Plane Crash In French Alps

[DonnyTJS]

Oh to be judged by emoticon, you obviously missed the vital, novel and otherwise unobtainable perspective by the current demographic posting, lacking as we were a commercial airline pilot. I've reproduced it below, may you find wisdom in it. We're talking about engineering pilots out of the plane, not flying them.

The emoticon was an expression of amusement, not judgement. I was simply tickled by the TAMBness of the exchange - I'm neutral on the technology v human debate.

[thewelk]

With a year of training an engineer could fly a plane but a pilot couldn't be an engineer.

Yet engineers are generally undervalued by society and pilots are revered.

[Tartan Monkey]

Tartan Monkey's a commercial airline pilot, iirc, so would be good to hear his perspective if he feels like giving it.

I'd be happy to give my opinion if you like.

I'm an airline pilot, I have been for the past 16 years. I have flown regional turbo props around the Mainland UK and the Scottish Highlands ans Islands. I've flown Boeing 737,757,767 and I have flown as both first officer and captain. I current fly the Boeing 777 all over the world and I now live in the Middle East. I have over 9000hrs flying time and I started to learn to fly when I was still at school aged 16 (20 years ago). Now that you have my CV, let's have a chat about what pilots do and don't do........

First of all I'd like to say that this incident made me feel physically sick. Even now I cannot get my head around it. Many of my friends and colleagues feel the same. This guy obviously hid his illness very well, although it now turns out that the German aviation authorities knew about his illness and decided that he needed regular psychiatric evaluation. I find it shocking that he wasn't grounded. Let's rememebr pilots are human beings too. Work stress, divorce, lack of career opportunities, bereavement, financial strains all affect pilots the same way they affect everyone. Unfortunately our industry isn't so forgiving when it comes to this. One isn't seem to have "the right stuff" if one was to admit to problems. We are supposed to get on with things. Personally I hope that this incident raises the issue and allows those who suffer and can't cope, to get the help they need.

The locked flight deck door came into our professional lives in the wake of 9-11. It's a necessary evil. We simply cannot achieve 100% security and 100% safety. It's not a line that the public want to hear, but we can't achieve it in every day life either. Since 1997 there have been 3 pilot murder/suicides that I am aware of (including Tuesday's). It's not a regular occurrence, but it sadly has happened in the past.

I most certainly do not think that remotely flown aircraft is the answer. The technology simply is not there to support such a thing and I can't see it in my lifetime. There are a multitude of things that happen on flights everyday that require a pilot to deal with that a computer couldn't. Unmanned Aircraft crash on a regular basis, I know of one UAV designer who says he would never fly on a remotely flown airliner. Pilots are highly trained, highly dedecated people who take their profession very seriously. We do not sit and look out the window doing nothing. The aeroplane cannot take off on its own, we land the aeroplane whenever we can. We usually only use the autoland facility when the visibility dictates that we must, it isn't us being lazy, it isn't that we can't fly in fog, but regulations dictate that we must autoland when visibility is low. This allows us to monitor the systems and to obtain the legally required visual minimus at our decision height to safely land the aeroplane under these conditions.

To get back to the point, I think that this is a very rare event, an absolute tragedy for everyone involved. It has shaken the entire industry, but as we do in this business we will learn from it. Things will change to reduce the likelihood of this happening again, and as I said hopefully those who need the help will get it.

If there are any specific questions then fire away.

[phart]

I'm neutral on the technology v human debate.

Presumably this neutrality is a function of your ignorance on the subject as opposed to a reasoned decision?

[johnnie x]

Bus drivers in gold trim.

But bus driving is more dangerous.

Exactly.

And all the birds love pilots, all they do is what they are told by the real professionals on the ground, the ATC guys who juggle hundreds of planes.

[DonnyTJS]

Presumably this neutrality is a function of your ignorance on the subject as opposed to a reasoned decision?

Of course.

[phart]

Of course.

You should be more like me and feign expertise. Then just keep bringing up the pronouncements you did get correct to create the illusion you're correct a lot more than you actually are.

Edited March 27, 2015 by phart

[Auld_Reekie]

If there are any specific questions then fire away.

Good read that TM.

Question I would have is, given the pressure on airlines to reduce costs and offer cheap flights, do you think management are understanding of staff needs or are more interested in chasing the cheap money? What's the relationship like between flight crew and airlines?

