me to pay more attention to the new enhanced Fi-Fi and her cutting-edge smoke and mirrors.
Other things...
I have received about forty plus email requests concerning Sully's new gig and his comments on AF447. I have not seen that report, nor am I interested in it. Whatever Sully says is OK with me; I would never disagree with him in public, or private. As far as I am concerned, he now walks with the Great Ones. He is, in my view, an aviation God. And he made the transition in two minutes and twenty seconds... What a staggering feat of airmanship!
Unbelievably, (well, maybe not...) I have heard quite a few Line pilots criticize Sully's actions because of listening to various expert's reports that he could have done this or that differently, etc. What a joke! Everyone of these talking heads would have been peeing their pants and crying for momma when both engines rolled back to idle thrust followed by the indicated airspeed trend arrow pointing at the bottom of the instrument case. Sully did not even raise his voice...
Free opinions...
Once again, here is my opinion on the question of multi-layered flight control systems controlled by a network of computers and managed by pilots. I think they are great! Better than great, actually... The Electric Jet can fly in the busiest and most complex airspace in the world, yet I could take any private pilot and have him/her flying this baby in about twenty minutes. Turn the magic OFF and it flies like any other aircraft, probably better than most. Stick, rudder, power... A wonderful flying machine.
Understand that is not what we Line pilots are trained or paid to do... We utilize every last transistor and circuit board in the Star Trek bay. The airlines that pay for these high dollar aircraft demand it. There is no time to fly for fun in the simulator; no flying under bridges or through the St. Louis arch like we used to do in the 737 sims. Every minute is required to train for the New World Order of airline flying; exotic instrument approaches, new airspace rules and regs, multi-layered system failures, flight computer failures, and on and on the task list goes mandated by multiple government agencies.
Once again, here is my opinion on the question of multi-layered flight control systems controlled by a network of computers and managed by pilots. I think they are great! Better than great, actually... The Electric Jet can fly in the busiest and most complex airspace in the world, yet I could take any private pilot and have him/her flying this baby in about twenty minutes. Turn the magic OFF and it flies like any other aircraft, probably better than most. Stick, rudder, power... A wonderful flying machine.
Understand that is not what we Line pilots are trained or paid to do... We utilize every last transistor and circuit board in the Star Trek bay. The airlines that pay for these high dollar aircraft demand it. There is no time to fly for fun in the simulator; no flying under bridges or through the St. Louis arch like we used to do in the 737 sims. Every minute is required to train for the New World Order of airline flying; exotic instrument approaches, new airspace rules and regs, multi-layered system failures, flight computer failures, and on and on the task list goes mandated by multiple government agencies.
Is there a fatal flaw in the Airbus Industries product design? I seriously doubt it. I believe I would have seen it by now. I am not a suave French test pilot by any means, (not even close) but I am a high-time Electric Jet pilot having flown these exotic aircraft in heavy weather on a regular basis.
The guillotine of the Enlightened Ones...
Heads will roll over AF447 and the pilots are always prime targets for head chopping. The two young co-pilots flying through the nightmare scenario will be made to look like complete idiots by a media machine that understands not one tiny, itty-bitty, molecular-sized iota of the FACs, ELACs, SECs; the Captain will be an indecisive nincompoop. I've seen it many, many times. If the pilots cannot be whacked, the manufacturer is next in line... Whatever, however, for sure heads will roll. The concept of a bad accident every zillion air miles just doesn't, uh, fly anymore.
Heads will roll over AF447 and the pilots are always prime targets for head chopping. The two young co-pilots flying through the nightmare scenario will be made to look like complete idiots by a media machine that understands not one tiny, itty-bitty, molecular-sized iota of the FACs, ELACs, SECs; the Captain will be an indecisive nincompoop. I've seen it many, many times. If the pilots cannot be whacked, the manufacturer is next in line... Whatever, however, for sure heads will roll. The concept of a bad accident every zillion air miles just doesn't, uh, fly anymore.
Navy pilots in our ten o'clock high...
Two Atlanta boys, maybe girls, in our ten o'clock high on the same compass heading. We cannot actually see them, but the fish finder (TCAS) shows them. Our mach number is exactly the same because relative position has not changed for awhile.
