Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Cockpit Chronicles: Back to the simulator
Cockpit Chronicles takes you along on some of Kent's trips as a co-pilot on the Boeing 757 and 767 based in Boston."You have training!" read the message at the top of our company website.
Unlike our vacation or monthly schedule, we have no choice in the timing of our training. So every nine months, plus or minus a month, we know that we'll be called back to the flight academy for four or five days of what we call "recurrent."
Ground School
The first two days consist of classroom training that covers subjects such as performance, (which mostly deals with takeoff performance calculations), emergency equipment, federal regulations, security and finally a review of the aircraft's systems, such as the electrical, hydraulic and flight controls of both the 757 and the 767.
At times, these courses can be tedious. Watching a video on the proper way to set up a 56-man life raft every nine months can test your abilities to stay alert. In fact, it's torturous.
This year, however, we had a redesigned human factors class. Human factors training covers some of the common mistakes discovered through a pilot self-disclosing program known as "ASAP."
Often these mistakes are re-created in a simulator and filmed for use as a training aid. This year, one of my flights was featured in the class.
Usually this isn't something anyone would be proud of. Fortunately it was a video I made for entertainment purposes only. It showed a typical three-day trip from Boston to Paris and it's now used to lighten things up a bit in the class before diving into more serious topics.
A Shiny New Toy
The other new experience came during the simulator training. The company is in the process of retrofitting all their 757 and 767's with a new type of cockpit display. These LCD screens are much larger and they replace many of the round dial instruments that are common in the older Boeings.
Currently only one of our airplanes is flying with these new panels, but two of the simulators have been modified, allowing us to get some training in the new layout before flying one for real.

The LCD screens are larger and they display more information without having to switch pages as we've had to do in the original design. It's bright and clear, and it makes flying an approach a little easier, eliminating the requirement for one pilot to display a raw data page while the other displays their map page during certain approaches.
I know there are some people out there who prefer the round dials and old 'steam gauge' cockpits, but these people probably would prefer we did away with enclosed cockpits, too. At some point, you have to embrace new technology.
Eventually these screens will include satellite weather and Jeppesen approach plates with airport diagrams built in, an upgrade called the Class 3 electronic flight bag. This will allow us to shed a couple of heavy books from our kit bags.
Since I'm a gadget nut, I'm always in favor of any new technology we can get in the Boeing. Small, general aviation aircraft have had some of these features available to them for years and it's about time we caught up.

The Simulator
This time I'd be going through the class by myself, which meant that instead of being paired up with another captain, I'd fly with an instructor who would play the role of captain for the scenario. After a two-hour briefing, the instructor, also known as a "sim-P," or simulator pilot, put me in the box to practice a few maneuvers while getting used to the gorgeous new displays.
The two sim-Ps were retired from Braniff and Eastern Airlines. I've always been impressed with these former line pilots. They know what they're doing and they approach their jobs with surprising enthusiasm, even though they've been flying or instructing for quite a few decades.

George and Gary, both former pilots of now defunct airlines, get the simulator ready.
The FAA requires the training of certain maneuvers. You can expect to see aborted takeoffs, an engine failure during the critical phase of flight [like just after lifting off the ground] and a windshear scenario. We also fly a variety of approaches–ILS's, VOR, RNAV and visual approaches–often times with only one engine operating.

After the required maneuvers are completed, they often give you a chance to see or try something you could never do in the actual airplane. I asked to do a no-flaps takeoff, since that had been in the news lately as well as a landing where I attempted to fly slow enough to touch the aft fuselage at touchdown.
The flaps-up takeoff went surprisingly well. I suspect the 757 has the wing design and the added thrust to handle that situation better than the DC-9 or MD-80's that have had problems. Of course, there would never be a situation that you'd want to be in this predicament, but it's nice to know more about what the airplane can do?
The intentional tail strike turned out to be much more difficult than I expected. Even though I was 15 knots slower than the normal approach speed for our weight, we still didn't touch the aft part of the fuselage to the ground. After touchdown, I pulled back and I was surprised to see how much of an angle was required to finally get a strike. This 757 was much less prone to a tail strike than the 767-300 or even the 737-800.
We continued down the runway dragging the rear end. I imagined huge sparks flying from our tail section. This would have been an expensive lesson in the real airplane that would have resulted in a visit to the chief pilot's office followed by some remedial training.
After 4 hours in the simulator, George was confident I'd pass my checkride with a check airman the next day.
Fortunately, I'd have Gary, the former Eastern pilot who acted as my captain during the training session, with me in the left seat for the checkride.
The next day from 6 to 8 p.m., I answered the questions the check airman asked about the airplane's systems and then we discussed some of the problems pilots have seen on the line.
At 8:15, Gary and I jumped in the simulator and flew a variety of maneuvers and dealt with some equipment failures and fires for two hours, and then we took a short break before coming back to the 757 simulator for the official checkride.
For the next two hours, we operated as a normal flight from Reno to San Francisco. We discussed the unusual two-engine and single-engine departures from Reno, that require a variety of turns to avoid the high terrain in the area, and we also looked at the arrival into San Francisco.
We made sure to discuss the procedure for a one-engine go-around at SFO and how its path differed from the two-engine go-around. Had we not briefed this difference, the check airman would have almost certainly given us an engine failure followed by a go-around.
With just a push of a button, our instructor could have created one of literally hundreds of problems for us to contend with. But this flight was to simulate a more normal scenario with a single mechanical problem, which is more realistic.
After taxiing out and taking off, the check airman gave us a small air-conditioning problem that was resolved quickly. The issue, a 'pack trip,' was small enough that we could continue the simulated flight to San Francisco.
Compared to the day before and the first two hours of the checkride, this was a rather simple task. We landed, pulled up to the gate and finished the parking checklist before the walkway was lowered to the hydraulically-actuated simulator for our 'deplaning.'