[Tartan Monkey]

With a year of training an engineer could fly a plane but a pilot couldn't be an engineer.

Yet engineers are generally undervalued by society and pilots are revered.

No, an engineer couldn't pilot a public transport aircraft in a year. To get to that level of proficiency it takes the same amount of time, if not longer than it takes to become an engineer. It took me 13 and a half years to become a captain from my first flying lesson, 7 years from my first flight with an airline. To captain a wide body it has taken 20 years from first flying lesson which is 16 years from first airline flight.

Pilots terms and conditions have been constantly degraded over the years. Pilots are by no means held in the same esteem as years gone by.

[deecie]

With a year of training an engineer could fly a plane but a pilot couldn't be an engineer.

Yet engineers are generally undervalued by society and pilots are revered.

As an Engineer who would rather be a pilot, I've struggled to get anywhere as I'm viewed as 'unlikely' to stay with the profession.

[DonnyTJS]

I'd be happy to give my opinion if you like.

Thanks TM.

[Tartan Monkey]

Good read that TM.

Question I would have is, given the pressure on airlines to reduce costs and offer cheap flights, do you think management are understanding of staff needs or are more interested in chasing the cheap money? What's the relationship like between flight crew and airlines?

It very much depends on the airline you work for. Like every job, there are good employers and there are bad. However the pressures to save costs, and the amount of legislation is increasing every year. Pressure is certainly higher than 10 years ago.

[phart]

No, an engineer couldn't pilot a public transport aircraft in a year. To get to that level of proficiency it takes the same amount of time, if not longer than it takes to become an engineer. It took me 13 and a half years to become a captain from my first flying lesson, 7 years from my first flight with an airline. To captain a wide body it has taken 20 years from first flying lesson which is 16 years from first airline flight.

Pilots terms and conditions have been constantly degraded over the years. Pilots are by no means held in the same esteem as years gone by.

You can fly a single prop plane though with 45 hours experience and passing multiple choice (WTF?) exams though. an exam system where you can be lucky and pass. All accross europe with passengers.

Edited March 27, 2015 by phart

[Tartan Monkey]

Exactly.

And all the birds love pilots, all they do is what they are told by the real professionals on the ground, the ATC guys who juggle hundreds of planes.

Aeroplanes can and do operate regularly without ATC, but ATC can't operate without pilots. We have a mutual respect, but the reality is that they are there because of us, not the other way round.

[TartanJon]

I want TM to be the pilot the next time I fly

[thewelk]

No, an engineer couldn't pilot a public transport aircraft in a year. To get to that level of proficiency it takes the same amount of time, if not longer than it takes to become an engineer. It took me 13 and a half years to become a captain from my first flying lesson, 7 years from my first flight with an airline. To captain a wide body it has taken 20 years from first flying lesson which is 16 years from first airline flight.

Pilots terms and conditions have been constantly degraded over the years. Pilots are by no means held in the same esteem as years gone by.

Ok, I admit that using my dabbling with flight sims over the years as evidence was a bit of a stretch. But still, restrictive rules and regulations aside, the core skills required these days aren't as high as they used to be. Engineers helped make piloting far easier. And those guys probably didn't get half the amount of minge.

I'll turn my scorn back to GPs again now...

[ALBANACH]

Where pilots are invaluable is when dealing with emergencies and contingency planning. Look at the Jet Blue incident from a few years back where the the forward landing gear was locked 90 degrees out of the normal, technology in that event failed but but the skill of the pilot averted disaster.

[Tartan Monkey]

You can fly a single prop plane though with 45 hours experience and passing multiple choice (WTF?) exams though. an exam system where you can be lucky and pass. All accross europe with passengers.

A single engine prop is not an "airliner", and no you cannot fly with passengers as that would be flying "for higher or reward" for wich you require a minimum of a commercial pilots licence. You are talking about a private pilots licence, and 45 hrs is a MINIMUM.

[DonnyTJS]

Engineers helped make piloting far easier. And those guys probably didn't get half the amount of minge.

And all the birds love pilots

If there are any specific questions then fire away.

Er... yeah ...

[Tartan Monkey]

Ok, I admit that using my dabbling with flight sims over the years as evidence was a bit of a stretch. But still, restrictive rules and regulations aside, the core skills required these days aren't as high as they used to be. Engineers helped make piloting far easier. And those guys probably didn't get half the amount of minge.

