Changing planes. as a pilot

[DeepFriar]

Originally Posted By: d4d
My NWA Instructor Pilots (Capt and FO), particularly in the glass jet programs, were hand picked, "high speed, low drag " subject matter experts in the latest procedures and technology. They were so good, they even got me through the training/checking programs on time with semi-satisfactory results.


A lot of us thank God that US pilots are held to a high standard and have actually "flown" airplanes rather than simply managed them. The stories often told of ab initio pilot training programs makes my blood run cold. Even Lufthansa, the gold standard in maintenance, has such a program in Arizona I beleve. That's how you end up with Airbus airplanes in the Atlantic or other heavies landing short in LA, among others. One of the side benefits of paying and sacrificing to "keep the free world free" was that once steady stream of talented and intensively trained honest-to-God PILOTS salted into our fleets helping to sustain that system based on aeronautical merit.

That's not to denegrate those who sweated and starved coming up the other commercial ways. They FLEW too and really learned that craft. They didn't just put in the minimum hours and pass tests at some ab initio baby nursery. I've still got a square butt from 20+ years of heavy travel (I don't know how many real miles but it was almost 3M FF miles) and every time I could work it out I got myself on a US flag carrier flying Boeings if at all possible. Most people don't know how lucky they are.

 

[lubricatosaurus]

Originally Posted By: d4d
When I had to bounce to 727 Capt from 747-400 FO, I would know which seat was mine because there were already pilots sitting in the other seats when I got to the cockpit. I told them " If you can get this thing started, we can go." I would set my radar altimeter warning alert to 20 feet so that I had a ground alert system to know about when to flare the Three-holer. Otherwise, coming from the 747-400 just a few days prior, I was likely to start my flare, based on learned sight picture, about 100 ' AGL. I would remind my FO/SO to make sure that I moved the throttles since I was used to autothrottles on the 757, 320 and 747-400. After babysitting me for a couple of legs on the 727, it was pretty normal , however, I did use more "automation" (Autopilot, FD) on the Trijet , than probably any other 727 pilot in history. That was what I was used to. Now I was coming back to a Jurassic era dinosaur from the Star Wars era glass jets...


Appreciate the description. Back when I was doing autopilot design for CatIIIB autoland on the MD-11, we always set flare for 50 ft radar altimeter, although we adjusted it (using pitch angle) to be AGL of the main gear, not the cockpit, so the 100' you mention might not have been too much different. Certainly the 20' on the 727 sounds too low to me! Although, on the 727, I heard the non-minimum phase pitch response (pull back on stick and you sink first a bit, then rise...) was worse than other big jets, so your flare style might be different in diff type airplanes. That all depends on tail loading and ground effects which varies some across airplane types

I'd think the worst multi-type-training confusion one could get into would be crosswind crab/de-crab maneuvers. I used to think Boeing jets had no crab prior to touchdown, while Douglas jets were supposed to be crabed until mid-flare, and Airbus not sure now. Maybe its just airline and/or pilot preference.

From something dug up on the web, sounds like a good summary:

"Crosswind Landing Techniques

Three methods of performing crosswind landings are presented. They are the de-crab technique (with removal of crab in flare), touchdown in a crab, and the sideslip technique. Whenever a crab is maintained during a crosswind approach, offset the flight deck on the upwind side of centerline so that the main gear touches down in the center of the runway.

De-Crab During Flare

The objective of this technique is to maintain wings level throughout the approach, flare, and touchdown. On final approach, a crab angle is established with wings level to maintain the desired track. Just prior to touchdown while flaring the airplane, downwind rudder is applied to eliminate the crab and align the airplane with the runway centerline.

As rudder is applied, the upwind wing sweeps forward developing roll. Hold wings level with simultaneous application of aileron control into the wind. The touchdown is made with cross controls and both gear touching down simultaneously. Throughout the touchdown phase upwind aileron application is utilized to keep the wings level.

