Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So glad I'm retired!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • So glad I'm retired!

    https://youtu.be/uafWhCv-Xd4

  • #2
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    Well. Somebody one or two years ago told me, that you are no longer 12 years old. Today I assume, that was not you, or was it.
    We really seem to share one or two things. Jetphotos Senior, older than 12 years, and, with a Boeing 747 as avatar.

    So, only for the unique case that one jetphotos member retires,
    I have decided to open your video. The name of your video is 'Airlines will start using only one pilot on their Airbus A350 [...] by 2025.'

    Now I know why you only gave us the link for the video. The title of the video would have been much too long to have been accepted as a name for a jetphotos topic!

    What I don't see so far. Your avatar is a Boeing 747, very brilliant. But your video is Airbus A350? So, even between your avatar and your reality there is a difference?
    Come on, tell me lies.

    Nevertheless. I can confirm, that one senior forum member in the past told me, that you are older than me. So. Let me congratulate for your retirement.
    What will you do now. Going on my nerves even more often?

    The German long haul is alive, since more than 60 years.
    The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
    And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
    This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

    Comment


    • #3
      Back to seriousness.

      Well, I really am not here to make fun of jetphotos members who are older than me. Especially not when you are old enough to be my father.
      Do you allow me to say how old you are? By the last time I asked you, I mean you said something like 62.

      And we can really discuss the topic of your video. I was just asking the internet for our Lufthansa A350, but at least on the first page of the results, nobody said something like
      'Lufthansa will fly the A350 without the F/O from next Tuesday on.'

      And among these results on the first page, there have been at least four results which have been published by Lufthansa herself.

      I really can't imagine longhaul flights with only 1 professional pilot on board. What do you think, what is the second seat in the cockpit good for, then?

      One seat in the cockpit must be free, for the Flight Captain's dog? But as of today I don't know dogs with a pilot license.

      On the long haul you definitely need all seats occupied in the cockpit. Because, as far as I know, after 3 hours the PF ('pilot flying') must be changed, from the F/O to the Captain,
      or vice versa.
      Rhein/Main - Tokyo Haneda, approximately 11 hours nonstop on board a LH-B744. And you like to fly that alone, as the only pilot on board?

      That will not happen, at least not at Lufthansa and at least not in one of our 747s and at least not this year.
      Afaik.
      The German long haul is alive, since more than 60 years.
      The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
      And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
      This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

      Comment


      • #4
        The dipsh*t who made that video: "I'm in the process of making a video about how automation brought down Air France flight 447..."

        Don't waste your retirement this way.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Evan View Post
          The dipsh*t who made that video: "I'm in the process of making a video about how automation brought down Air France flight 447..."

          Don't waste your retirement this way.
          Hi Evan. I must be honest, I only opened the video, and waited until the name of the video appeared on my screen. After the first 15 seconds, ok I really watched it so far, I was sure,
          that is a tasteless old video, made in the 1990s, when bright green (!) neon lamps were used all across the streets in downtown. Compared to what we see on the right side of the screen when we open this link:
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fr...nce_of_Bel-Air

          That was a good TV story, I watched it all the time. But as you, I don't know if Will Smith would let begin a 2021 movie where he takes place
          again with a starting sequence with bright green neon lamps. I mean, 1990, since then we all have grown older, 31 years older to be exact..

          Don't waste your time this way.
          Well here in Germany now it is rather late, 02:27 by night, and I read 'time' and I thought, you mean that I should not waste time by watching such rather doubtful videos.
          But what you also meant was, that Bob shouldn't waste his time with rather useless videos? Yes. I like to second that.

          Automation brought down AF #447? Ahm. I do no longer know what I wrote here in this forum back then when AF #447 happened.

          But after all what I know since when AF #447 happened. Three professional pilots on board, at least. But only one Flight Captain, who left the cockpit as a PF (pilot flying) after he fulfilled his first three hours in the cockpit.
          Then the tragedy started. Two F/Os in the cockpit, of whom at least one did not know how to fly an Airbus 330-200 manually at high altitude (FL350 and higher)... (!). And both F/Os rather lazy in communication, so that the only Flight Captain on board was only called back into the cockpit when it was really too late.
          The only thing which that Flight Captain reportedly was able to say, was
          'STOP pulling the yoke, we are already too slow!' .