I look over at the co-pilot and ask him if he wants some fake coffee from the forward replicator. He points at his hours old Starbucks and says he would rather drink it cold. On the overhead panel, I push the lead flight attendant call button one time...
"Yeah, this is Cindy..."
"Cap'n Dave in the engine room... Would you make me a fresh pot of coffee, please?"
"I can do that darlin'... Call you back in a few..."
"Thanks..."
Are we there yet? No, not even close...
Life on the Line continues...
32 comments:
I'm a private pilot and have 20 minutes free. Think you can teach me to fly the 321 sometime? ;)
Captain Dave, thank you for yet another piece of delightful reading. I only recently discovered your blog (thanks to a link from an AF447 discussion) and took about a week to read it all the way back to the first post. Being a bit of an aircraft and aviation enthusiast, it's been enjoyable and enlightening to learn about a few things that are usually beyond the passenger's view. I will keep both eyes on this blog (and my RSS reader) and hope for many more articles from the Life on the Line.
Best Regards from South Africa
Alex
Hi Captain Dave,
I'll be on a flight from SFO to CDG in a couple of weeks and it looks like it'll be on the A380. I'm excited and a little nervous about it, but I listen to your words of reassurance. In fact, when weather gets rough on any flight, I invoke your name ... "keep me calm, Cap'n."
Those Air France pilots have deep confident-sounding voices even though I can't understand them in French or English.
When are you going to put up a photo of Sully on the sidebar?
Thanks again Capt. Dave. Another excellent post. I admire the respect you show toward Capt Sullenberger over untested blowhards. Keep up the excellent writing, and safe flying.
Captain Dave, your blog is amazing! Every time there's a new post, it's like reading a new book and you bring us on the flight with you. I hope someday I'm a passenger in one of your flights. Thanks for the great posts and please keep them coming! Cheers from Boston!
Ruben
You can order-up freshly made coffee? Wow, you rate!
Capt. Dave, first of all, great blog, I love reading it.
About the AF447... The fact that 200+ people died just because a Electric Jet lost its valid airspeed input is a clear sign for me that there IS a problem somewhere in the System (= aircraft + crew). I don't know whether there is/was something wrong with the Electric Jet or the crew or the interaction between the two or the procedures, but this was a disaster which could have been avoided and should have been avoided with a better System. So the System still can be improved and therefore must be improved. Airbus and the airlines must learn from this disaster. Airbus must re-think whether their aircrafts can be made safer in non-standard conditions and easier to manage their computers. The airlines must re-think whether their pilot selection and training procedures are really adequate for the airliners of the 21st century. I fully agree with Capt. Sully in this respect.
Fish finder..now that was funny!!!
Re AF447, Expert Talking Heads, Etc. My dad told me one time that you can always spot the pioneers and the people who are willing to take responsibility. They are the ones with arrows in their backs.
Agreed on loving the 321. I did 6 months of commuting Amsterdam-London mainly on BMI 321s. Its a very handsome aircraft if that is the right term. Does great tight turns too...esp if you're sitting near the back. Whats special about the 321 Enhanced for you Dave? Any particular quirks?
An engrossing post as always!
Bertalan- I disagree... The new and improved system will also fail, but in a different envelope. The engineers who work at Airbus Industries are the best in the world. On the pilot selection... Oh, please give me a break. Have you ever tried to get an airline job? It is almost impossible.
Captain Dave, On any layover you have in SFO, I have a Brewery/Restaurant near the Giants ball park. Let me buy you and your team dinner and everything else. File under: Returning the favor.
Capt. Dave, we do disagree :-) A system _can_ be made safer by plugging in the safety holes. If you keep plugging in the holes (carefully, so you don't introduce new ones), you'll get less failures. This approach worked very well in reducing the number of air accidents. Of course if you design a completely new system from scratch... Well, that's another story. Then new get new safety holes.