Touchdown In Crab

The airplane can land using crab only (zero sideslip) up to the landing crosswind guideline speeds. (See the landing crosswind guidelines table, this chapter).

On dry runways, upon touchdown the airplane tracks toward the upwind edge of the runway while de-crabbing to align with the runway. Immediate upwind aileron is needed to ensure the wings remain level while rudder is needed to track the runway centerline. The greater the amount of crab at touchdown, the larger the lateral deviation from the point of touchdown. For this reason, touchdown in a crab only condition is not recommended when landing on a dry runway in strong crosswinds.

On very slippery runways, landing the airplane using crab only reduces drift toward the downwind side at touchdown, permits rapid operation of spoilers and autobrakes because all main gears touchdown simultaneously, and may reduce pilot workload since the airplane does not have to be de-crabbed before touchdown. However, proper rudder and upwind aileron must be applied after touchdown to ensure directional control is maintained.

Sideslip (Wing Low)

The sideslip crosswind technique aligns the airplane with the extended runway centerline so that main gear touchdown occurs on the runway centerline.

The initial phase of the approach to landing is flown using the crab method to correct for drift. Prior to the flare the airplane centerline is aligned on or parallel to the runway centerline. Downwind rudder is used to align the longitudinal axis to the desired track as aileron is used to lower the wing into the wind to prevent drift. A steady sideslip is established with opposite rudder and low wing into the wind to hold the desired course.

Touchdown is accomplished with the upwind wheels touching just before the downwind wheels. Overcontrolling the roll axis must be avoided because overbanking could cause the engine nacelle or outboard wing flap to contact the runway. (See Ground Clearance Angles - Normal Landing charts, this chapter.)

Properly coordinated, this maneuver results in nearly fixed rudder and aileron control positions during the final phase of the approach, touchdown, and beginning of the landing roll. However, since turbulence is often associated with crosswinds, it is often difficult to maintain the cross control coordination through the final phase of the approach to touchdown.

If the crew elects to fly the sideslip to touchdown, it may be necessary to add a crab during strong crosswinds. (See the landing crosswind guidelines table, this chapter). Main gear touchdown is made with the upwind wing low and crab angle applied. As the upwind gear touches first, a slight increase in downwind rudder is applied to align the airplane with the runway centerline. At touchdown, increased application of upwind aileron should be applied to maintain wings level."

I like the landing at the 1:54 point in the video, although sink rate seemed a tad too high:


If you're used to one airframe, then keep transitioning to others, that crosswind landing stuff gets real fun real fast.

 

[Mr Nice]

d4d,

Take pride in knowing what ever amount of [censored] the company put you through.... You were able to be professional at all times and be up to the challenges of constantly flying multiple aircraft on such short notice.

 

[d4d]

Quote:
Appreciate the description. Back when I was doing autopilot design for CatIIIB autoland on the MD-11, we always set flare for 50 ft radar altimeter, although we adjusted it (using pitch angle) to be AGL of the main gear, not the cockpit, so the 100' you mention might not have been too much different. Certainly the 20' on the 727 sounds too low to me! Although, on the 727, I heard the non-minimum phase pitch response (pull back on stick and you sink first a bit, then rise...) was worse than other big jets, so your flare style might be different in diff type airplanes. That all depends on tail loading and ground effects which varies some across airplane types


Thanks for your informative response and your work on autopilot designs for the CAT 3 autoland systems. They really are magic systems and give pilots and airlines landing capabilities prior generations could only dream of. Most passengers do not realize that we are REQUIRED to use the Autoland capabilities in very low viz weather conditions. Further, on CAT 3 landings, at the 100' Alert Height, we are not required to see anything outside and are looking at internal cockpit indications (LAND 3, CAT 3 DUAL, etc depending upon airplane type). In the fully automated autoland mode, both the B747-400 and A-330 would enter the FLARE mode about 50 feet RA (40-60 feet based on sink rate). At approx 25-30 feet RA the autothrust system goes to IDLE and the ROLLOUT (centerline guidance) engages at approx 5 feet RA (or at touchdown-Airbus). My best recollection is that the B-757 and A-320 automatic autoland systems were identical to the parameters given above. The automatic FLARE mode on these airplanes seemed a little "abrupt" to me, in the automatic autoland, compared to a pilot flown flare manuever. Note: We performed autolandings periodically on good weather days to practice the automatic landings for both pilot and aircraft certification purposes.

