I see many pilot’s agreeing that more hand flying would be beneficial in Technologically Advanced Aircraft. However, it is not just hand flying that promotes “stick and rudder” and manual flying skills. It must be hand flying with the flight director off and auto-throttle off otherwise you are not improving the basic instrument scan and manual aircraft control we all desire. Simply hand flying and following the flight director does very little to improve pilot skills. I suggest we all start using the phrase “raw-data hand-flying with auto-throttle off” as a skill for improving safety that must be practiced. I have 24,000 hours in many phases of general aviation, instructing, corporate, and airline operations. Yes, I have hand flown many raw-data auto-throttle off take-offs and landings in Boeing 727, 737, 747, 777, 787 aircraft (yes, on the line not just simulator) and it is fun, easy, and safe when you are proficient in that mode. Yes, the airline operation manual allowed this but so few pilots actually did that many pilots thought it was prohibited. Training Departments at all types of operations need to include raw-data hand flying with auto-throttles off in the syllabus. Unfortunately, there are too many instructors, and management pilots that don’t agree and continue to ignore this lack of proficiency as the cause of many recent accidents. Again, most pilots “hand-fly” quite frequently (in the big iron at my airline) but it is raw-data hand flying with auto-throttles off that is necessary. (PS - the Airbus A320 is also easy to fly raw-data on approach and landing, but raw-data mode was prohibited on take-off).
Yes!
Some good comments here. But I don’t see the one that applies most to US certified pilots. Simply put, I have the skills to hand fly multiple turboprop models, a Lear35, a DC9 and now a narrow body Airbus. BUT the FAA became so draconian over my career regarding enforcement actions that I rarely use those skills. When ATC tracking systems have automatic “snitch patches” built in so that even the controller may not know an altitude was busted or any other clearance exceeded, I, and most other line pilots have chosen to use the autopilot as a way to preserve our ticket. In today’s US airspace system, especially in terminal areas, one must remain exactly on the RNAV course. (I’ve been called out by ATC for trying to sneak around a building cell, which resulted in being off the green/magenta line by less than a 1/4 mile). In such circumstances, even the most proficient stick and rudder pilot uses the automation as means to protect his/her ticket. Modern GPS/RNAV/GNSS based arrivals and departures almost demand a reliance on the automation. I personally try to kick the automation off when flying into the occasional lesser dense destination or when being vectored during climb or descent, but when operating from DFW to ATL the autopilot stays engaged from 1000agl on departure til minimums on approach. *
In short, it’s not that I can’t hand fly, it’s that the FAA seriously discourages me from doing so.
We obviously can’t have airliners flying around off altitude or course, my only answer would be: the FAA must force airlines to include basic raw data hand flying in initial and recurrent training. This of course will add to the cost of training, so I am not hopeful. But the average pilot needs the opportunity to practice without “jeopardy”. **
*It is virtually impossible to even fly a visual approach by ones self in most major areas. ATC almost always issues headings, altitudes and speeds for “visual” approaches .
**Most simulator training, even for basic hand flying, is so focused on “checking a box” (demanded by the FAA) or adhering to “procedure” that it still feels like a jeopardy event.
In the early '70’s I was trained to fly under-the-hood landings in a complex, high-performance A/C, and got to the point where either my friend or I could talk one another into hood landings, from either the left or right seat…think the equivalent of a PAR/GCA to zero-zero. DME Arcs, NDB approaches, partial panel, heavy IFR under rigorous simulated circumstances, all standard. I read of a particular situation where a corporate pilot a few years back claimed they were overwhelmed flying 45 minutes of actual. Nothing wrong with the newest technology, but, as one pilot I spoke with recently said, “The plane just flies itself”. Sad to see such degraded skills.
Absolutely right!!