I'm sure that there are many brilliant engineers at Airbus, but I'm not sure whether all of them can think with a pilot's head, which is essential if you design a plane which is supposed to fly itself (sort of). For example, in the AF447, when the airspeed decreased below 60 kt, it became "unreliable", and it was no longer taken into account by the computers. As a result, the stall warning stopped. Now that's not very clever design, to put it mildly. The pilots pulled on the stick, and the stall warning stopped. They pushed on the stick, and the stall warning sounded again. This must have been very confusing for them, since it is completely opposite of what you expect. (Unless you are flying inverted, and you are in an inverted stall.) And even if this information is written in the flight manual (I hope it is), will you remember it in the heat of the moment?
So how can we avoid such pitfalls? Either you are a kind of person who remembers such things even in the heat of the moment (pilot selection), or this information is emphasized during the training and you train it in the simulator (pilot training), or best yet if this information is not in the manual, because the aircraft doesn't behave in such an irrational way (system design). So there is room for improvement.
I know it is very difficult to get an airline pilot job. But what does it have to do with pilot selection? I don't want to have less pilots selected, I just would like to have them selected slightly differently. Once I read a book by the former chief pilot of Malév (Hungarian airlines). Unfortunately he is not among us any more. He wrote that during his career, when doing check flights with (would-be) captains, he met many who should have never become airline pilots, let alone captains, simple because they didn't have the necessary abilities. So he failed them in the check flights, which in the political era of the time (we talk about a socialist/communist country in the 70s-80s) raised quite a few eyebrows. But his strictness worked, because the series of disasters which plagued Malév in the 70s finally stopped. You also say that 10% of the co-pilots whom you fly with are just so-so. Could we get rid of them and replace them with great ones? Can we save the lives of some passengers if we do so?
BTW, I've never applied for an airline pilot job, because the planes I fly have no engines :-)
From the AF447 reports, it sounds like the pilots didn't know they were stalling because there is no AoA indication in the cockpit.
Would it have changed anything if when the airspeed became unreliable that the speed tape switched to an AoA tape? It doesn't sound like 'pitch and power' works very well in heavy turbulence, but perhaps this could at least prevent the wings from becoming useless....?
Keep up the fantastic work. Love every blog!
Capt Dave, I'm not qualified to judge FiFi, but I certainly trust your judgement so that's enough for me. Love what you said about Sully too. He flew F-4's too, I think. (already qualified for godship there) Enjoyed your comment about the ride up front being hypnotic during light turbulence. Riding in the back of an ol' P2V-7 was a hoot in rough air as well, akin to having a tiger by the tail at times. Looking forward as always, to your next post!
Fantastic post, bravo.
Bertalan, crashing on a night flight because of losing airspeed indication has happened several times to non-Airbus planes.
Cap'n Dave -
I'm sure you have been asked this question before, but what do you intend to eventually do with your several years of meditations on this blog? If I remember correctly, the mandatory retirement age has been upped to 65; that still leaves a lot of life beyond. A nice book royalty would be helpful to buy a few Starbucks I'm sure.
Yes, Tinchote, I know that other planes are also vulnerable to this type of failure. So some common re-thinking is needed how to handle this situation. Maybe get the airspeed from GPS? I know that getting the IAS (or TAS) from GPS (or Galileo, if ever...) is rather difficult and error-prone, but might be better than nothing.
I think many people like myself with technical backgrounds, but who are not in the aviation industry have wondered: Why are pitot tubes the only instrument on modern aircraft capable of measuring airpseed accurately (no backup technology)? And why can't GPS be used in some way? So I searched, and this is what I found. (You know this stuff of course, but it might be of interest to others reading through the comments at my lowly level of knowledge.)
It is a mistake to believe that aviation engineers all over the world have missed the obvious, and that the system is "flawed" because these engineers don't have the sense that can be mustered by the casual observer. There must be reasonable answers, and turns out there are.
A simple internet search provides the answer to the GPS question. GPS provides ground speed information only, while the pilot needs very accurate airspeed information to keep the aircraft from stalling. Ground speed could be different than airspeed by hundreds of miles per hour, so it's not useful for this purpose. That's easy enough to understand.
