Only my own opinion; a notion or ramble may be a more fitting description - but the deep, systematic flaws in the ‘training’ programs seem to be appearing on a regular basis. We have quite a long list from the last couple of years; Mildura, Mooranbah, Melbourne, Sydney, etc. Newcastle being the exemplar where the crew were rescued from landing on the coal loading dock by an alert ATCO.
My mind keeps picking at what I can only call – ‘disconnection’. The modern aircraft, particularly the Airbus are so ‘automated’ that it is quite possible for the crew to feel ‘remote’ from the operational reality. When you have a control column’ in one hand and the power levers in the other, the aircraft is ‘with you’, firmly between your feet on the rudder pedals. The flight path, profile and speed – controlled by you. Reality. It is quite a surreal experience to be playing with automatic systems, remotely asking a computer to sort out the task at hand. Is it possible that crew are becoming more focussed on the ‘keyboard’ and connected to the computer; rather than cognisant of the external factors? It’s academic; but clearly something is going wrong, regularly, and if the ATSB can’t or won’t provide a solution, we need to examine the basic tenets.
Then there is the simulator syndrome; in the ‘sim’ the event being discussed here could have been stopped; a discussion held while the ‘aircraft’ patiently waited at 1000 feet until the point of the exercise was understood; then, reversed back to where the initial problem occurred and- it’s off to the races, problem solved. Is this ‘attitude’ endemic? the reality of a 50 ton aircraft at 135 KIAS on final approach is that it will not patiently park at 1000’ while the mysteries are unravelled, it’s real. It’s dynamic and it is no place for a crew to be disconnected from the task at hand.
Please note; not knocking or denigrating anyone or anything; just trying (struggling) to understand the radical causes. Thinking out loud if you like.
My mind keeps picking at what I can only call – ‘disconnection’. The modern aircraft, particularly the Airbus are so ‘automated’ that it is quite possible for the crew to feel ‘remote’ from the operational reality. When you have a control column’ in one hand and the power levers in the other, the aircraft is ‘with you’, firmly between your feet on the rudder pedals. The flight path, profile and speed – controlled by you. Reality. It is quite a surreal experience to be playing with automatic systems, remotely asking a computer to sort out the task at hand. Is it possible that crew are becoming more focussed on the ‘keyboard’ and connected to the computer; rather than cognisant of the external factors? It’s academic; but clearly something is going wrong, regularly, and if the ATSB can’t or won’t provide a solution, we need to examine the basic tenets.
Then there is the simulator syndrome; in the ‘sim’ the event being discussed here could have been stopped; a discussion held while the ‘aircraft’ patiently waited at 1000 feet until the point of the exercise was understood; then, reversed back to where the initial problem occurred and- it’s off to the races, problem solved. Is this ‘attitude’ endemic? the reality of a 50 ton aircraft at 135 KIAS on final approach is that it will not patiently park at 1000’ while the mysteries are unravelled, it’s real. It’s dynamic and it is no place for a crew to be disconnected from the task at hand.
Please note; not knocking or denigrating anyone or anything; just trying (struggling) to understand the radical causes. Thinking out loud if you like.