What a dynamic subject, but here’s my stab at an overall view:
How much of this problem might be due to the fact that regulation, litigation and the overall expense of gaining experience has risen to a level that only “privileged” individuals can afford to enter this field? Piston engine flying is now reserved for those who are willing to pay for high maintenance bills and incredible insurance premiums. In the 80’s the manufacturers were burdened with lawsuits and stopped producing aircraft. The GA Revitalization Act removed some of their liability, but some of that has simply been passed on to the pilots through insurance premiums. It certainly is possible to save every last penny, as many have, for flight lessons, and then make next to nothing for years of instructing. But who is crazy enough to want a life like that? Gaining experience is no longer as easy as borrowing a buddies aircraft and going flying. Just read the insurance policy. You have to have experience to be covered, and you have to have coverage (or money) to gain experience. I am a 10,000+ hour professional pilot with 18 years of experience, and I have a hard time affording to be in a 3 person partnership on a general aviation aircraft. Hauling cancelled checks was how I gained most of my hand flying skills, and that type of flying almost doesn’t exist anymore. Basically only pilots that can afford to fly on their own dime to gain experience or are willing to working for flight schools that “turn two million dollars into one” (as the aviation saying goes) are left for hiring. Sure, some doctors, lawyers, politicians, and other well paid professions can afford to own aircraft; and their kids might be able to enter the field relatively easily. (I’d be willing to guess that their parents may not push them in that direction though). There are, however, many other talented young aviators out there that simply can’t afford to demonstrate or hone their skills. The Civil Air Patrol is a possible avenue to experience and training, but it can take quite a bit of time to get actual flying experience there. It also isn’t really a paid job. Aviation has become so expensive that practicing in an actual aircraft isn’t desirable or financially possible. As a former member of a union training review board, discussions about training failures resulted in my own realization that raising the pass/fail rate of an airline ultimately boiled down to how much money was spent. You can spend enough money to attract pilots with experience, or you can spend money training pilots without experience, but in either case it’s going to cost someone. But here’s the kicker: The pilot shortage has caused some airlines to hire some pretty inexperienced pilots. Those airlines are now paying $1000’s of dollars on extra training in highly advanced simulators to “train to proficiency” all because they dried up the pool of experienced pilots. And who is filling that pool? General Aviation!! If something can be done to ease the cost of fuel and insurance due to FAA mandated maintenance and liability on general aviation aircraft, then this problem might just improve on its own.
We could just completely automate aircraft so no mistakes will be made, and we won’t have to train pilots. Right? RIIIIGHT… Just like the automated checkouts where you need a security guard to watch a camera and monitor for theft, an attendant to help you when you have to show your ID, or the machine runs out of change, or paper, or malfunctions… It’s not that simple. You’re causing more problems than you’re solving.
There’s liability in allowing an individual to fly a GA airplane with low experience, and of course the likelihood that they might make a mistake. There’s the possibility that they might have an engine failure and land on a road, inadvertently causing a fatal wreck with a vehicle or a pedestrian, or hurt themselves. But the same liability exists on a much greater scale when you reduce the experience level across the entire industry due to attempting to avoid it on a smaller scale. Then, when an airliner crashes and many people are hurt, the fingers get pointed at the pilots and their lack of experience. The truth is that aviation has become so safe (due to the expensive automation which is degrading our skills), that the very occasional accidents that DO occur are the GA accidents that degrade public confidence due to dramatic media coverage. This just serves to justify the increased insurance premiums and mandated maintenance causing the problem.
I feel like I’m talking in circles, but all the same I think I’m covering the fact that this certainly is a very dynamic subject. My previous paragraphs show what I feel is the root of the problem, but I also think there’s more to it than that. You can’t change one thing. All of the change we’re experiencing with rapid advancements in safety is painful. Take flight control malfunctions for example (which I’m guessing is one reason the FAA is addressing this). A manufacturer tried to make an aircraft affordable, with safety improvements which take the pilot out of the picture, and it ended up being more of a problem than a solution. They certainly had good intentions, but technology seems to be outpacing human ability. The man-machine disconnect is leaving inexperienced pilots with surprises they cannot process. Now, the company potentially has billions in liability and the FAA is addressing declining pilot skills. Should we all be looking at ourselves instead of trying to pawn off blame to someone else for safety shortcomings? Admitting our own mistakes is painful, but it is free. Placing blame costs everyone lots of money.
I wonder what they’d say if I started the GOWMPA (Grumpy Old White Male Pilot’s Assn) and had an annual conference for just that segment of the population. We now have the Black Pilots Assn, the Gay Pilots Assn, the WAI … why not GOWMPA? Has a nice ring to it … no ? Anyone interested?
I’m calling MISANDRY !!
I never needed a support group for “inspiration” to start flying; I was going to do it and I did.
Precisely, Mark. And as others have pointed out … despite all the herculean efforts to attract more females to aviation, the participation rate has been stubbornly below 10% for decades. Not one of us here in the GOWMPA wouldn’t lend a helping hand or even go above and beyond to help an interested young female get into aviation. But when they invent their own one-sided organizations instead of including the male side of the group, I have major heartburn with it all. Just like the organization mentioned in a blog last week where they want gender neutral terminology in FAA documents. Give us all a break ladies. Use all your energy getting INTO aviation instead of trying to change things that have nothing to do with same.
I can’t say I belong to any all girl aviation clubs and wouldn’t join one. Mainly I hang out in online forums where I am the only female. I catch a lot of hell there not because I’m female (they actually are pretty nice and tolerant about that) but because I espouse a rule free world view where the skies are a common for everyone to enjoy - nobody owns it, therefore nobody can dictate any rules about it. Also, I will call it like I see it, and point out the elephants in the room, and most old codgers don’t like uncomfortable truths, even though I’m pointing them out with the best of intentions.