The check airman gave a short debrief. His only issue for me that night was that I hadn't annunciated "Autopilot Off" loud enough when I clicked the button on the yoke to hand-fly the approach. A legitimate gripe that I'll happily take after four-hours in the simulator.
While I enjoyed the initial training that lasts four to six weeks and the excitement that comes with learning a new airplane, no one ever looks forward to recurrent training. And even though I managed to crack a smile and have a few laughs with some great instructors this week, it was an exhilarating feeling to leave the flight academy knowing I was good for another 9 months.
After training, I had to fly a four-day trip over Thanksgiving, but you might want to hold off with any sympathy for me until after you see where I'll be going. Stay tuned!
Cockpit Chronicles takes you along on some of Kent's trips as an international co-pilot on the Boeing 757 and 767 based in Boston.

Filed under: The Cockpit Chronicles








Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Marius Heersink Dec 3rd 2008 11:26AM
Thank you for this great insight.
I remember reading an article from Les Abend in Flying magazine about exactly the same thing.
How much would one of these simulators provably go for?
And are you planning on becoming a captain soon and is there any extra training you have to do for it?
And last one, what exactly is a 'pack'?
Marius Heersink
Kent Wien Dec 3rd 2008 12:29PM
Hi Marius,
The CAE simulators are going for $12.5 million right now. Start saving!
Upgrading to captain is based on seniority at my airline. So when I reach approximately 55% on the seniority list, I should be able to 'hold' a captain seat. Currently, I'm around 60% after almost 16 years with the company.
Other airlines are moving much faster, with upgrade times of less than three years, even. But things have slowed down with the increase in mandatory retirement age and the slowing economy.
I wrote about the upgrade process here:
http://www.gadling.com/2008/04/04/plane-answers-how-do-pilots-move-up-to-captain/
A "pack" is an air conditioning and pressurization device that converts the compressed air from the engines into clean air to keep the cabin warm or cool and to pressurize the airplane.
We have two packs, so if one overheats or fails, the other one can take over. If both were to fail, we'd have to descend to a lower altitude immediately.
Marius Heersink Dec 3rd 2008 12:40PM
Thanks for responding.
WOW
$12 M......
That'll set you back a little bit.
I think I'll stick with Microsoft Flight Sim
chris Dec 3rd 2008 1:24PM
Hi Kent,
I'm one of those folks who will miss some of the round gauges, but it's not because I'm a luddite. :-)
When you posted your flickr photos of the new digital instrumentation I was surprised by the omission of an analog airspeed indicator. When "flying" x-plane I find steam-gauge airspeed indicators to be much easier to read than tape indicators; I've noticed that I can more easily sense airspeed from an analog gauge than a tape.
When digital speedometers in cars were the new thing a number of years ago, some folks remarked that analog gauges were better because drivers could get an idea of their speed peripherally without having to actually look directly at the gauge and read off the speed figure. I find tape airspeed indicators to be hard to read for the much the same reason: all airspeeds look pretty-much identical on a tape, so tape gauges don't provide the same peripheral/visual speed cue that one easily gets from a steam gauge.
Perhaps this isn't as much of an issue in a real airplane because there are other visual, aural, and kinetic speed cues that one doesn't necessarily get from a simulator. I'm curious to know if real pilots find airspeed tapes as comparatively hard to read as (some of) us sim drivers.
Chris
Kent Wien Dec 3rd 2008 3:20PM
Hi Chris,
I agree. The round dial is quicker to determine your speed at a glance. But the tape has one advantage. When hand-flying, with the autothrottles off, it's easy to see if you're accelerating or decelerating with just a glance at the trend indicator, which displays the projected speed in the next 10 seconds. So, by zeroing out that little up or down arrow, you'll know you're speed is stable.
arex Dec 3rd 2008 8:32PM
On a similar topic, via Laughing Squid: How to land a 747 at SFO Airport!
http://laughingsquid.com/how-to-land-a-747-at-san-francisco-international-airport/
Cool stuff.
Alex Dec 3rd 2008 11:22PM
Hey Kent,
Thanks for posting again! I was having withdrawl symptoms from not reading any new posts in a while. Can't wait to find out where you went during the Thanksgiving trip. Good cliffhanger.