When landing the 747-400 MANUALLY, I would use the natively designed aural (flare) tones.The first tone, at 100 feet RA, was a "wake-up call" to alert me to approx threshold crossing and as a warning to "prepare to flare" the airplane for landing. At approx 35 feet RA , you would get a second (flare) tone which signaled that you should start decreasing your sink rate by starting the flare and a third (flare) tone at 20 feet RA indicated that you complete the flare maneuver for landing. Generally, I used a slow and gradual change in pitch attitude from about the second tone through the third tone. Every 747-400 pilot had their own technique for managing the pitch/power scheme using the flare tones in an everyday manual landing.The 747-400 was a pretty easy airplane to land in general. Note: The Airbus family had similar aural callouts for automatic/manual landings: FIFTY THIRTY TWENTY RETARD (approx 10 feet).

With respect to the differential flare heights of the 747-400 and 727, I felt that I needed a crutch transitioning back to the "little" 727 to preclude a "high flare" until I could re-familiarize myself with landing the Trijet. I found setting the radar altimeter index to approx 20-25 feet gave me the comfortability that I needed. I seem to remember a light in the RA lit up and I think we got a small warning tone in the cockpit/headset. I did fly all three seat positions in the Trijet and for me, the B-727 was one of the hardest airplanes to land consistently well that I ever flew. The 727-100 (Stubby) landed like a real airplane. The stretched 727-200/2A series, was very challenging to consistently land well. I could do exactly the same thing two landings in a row, and both landings would be different. If you continued to rotate the airplane in the flare in the 727-200/2A, you were in a sense, driving the main gear into the runway, whereas, that didn't seem to be the case in the non-stretched model. Some guys actually pushed the yoke forward very slightly in the flare trying to milk the airplane onto the runway. It was an unnatural feeling for me to push the yoke forward slightly at landing.

With respect to crosswind landing techniques, for simplicity (KISS), I used nearly the same techniques in all the jets. The Boeing jets were, for me, easier to subtly manipulate during the crab/decrab/flare manuever, etc. For me, the Airbus airplanes, with their change to DIRECT LAW in the fly by wire sidesticks for landing at 100 feet, were easy to overcontrol in a strong crosswind. I disliked the A-330 in strong crosswinds, while I felt very comfortable landing the 747-400 in the same scenario. You just had to be very careful about pitch/roll combination inputs in the 747-400 while in the flare as it was possible to drag an outboard pod engine on landing. Depending upon weather conditions (wet or icy) you could actually land in a crab or remove it prior to touchdown.

As a multi-qualed pilot, I needed every crutch I could devise to transition between the jets. Most pilots were permanent position schedule holders and flew one aircraft at a time, sometimes for years on end. I didn't get that luxury for many years and it was extremely difficult to jump between airplanes so frequently. The constant academic study, aircraft systems review and shift in focus while flying another aircraft(s) simultaneously, made this a difficult lifestyle. Was it doable? Yes. Did it suck sometimes? You betcha! Like anyone else in their job, you dealt with the challenges and always did your very best.

For those of you sitting behind the cockpit, perhaps this gives you a brief glimpse into what happens on the pointy end of the jet, in front of the armored door.

 

[lubricatosaurus]

Originally Posted By: d4d
If you continued to rotate the airplane in the flare in the 727-200/2A, you were in a sense, driving the main gear into the runway, whereas, that didn't seem to be the case in the non-stretched model. Some guys actually pushed the yoke forward very slightly in the flare trying to milk the airplane onto the runway. It was an unnatural feeling for me to push the yoke forward slightly at landing.