There are many serious problems with the sorry state of aviation that are keeping new people out, not just women:
- It’s outrageously expensive. A commercial airline pilot who spent 25/30 days every month in the air was complaining to me just the other day: “A Bonanza is a million bucks. It’s a good airplane, but seriously, it’s out of the 1940’s and not worth a million dollars”. Most people, if they even have a job, live paycheck to paycheck, or are just out of high school with lint in their pocket, or aren’t even land or home owners yet.
- There is a steep learning curve.
- It’s inherently dangerous.
- It’s overloaded with noxious, toxic rules and regulations. Don’t under estimate this one just because it is far down the list at #4. It’s a huge turn off for many.
- Airplane parts are scarce, even rare, to build an airplane out of. Contrast to say computer parts to build your own computer, which you can find used for almost for free.
- Aviation people can be serious money grubbing or all out just dickheads. I’ve met a few. This probably mirrors the general population, but still. They will never part with anything except through the nose and try to price gouge everyone.
- At some point EAA club members began building faster, all metal sporty race planes. One, so they could go places, do aerobatics, but probably two because they wouldn’t have to recover them every X years. All the fabric primary gliders and slower flying planes (read: approachable to new beginning pilots) went into a big proverbial bonfire. That was it - kids and women were out. No more primary gliders and tow planes, no new pilots. Period. End of the road.
- Land to make your own grass strip and build your own T-hanger on, is very expensive. Trailering your plane, or hangering it with monthly fees, are also expensive.
- The FAA is trying to ruin it even further with RemoteID and ADB-S. First the GA pilots were in a row about it, now the RC pilots are absolutely livid and ready to riot. In front of the FAA building in Washington. You think aviation is sleepy and dead, until the FAA decides to go arch-villian on you.
- Once in barnstorming days it was a big fun thing to have an off field landing - the local farmers and peeps came out to see your shiny plane and offer any assistance they could to help you drag it out of the mud. Now, they can be downright hostile - one of our forum members made a flip on his baclk landing in a state park - the park ranger immediately started writing out tickets and spewing out removal ultimatums. Seriously? Seriously?
I could rattle of 10 more, and then another 10 more, and even write an article. Right now you have bigger problems - with a global pandemic, airlines and airports are grinding to a halt and shutting down. Marginal airlines may go out of business before this subsides. More local airports may get closed down as people focus more on survival and shun recreation.
So is aviation dead? Are women absent from aviation? Heck no… a few years ago, when shut out, the goal post moved elsewhere.
Hundreds if not thousands flocked to paramotors, which could be thrown in the back of a pickup truck and taken anywhere to fly.
Aother whole subset flocked to FPV quadcopters, which were even more transportable and cheaper to fly and fit in a backpack. You can literally “take your plane” anywhere in the world in your backpack… on a motorcycle, in a Eurail train car… get off someplace scenic, and within minutes be up in the air a mile away taking all the breathless scenery in. No gas, no hanger fees, no $30K airplane, no rules, no pilots license, no oil seals dripping, no engines out and off field landings. Girls could fly, guys could, kids could fly, anybody could fly. If you had a few hundred bucks invested, that’s all you needed to go “up”!
When you consider flying, ask yourself, why do I want to fly? I did. Do I want to go anywhere? No. I have a car for that, and it’s cheaper to use a car. Do I necessarily need to have my body up there to enjoy it? Again, no. In fact, as low and slow and fast and furious as I like to fly, it’s probably better that I not be in the vehicle. Do I really need to have a big airplane to overcompensate for something and impress people? No, not really again. I mostly want to fly alone.
So why do I want to fly? To get out and see the world more. To get up there. In those gorgeous skies, and be able to look down from up there, and fly around, and have fun. To see my planet earth. All that stuff, you can now do cheaper, safer, faster, easier… with a quadcopter. Having a big huge private plane to do so… well… it’s obsolete.
I know, I have 3 airplane projects in my shop. What am I suppose to do with them? They’re 20’x20’. I got engines, I got props, I got BRS… what I don’t have is the time to fix them, restore them, trailer them, cart them around, risk my neck, and do all that nasty labor and lug and tug… I just don’t have that in me much any more. I just want to fly. Have you ever tried to put on a removable parasol wing on a plane all by yourself. I have, it’s a total PITA, you feel like a tiny ant carrying a huge leaf around.
If you’re totally oblivious about FPV quadcopters and the massive golden age (think ultralights) that happened all over again just a few years ago in aviation, visit my research page on them: http://fpv.air-war.org
All that being said, if you’re cleaning out the hanger, or need someone in your will to leave your grass strip to, or want to tear down an old T-hanger, my email address is always open. 
Who knows, maybe I’ll finish these 3 planes of mine…
CHOPPERGIRL
http://choppergirl.air-war.org
http://cg.air-war.org