Thanh T. Dec 4th 2008 10:45AM
I agree.
I think an on ground flight simulator [regional jets, commercial airplanes, helicopters] is a great way for students to safely train on and gain more experience with the instruments.
When some of my old classmates were interested in taking private flying lessons many years ago, they went through a similar process of training. Of course, some of the rules and regulations are a lot tougher today.
I think one of the most difficult decisions for many new students is choosing the correct flight school for his or her needs-choosing the right certification program(s).
There are a lot of flight schools across the country offering many different programs. The cost of these pilot programs varies significantly.
I think many new students will need to familiarize-research which career path he or his would like to pursue to help jump-start his or her career as a professional commercial pilot.
It is projected in coming years, many airline pilots will reach retirement age (60-65).
And some airlines analyst project their companies will restart hiring for these new positions in the coming years.
hiflyer99 Dec 4th 2008 3:51PM
As another AA pilot who "lurks" more than posts, you have quite a following on the internet. I have enjoyed your Boston to Paris video and as I am looking at either 737 or 767 captain in the next year or two, I appreciate your photos of the new display upgrade for the 757/767. As a photographer (amateur) I am also impressed with your wonderful photos! Keep up the great work.
Michelle Dec 4th 2008 6:16PM
I second on the withdrawls!! Aside from the PC versions, are there really any avenues for non-pilots to get a feel of flight simulators? While the thought of a flight lesson is still on my mind, it would be really cool to be able to try it out on the ground as well. Looking forward to the next post!
Alex Dec 4th 2008 10:55PM
I've heard United Airlines actually rents out their simulators for a hefty fee. They have a program that's kind of like " be a United pilot for a day." I think you get some ground school and then they let you fly the simulator. I've heard of regular people getting that as a birthday present. I've read about it in Aviation mags I think. It would be cool to do that but even better would be to be an actual airline pilot. Are you working on becoming an airline pilot Michelle?
Alex
Alex Dec 4th 2008 11:08PM
Michelle,
Here's the website of someone who did the "Pilot For A Day" program at United.
http://www.flywestwind.com/Products/b777_review/ual_b777_sim.htm
Alex
Kent Wien Dec 4th 2008 11:10PM
Thanks Alex,
I was searching for someone who offered some sim time with very little luck.
Thanks for the link. It'd be a heck of a present for someone, wouldn't it?
Kent
Michelle Dec 5th 2008 2:41PM
Wow thanks for the cool find Alex! That would be one heck of a gift.
hiflyer99 Dec 5th 2008 11:16AM
by the way, I forgot to say, (although I don't think you'll need it) good luck on your recurrent training.
adf Dec 16th 2008 11:06AM
I did not read the whole article but I'm sure I will eventually. In fact I just clicked the link because I saw those pictures. I'm reading all of Galley Gossip right now. But are you allowed to post photos of all that simulator stuff? It doesn't seem safe.
j.l Jan 1st 2009 1:45PM
well, i guess in all of the free audio lessons on how to overcome fear of flying when they said that pilots are required mandatory regular training intervals they weren't lying! i just thought it was something they said to give passengers like me something to chew on in deceit. i am glad to know this! :-)
Larry Jan 11th 2009 8:52PM
I work for FlightSafety, I think the training plots get is great. Pilots are put through he__, but passengers safety is with every minute of it. Not everyone has to take a test every 6 to 9 months to keep there job. If they did there would be alot of weather people out of a job! :)
Patrick Feb 27th 2009 9:46PM
Hi, great stuff!
Just wondering, when you say you shot a few RNAV approaches, what do you mean? Is all of your airlines 757/767s certified for RNAV(GPS) approaches or just this panel? Or are you talking about SAAAR RNP approaches with this panel or what?
Thanks!
Kent Wien Feb 27th 2009 9:50PM
Hi Patrick,
RNAV approaches are new to the 757 for us, since at least half of our airplanes aren't even capable right now. With the flat panel upgrade, we're going to have the entire airline ready for RNAV approaches soon.
It's new to a few of our pilots, but those coming from the 777 or 737 have been doing these approaches for a while.
The Quito approach we've been practicing does have a turn in it, so that was a new element for all of us.
Thanks for asking!