OK, that is what I've heard about the 727, that in flare the non-minimum phase pitch control I mentioned before, was most annoying. All rear-tail airplanes do this to some extent since you have to push down on the tail to pitch up, reducing some lift momentarily before the main wing can develop its aerodynamic circulation (to get lift).

About the differences between a long and a short 727, it must be due to the greater distance between the main landing gear and the pilot's position. When the pilot pulls back on the yoke or stick, the cockpit rotates but doesn't rise as fast on the shorter 727 (kinematic instantaneous center closer to the pilot on the longer 727). Plus, the higher horizontal tail surface (T-tail) on the 727 meant the tail never experiences ground effect while the wing does, resulting in the tail still pushing down effectively close to the ground, compared to a low-tail aircraft where ground effect pushes up on the tail slightly. Result: I can see why some 727 pilots like to perform nose-lowering at the end of flare before the moment of touchdown, makes sense.

Human factors studies have shown that a pilot trained on one airplane in landing can possibly get into pilot induced oscillations (PIO) on another airplane if the phasing and feel is different and he is an aggressive "high-gain" kind of pilot.


Originally Posted By: d4d
You just had to be very careful about pitch/roll combination inputs in the 747-400 while in the flare as it was possible to drag an outboard pod engine on landing. Depending upon weather conditions (wet or icy) you could actually land in a crab or remove it prior to touchdown.


That works well to minimize roll angle in flare. Stay crabbed at wings level, then dip the downwind side landing gear about 10 feet (main gear) off the ground, which then hits first, torquing (yawing decrab) the airplane around to the runway heading and centerline as the other gear hits. Either that or I assume most pilots might just hit both right/left main gears at the same time in full crab, then get on the rudder aggressively to decrab at touchdown (??).

I'm no expert in what astro14 at UAL, or other airlines, train pilots to do exactly. Whatever is easiest, right?! On the MD-11 autoland, we would de-crab at 10 ft and let one gear side of the aircraft touch slightly ahead of the other gear, causing rolling and yawing naturally to runway alignment at about a 4 ft/sec sinkrate at touchdown.

Of course, if you're Navy, just pancake it in, simple.

 

[lubricatosaurus]

Originally Posted By: d4d
..... but early retirement seemed much more interesting than flying even one more trans-Pacific or trans-Atlantic crossing. "Tokyo, Tokyo, Northwest 11, Position, over..." Sayonara !

Hey, if that's what it takes to find good sushi, then so be it.

 

[d4d]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
d4d,

Take pride in knowing what ever amount of [censored] the company put you through.... You were able to be professional at all times and be up to the challenges of constantly flying multiple aircraft on such short notice.



Thank You for the kind sentiment, but I think that in Dec 1993, the MSP Crew Skeds/Training Scheduler probably thought my response to her might have been just a little less than professional: " Why don't you just keep me qualified and current on every airplane in the (NWA) fleet ? "

She really caught me at a bad time- I just walked in the door from an Asia trip on the 747-400, I was off from early Dec to just after Christmas, I had custody of my 8 year old son for nearly three weeks, I was going thru a divorce, I was being forced to take a check ride on the A-320 against my will after Christmas, etc.

The charitable Christmas spirit left me for a brief few minutes speaking with the Scheduler. Thankfully, it didn't leave her or the DTW Chief Pilot, because I didn't hear back from them as I expected. I did not answer my phone the rest of that Christmas season...I already had my gift and didn't care if even Santa called.

 

[SEMI_287]

Originally Posted By: d4d
Astro14 and 757guy gave you a pretty comprehensive description of what it was/is like to transition between aircraft in the airlines as your "Permanent Position" changes (B757 Capt to A330 Capt, A320 FO to B757 FO, etc). The training footprint, as someone noted, is like a two month long hostage crisis. Do it in Moscow on the Mississippi (MSP) in January and February and it felt like a Soviet gulag.