I'll turn my scorn back to GPs again now...

I think you should stay away from playing flight sim on the computer and watching the movies. What makes you think that the core skills are not as high? What era are you comparing today with? Also how do you know if piloting is "far easier"? What technology are you referring to?

[phart]

A single engine prop is not an "airliner", and no you cannot fly with passengers as that would be flying "for higher or reward" for wich you require a minimum of a commercial pilots licence. You are talking about a private pilots licence, and 45 hrs is a MINIMUM.

Ok you can fly with other folk in the aircraft, which was what i meant with "passenger". I never made any claim to a single engine being an airliner though, I never made any claim to commercial license either i'll reproduce what i did write so we all have it in front of us.

"You can fly a single prop plane though with 45 hours experience and passing multiple choice (WTF?) exams though. an exam system where you can be lucky and pass. All accross europe with passengers, other people in the plane"

By minimum it still means you can do it though, so not sure how minimum contradicts my statement of 45 hours, my point is still correct.

Not really sure why this is being argued against beyond the "passenger" thing, it's clearly correct.

Edited March 27, 2015 by phart

[phart]

the whole boeing twin engine 777 was designed by engineering models on computer. it was built AFTER it was designed and worked a treat.

[Maq]

but ATC can't operate without pilots.

Aye we can, Sunday mornings are my favourite shift!

the reality is that they are there because of us, not the other way round.

Absolutely. There would be no job for us if we didn't have some pilots to keep right

I jest - commercial pilots do a fantastic job.

No way you'd catch me on an unmanned aircraft.

The technology isn't there, and isn't going to be for a long time.

[thewelk]

I think you should stay away from playing flight sim on the computer and watching the movies. What makes you think that the core skills are not as high? What era are you comparing today with? Also how do you know if piloting is "far easier"? What technology are you referring to?

Seriously? You need to compare what you have now to the 80s for example. Technology has increased efficiency so much that you can now do the job of what was previously 4 people. Your computer systems make the whole piloting much safer and easier. TCAS, for example. Imagine life without it? Basic moving maps, EVS thermal imaging, accurate weather info. Real time system analytics. Envelope protection.

We're not even onto the autopilot features...Autothrottle/cruise control, autolanding

Pilots these days...don't know they're born

[Tartan Monkey]

Ok you can fly with other folk in the aircraft, which was what i meant with "passenger". I never made any claim to a single engine being an airliner though, I never made any claim to commercial license either i'll reproduce what i did write so we all have it in front of us.

"You can fly a single prop plane though with 45 hours experience and passing multiple choice (WTF?) exams though. an exam system where you can be lucky and pass. All accross europe with passengers, other people in the plane"

By minimum it still means you can do it though, so not sure how minimum contradicts my statement of 45 hours, my point is still correct.

Not really sure why this is being argued against beyond the "passenger" thing, it's clearly correct.

My point is that not many people get a PPL with 45 hrs. Regardless I believe you are comparing the ability required to attain a recreational flying licence with the requirements for a professional flying licence. It's like comparing someone that owns a sail boat to the captain of the QM2. It's similar in basics only. Not really sure what the significance of the multiple choice question papers are. Have you ever seen them? They are by no means easy. The pass mark is 75% per paper, of which there were 15 exams. these are taken in 2 blocks over 3 days. You must pass all exams at 75% to pass the ground school subjects. There are then 5 flying tests to pass in the aircraft (not including simulator). Then once you get a licence you need to get a job, which can take years, I was very lucky. You then do an intensive ground school course on the actual aircraft you will be flying (737/A320 whatever). Once you pass that you must undertake simulator training on the specific aircraft. Once that is done you will move onto all the safety and security courses, first aid, human factors, legal training and company procedures. Then you get to fly the aeroplane, but only under training which is very intense and to a high standard. Once the training is finished you are released "to the line" to commence passenger operations. Every 6 months you spend 2 days in the classroom and 2 days in the simulator under assessment. If you don't perform your job is on the line. Also you must pass your medical a flying "line check" every year. The cost of the training to get you the to that first job is around £100,000 - 150,000, which you need to find and pay. So I'm not sure why you are intent on making out like it's easy and that we do nothing.