          But that has absolutely nothin to do with automation, but with missing knowledge about the 'popometer' flight mode, i.e. the manual flight mode in an A332 at FL360. Reportedly, that F/O who almost ripped the yoke out of that A332, was the youngest and less experienced professional pilot on board AF #447.

          Afaik, exactly to prevent such cases, on the Lufthansa long haul, where at least three professional pilots are on board, you will find two experienced Flight Captains on board. So that at any time of the flight, one experienced Flight Captain sits in the cockpit, who knows his 748 or 330 from the first until the last screw, and who is able to take over control also and especially in emergency situations.
          Which very much reminds me of Flight Captain Chesley Sullenberger III.
          The German long haul is alive, since more than 60 years.
          The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
          And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
          This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Evan View Post
            The dipsh*t who made that video: "I'm in the process of making a video about how automation brought down Air France flight 447..."

            Don't waste your retirement this way.
            I am looking forward for it. This guy Maximus normally does very good videos and very well researched too.
            If he does a bit of research he will very quickly understand the real role that the automation had on this crash, which was a factor but not "what brought down" the plane.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

              I am looking forward for it. This guy Maximus normally does very good videos and very well researched too.
              If he does a bit of research he will very quickly understand the real role that the automation had on this crash, which was a factor but not "what brought down" the plane.
              It wasn't even a factor. Airspeeds were lost and the automation said "I'm done, your airplane" just as it would do on a Boeing. Yes, there are stealth issues such as thrust lock but this didn't really factor in either. The trim issue is moot. It's your airplane, you had better trim it. The stall warning issue is moot. It's your airplane, don't stall it and if you do, unstall it with pitch and power, not the stall warning.

              What brought down AF447 is a crew unfamiliar with 'your airplane' at high altitude cruise, unreliable airspeed and upset recovery. And most of all, human factors.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Evan View Post

                It wasn't even a factor. Airspeeds were lost and the automation said "I'm done, your airplane" just as it would do on a Boeing. Yes, there are stealth issues such as thrust lock but this didn't really factor in either. The trim issue is moot. It's your airplane, you had better trim it. The stall warning issue is moot. It's your airplane, don't stall it and if you do, unstall it with pitch and power, not the stall warning.

                What brought down AF447 is a crew unfamiliar with 'your airplane' at high altitude cruise, unreliable airspeed and upset recovery. And most of all, human factors.
                AP gave up with no countdown, plane can recognize speed disagree it can also hold the altitude for a few seconds and warn the pilots.
                Thrust not locked may have resulted in the plane not stalling at the TOC.
                Flight directors (that should have been manually turned off) gave invalid cues.
                I don't know what is the trim issue you mention. The auto-trim kept working correctly throughout the sequence of events.
                Stall warning and AoA protection could be better, since there were 3 perfectly working and agreeing AoA indicators. I know that AoA is fine-tuned by Mach number to define the limits and margins, but 40 degrees (or 15) is way too much no matter what.
                Lack of alterative and independent speed indication.
                Stall warning stopping to sound because of too high AOA values considered invalid, and starting to sound when reducing the AoA.

                Don't get me wrong, I agree this was crew horribly flying and that the control inputs they did would have as well stalled a 747 or a Cub (or a Colgan or a Pinnacle).
                But the system can be better set up to be more robust and friendly with the pilot instead of suddenly and with 0 previous warning giving up and start giving false indications. This is not what brought the plane down (I had already said that). But it was a factor or at least an interesting lesson to be taken into account in future system design and improvements. Especially in the context of designing the systems of the plane that will have only 1 pilot in the cockpit at cruise.