There were those of us at NWA (Not Written Anywhere, Not Without Acrimony,etc) who were "Forced Temporary" pilots, who transitioned between different airplanes and seat positions EVERY month OR sometimes between different airplanes and seat positions in the SAME month. It was done in reverse seniority order. Each month, as the airline flexed its flying operations up or down, if you were the most junior pilot qualified in that position, you got tagged for involuntary temporary reassignment. I was double/triple qualed from the Fall of 1990 until our contract changed after the lockout/strike of 1998. It was the worst period of my 25 year airline career and I was burned out. I was constantly taking checkrides, recencies and OE almost monthly, at least it seemed that way. Further, since you were already "qualified" on the aircraft you were in the simulator for, you were expected to perform quickly and precisely, notwitstanding the fact that you had more recently flown up to two different aircraft besides this one.

From month to month, I might have to look two or three different places to find out what aircraft and seat position that I was flying next month. As the next month rolled around, a week prior, I would start getting out my flight manuals for the "new" airplane and start rememorizing aircraft operations limits, schematics of hydraulic, fuel, electrical systems, pressurization, engines, ad infinitum. I would have to completely relearn aircraft approach procedures and instrument landing callouts/procedures for the new jet, even while flying my current seat position during airline trips. It was routine for me to take two sets of flight pubs on an airline trip and study on my layovers. I might land on the last day of the month as an international 747-400 FO and walk out the door a couple of days later as an A-320 Capt starting a domestic trip. In Dec 1993, I walked in the door after flying an Asia trip as a 400 FO and the phone was ringing. I was being "forced temp" to B727 Capt the rest of the month, while already being scheduled for an A-320 Capt Checkride after Christmas. That would have been three different aircraft and seat positions in the same month. I told the Crew Scheduler what they could do with their request since I was supposed to have a few weeks off over the Christmas holidays. Expecting a call from the DTW Chief Pilot at any moment for my unenthusiastic response to Crew Skeds, it never came. Perhaps the Chief Pilot was not such a Scrooge after all.

Exacerbating this dual/triple qual scenario in the airline, I was also flying in the Air National Guard. The Guard airplane made my 4th current airplane at one time. I would simply do what I did in the airline- review ops limits, systems, ejection and boldface emergency procedures before each flight and hope that I could use my superior judgment and not my superior flying skill. I finally used my superior judgment and left the Guard so I could focus on exclusively airline flying.

NWA was the only major US airline-or any airline that I know of- that employed dual/triple qualified pilots. I spoke with ALPA, NWA and finally the FAA about it. They all said the same thing- "we feel your pain, but it is legal." If the flying public had only known...

In retrospect, changing aircraft positions in the airline was actually both challenging and something to look forward to. It might mean being able to now fly international routes on a widebody when you had only flown domestically. It might mean you get to upgrade to Capt from FO. It might mean upgrading from "steam gauges" to the latest "glass cockpit" technology with a whole new language of acronyms like EICAS, ECAM, FADEC, IRS/GPS, MCDU/CDU, MCP,PFD/ND, FMS, etc. It was definitely the "firehose" effect when you went to school-particularly on the "glass" jets. The learning curve was exceedingly steep but our Instructor Pilots (Capt and FO) were generally outstanding (guys like Astro14, 757guy, etc). US airline training programs are outstanding in their scope and methods and produce excellent pilots. A few of us marginal guys did manage to slip by though...maybe that's why I got all those extra checkrides and line checks

Holy cow man, that is nuts. I'm glad I only have one aircraft to worry about. Although I would like to fly the 757.

 

[LoneRanger]

I'm 52 and wish I could start a 2nd career as a commercial pilot flying for a small regional either out west, the northwest, the southwest, or caribbean flying turbo prop twins. Low salary yes, but I'd have a pension coming in monthly from my 1st career retirement. No moving up to the majors, just stay small. Think I'm too old to break into it though, but health is perfect except for uncorrected vision around 20/50.