Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
23. The problem is this.
Sun Feb 1, 2015, 07:11 PM
Feb 2015

No one thought an Airbus jet would have Pitot trouble at altitude. If it did, the heater would melt the ice in a minute. No biggie, any pilot can fly for a minute right?

The real problem is when you are facing something not covered in step by step checklist style. There you have your experience to guide you. But if your experience is mostly watching a computer fly, then you will want to return to that instinctively.

Computers are excellent aides, but they are supposed to follow orders, not give them. Too many pilots are accustomed to doing what the computer wants. When it fails, or a situation not programmed occurs the pilot is supposed to fly the damned plane. But the pilot is trying to get the computer working instead of working the problem with the plane. This isn't the pilot not wanting the computer to fly. This is someone who needs the computer to fly.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

When you say older pilots... Most commercial planes were fly-by-wire for 40 years or more. TheBlackAdder Feb 2015 #1
Why did that pilot throw the breakers and turn off the computer over the Java Sea? CK_John Feb 2015 #3
Who knows? I wasn't there and I wasn't privy to his thoughts. TheBlackAdder Feb 2015 #4
Can you provide a link to this information please? Capt.Rocky300 Feb 2015 #7
Link: CK_John Feb 2015 #8
I've read several news articles on the crash......... Capt.Rocky300 Feb 2015 #9
No, not at all. Major Hogwash Feb 2015 #2
Some of the instrumentation is more reliable than humans jberryhill Feb 2015 #5
That's just your opinion. Major Hogwash Feb 2015 #11
That's just your opinion. GGJohn Feb 2015 #12
A nice myth but even the AF admits humans can't take the potential G force of todays fighters. CK_John Feb 2015 #6
Your argument is a myth, it is built on a false premise. Major Hogwash Feb 2015 #10
G suits have been around for decades now to counter G forces, GGJohn Feb 2015 #13
Testing of pilotless F16's and the introduction of driveless cars will bring this topic front and CK_John Feb 2015 #14
Any set of instruments or automation can fail FLPanhandle Feb 2015 #15
The problem is that the pilots spend the time trying to fix the computer. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #18
The problem is that the exchange of information is very poor. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #16
I know, I just answered, but.... Savannahmann Feb 2015 #17
A skilled and experienced pilot will know how the FBW computer works. backscatter712 Feb 2015 #19
IMO, the last several post high lights the human problem, which is more important CK_John Feb 2015 #20
I would disagree. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #21
I respect your opinion but... the world is moving to total automation and the bean counters are in CK_John Feb 2015 #22
The problem is this. Savannahmann Feb 2015 #23
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are older experienced pil...»Reply #23