                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                  AP gave up with no countdown, plane can recognize speed disagree it can also hold the altitude for a few seconds and warn the pilots.
                  True. But what aircraft does that?
                  Thrust not locked may have resulted in the plane not stalling at the TOC.
                  As I recall, the thrust lock was recognized and removed before the stall. Anyway, the pitch maneuver is what caused the stall.
                  Flight directors (that should have been manually turned off) gave invalid cues.
                  True, but what aircraft turns off FD's in this situation? Anyway, that's not automation.
                  I don't know what is the trim issue you mention. The auto-trim kept working correctly throughout the sequence of events.
                  There was some bleating about the trim working against them. Nonsense.
                  Stall warning and AoA protection could be better, since there were 3 perfectly working and agreeing AoA indicators. I know that AoA is fine-tuned by Mach number to define the limits and margins, but 40 degrees (or 15) is way too much no matter what.
                  Certainly, but that is not automation.
                  Lack of alterative and independent speed indication.
                  Ditto.
                  Stall warning stopping to sound because of too high AOA values considered invalid, and starting to sound when reducing the AoA.
                  Double Ditto.

                  Don't get me wrong, I agree this was crew horribly flying and that the control inputs they did would have as well stalled a 747 or a Cub (or a Colgan or a Pinnacle).
                  But the system can be better set up to be more robust and friendly with the pilot instead of suddenly and with 0 previous warning giving up and start giving false indications. This is not what brought the plane down (I had already said that). But it was a factor or at least an interesting lesson to be taken into account in future system design and improvements. Especially in the context of designing the systems of the plane that will have only 1 pilot in the cockpit at cruise.
                  I have always agreed with that. All airliners should have automated response to UAS to remain in the speed envelope until the crew can assess and take over. But none do.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well as I've said before, "the day will come when there will only be one pilot up front". Never thought of it on the long haul trips, but? Cargo haulers may be the first. Remember back when the airlines asked the manufacturers if they could build an airliner with out the Flight Engineer? Cost savings!! Since I'm an old 'stick and rudder' pilot I'll take the train, on the other hand I'm so old (77) I'll probably never see it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by kent olsen View Post
                      Well as I've said before, "the day will come when there will only be one pilot up front". Never thought of it on the long haul trips, but? Cargo haulers may be the first. Remember back when the airlines asked the manufacturers if they could build an airliner with out the Flight Engineer? Cost savings!! Since I'm an old 'stick and rudder' pilot I'll take the train, on the other hand I'm so old (77) I'll probably never see it.
                      Losing the FE was a no-brainer once the glass cockpit became a reality. Losing the second pilot goes against the fundamental doctrine of redundancy. One pilot up front is conceivable if another is available to take over. One on board is not something I expect to see in my lifetime.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Evan View Post
                        Losing the FE was a no-brainer once the glass cockpit became a reality.
                        What's your address again? I have about six dozen friends that would like to pay you a visit! ​​​​​

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post

                          What's your address again? I have about six dozen friends that would like to pay you a visit! ​​​​​
                          I'm flattered but it actually wasn't my idea. I wanted to have two flight engineers, a navigator and a radio operator up there taking all the distractions away from the pilots. The net result of the computer age is that we now all have to wear too many hats. Multitasking is how they made our lives easier

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I’m hijacking all of the black and white detail BS that Evan and Gabe are in to.

                            It seems that pilots die from time to time(medically) leaving the other pilot to operate single pilot… so sure, let computers help and monitor and make planes single pilot FLYABLE, but keep all 4 gluteal inertial monitors..

                            That, and the Uber basic logistics of I fly, you monitor and handle secondary tasks.

                            The Uber basic logistics become Uber critical logistics when certain things break.

                            And, there’s even arguments that NO pilots are needed- and planes that indeed do that.

                            So, blah blah blah to this whole subject…
                            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Evan View Post
                              What brought down AF447 is a crew unfamiliar with 'your airplane' at high altitude cruise, unreliable airspeed and upset recovery. And most of all, human factors.
                              No.

                              What went wrong was the crew going against many incredibly-BASIC airpersonship rules.

                              You claim they have no familiarity with common power and pitch settings…

                              Yeah, maybe not, since that’s an Uber basic way to avoid NAILING the memory checklist for the longest possible full stall.
                              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X