So what about an alternate to the pitot tube? Well it seems most of the research I can find is based on using doppler lasers (BAE, for example, has a fews links on this). The motivation is military now, but it wouldn't surprise me to see this eventually make its way in some form to commercial aircraft in the future (maybe as a backup to the pitot tube, or the pitot becomes the backup). Why doesn't it exist already? Probably because accidents involving modern jets are extremely rare, and accidents caused by pitot tubes are a tiny, tiny subset of an already rare event. The AF447 accident will probably shift more money into this effort though.
Every time I get on an aircraft, I try to remember that moving around on the runway to and from the gate is really the most dangerous part of the trip.
I think it is also important to recognize that engineers have purposefully designed the system with as much automated sophistication because it optimizes safety. The unfairly defined "pilot error" ends up being the main cause of accidents because Deep Blue (Fifi) only hands over the controls when she cannot win. How would anyone like their odds of winning a chess game if they only get to play when Deep Blue gives up?
http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/SharedServices/Divisions/AdvancedTechnologyCentre/FeatureArchive/bae_ss_atc_.html
Dave, Thanks for another great post. I'd comment on everything, but don't want to waste your space. Try three items: 1) Your 'management' of that bright FO, simply giving him the flying, is brilliant and everyone is happy. 2) I too am not about to second-guess Capt. Sully. I'm not a jet driver. I do not know if his procedures were correct, incorrect or could have been improved. What I do know is that they worked. He and his FO partner did not wet their seats and managed to deliver everyone alive and with minimal innuries. In my book, that IS good enough! 3)I'm still not a jet driver and I'm not about to pre-judge the fellows that were driving AF447. I'll wait until the final report is issued, read it and rely on a couple of Electric Jet experts to help me understand whatever is reported. I too have not seen Sully's on-air comments (I don't do TV), but it is a fair guess that he did not jump to any conclusions with only a preliminary report in-hand. He's too smart for that trap. OK, a fourth: I don't know what routes you fly, but the PAX counts and jumpers always seem to be at maximum. I sure hope that 'WE' make a profit this year! Keep on posting, sir. Great material! -C.
"The 321 is almost fun to ride through turbulence, as it has so much flex in the fuselage. The flight deck gently whips and twists on the forward end of the pressurized tube."
What a fantastic image! (I wouldn't have wanted to see Bev's face when she read this though!)
Love "the fish finder" mind picture also.
Thanks for your more frequent posts, Captain Dave, and for giving so much of your time and effort to please so many.
New Electric Jet, 40 years from now, per Airbus. What do you think Captain? (slide show with video at the end).
http://www.businessinsider.com/airplane-airbus-future-concept-2011-6#in-2050-planes-will-have-a-bionic-structure-that-mimics-bird-bones-airbus-says-1
wonderful blog dave. I have read it regularly for over a year now and have many of your shots as my desktop photo.
Cap'n Dave, I completely agree with your elevation of Sully Sullenberger to the pantheon of great aviators. I would like to observe though, that those who write so well of the flying experience deserve recognition too. You have a wonderful gift for observation and a powerful, light-handed way of describing the life of an airline pilot. When you finally walk away from the Electric Jets and write a book about your experiences, it will be right at the top of my list to buy. Thanks for sharing your experiences with us all.
Hi Dave!
Long time reader, first time poster (sort of as they would say for radio station call-ins). Just wanted to commend you on management of people's opinions on your blog. This one, along with a couple of other of your posts, I can just picture you cringing as you read some of the comments about the specifics of flying airliners on a daily basis.
The fine line you walk between showing your true opinion and not offending some of the commenters is exquisite and what makes this blog so much fun to read. And of course, your passion for aviation is contagious!
Btw, I send this as a message not a post, so it really doesn't belong in the comment chain. Just wanted to say thanks for the great writing. I fly a lot for work always hoping it's a pair of professionals like you sitting up front. For all of us folks in the back I sincerely hope the job stays fun for you guys!
-Dmitry
Enjoying your recollections and circumspect commentary on AF447. That's why I read you.
My day job often involves putting disparate puzzle pieces together in an effort to create a whole. The pilot maxim that an accident is the result of a chain of events where changing the outcome of any one will change the result applies to AF447 as well. Since I do know software I give a bit of credence to the reports about elevator trim running amuck that did AF447 in. With all of what they had to contend with in that short few minutes I don't believe either pilot even thought to check whether Fifi through the trim. That wasn't even in the flight manual for the A330 until seven months after the accident.
In the end I agree that the media is too quick to vilify the pilots or the manufacturers or the carriers when, in the end, everyone will really be part of the cause in varying degrees. That said, I'm not sure I could sleep well until that 200 pages comes out if I were an Airbus software developer who worked on the algorithm that causes the trim to advance like it sometimes can. The star trek smoke and mirrors is a necessary evil though I wonder if it makes use too complacent?
Sorry Dave probably should've included this to better explain why the elevator trim "thing", if validated, is a significant piece of the puzzle.
All software is like a corral. It's finite, even if complex and vast, in the number of situations it can react to. In 99.9999% of situations this may suffice. Life is, however, infinite in the number of permutations and combinations. By definition that means that certain combinations of parameters will be beyond the scope of the software to handle it. Thus exists a-law. But and here's where I think the AF crew contributed their bit, once Fifi threw up her arms and said "you boys fly me" nobody (may) have even thought to check the trim to see that, in her snit, Fifi didn't leave them in heading towards an untenable angle of attack.
My reference for the above with the LH A320 that landed long with a tail wind on a wet runway at Warsaw a few years ago. A software flaw meant in those conditions that the "brain" of the system had a delay recognizing that the wheels were firmly planted and applying the stopping power.
I think many people like myself with technical backgrounds, but who are not in the aviation industry have wondered: Why are pitot tubes the only instrument on modern aircraft capable of measuring airpseed accurately (no backup technology)? And why can't GPS be used in some way? So I searched, and this is what I found. (You know this stuff of course, but it might be of interest to others reading through the comments at my lowly level of knowledge.)
It is a mistake to believe that aviation engineers all over the world have missed the obvious, and that the system is "flawed" because these engineers don't have the sense that can be mustered by the casual observer. There must be reasonable answers, and turns out there are.
A simple internet search provides the answer to the GPS question. GPS provides ground speed information only, while the pilot needs very accurate airspeed information to keep the aircraft from stalling. Ground speed could be different than airspeed by hundreds of miles per hour, so it's not useful for this purpose. That's easy enough to understand.
So what about an alternate to the pitot tube? Well it seems most of the research I can find is based on using doppler lasers (BAE, for example, has a fews links on this). The motivation is military now, but it wouldn't surprise me to see this eventually make its way in some form to commercial aircraft in the future (maybe as a backup to the pitot tube, or the pitot becomes the backup). Why doesn't it exist already? Probably because accidents involving modern jets are extremely rare, and accidents caused by pitot tubes are a tiny, tiny subset of an already rare event. The AF447 accident will probably shift more money into this effort though.
Every time I get on an aircraft, I try to remember that moving around on the runway to and from the gate is really the most dangerous part of the trip.
I think it is also important to recognize that engineers have purposefully designed the system with as much automated sophistication because it optimizes safety. The unfairly defined "pilot error" ends up being the main cause of accidents because Deep Blue (Fifi) only hands over the controls when she cannot win. How would anyone like their odds of winning a chess game if they only get to play when Deep Blue gives up?
http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/SharedServices/Divisions/AdvancedTechnologyCentre/FeatureArchive/bae_ss_atc_.html
Capt. Dave,
Your writings always seem to infuse me with the love that I once had with jets as a young boy. Unfotunately, that love has diminished due to the hatred that is bred amongst airline employees, union and non-union(management).I'm no shrink, but could it be jealousy,greed and /or egotistical attitudes that have something to do with it? You yourself mention the problems you and your coworkers have with your copilots. If they can pass the company check-rides and get to where they sit, they must be as qualified as you. It's too bad, I do enjoy your posts until you mention the problems amongst employees, then reality hits,and "I wish I had picked another career." Maybe you could filter out some of this rhetoric in the future. Thanks for the few minutes of returning me to my youth.
Post a Comment