How much lack of similarity in airliner flying?

[Otis McNatt]

Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence. For
instance, one could die of a heart attack, and the other, say,
of an aneurysm. Now, I'll admit the chances of this happening are
remote, but it could happen; stranger things have.

So, suppose it did happen. If there happened to be an airline pilot
on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would he
have much of a problem landing the plane?

How about if the on board pilot had no Boeing experience, but only experience
with, say, Airbuses, or DC-9s, or the later MD-xx models?

I've been flying more recently, and these thoughts sometimes pop in my head
during those moments sitting up there at 33,000 ft. Also, people sometimes
sit around and babble about "the computer flies the plane" and such, and I'm
sure computers play a significant role with airliners now, but just how much?
I would think that humans still take the controls at least during takeoff
and landing, yes? And sometime I tune into the communications, and hear
that pilots are regularly requesting altitude changes and such. So, how
much does "the computer" fly the modern airliners now?

Also, would a highly intelligent, quick-learner, who keeps his cool under
pressure (but with absolutely no flying experience) have any chance at all
of landing the plane without killing everyone, while taking good instructions
from someone on the radio?

--
O.M.

[Mike Rapoport]

You watch too much TV. The chances of two healthy people dying from
unrelated causes at the same time is so remote as to be inconcievable. Have
you considered the posibility of the airplane being hit by a meteor?

Mike
MU-2


"Otis McNatt" > wrote in message
om...
> Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
> due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence. For
> instance, one could die of a heart attack, and the other, say,
> of an aneurysm. Now, I'll admit the chances of this happening are
> remote, but it could happen; stranger things have.
>
> So, suppose it did happen. If there happened to be an airline pilot
> on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
> 717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would he
> have much of a problem landing the plane?
>
> How about if the on board pilot had no Boeing experience, but only
> experience
> with, say, Airbuses, or DC-9s, or the later MD-xx models?
>
> I've been flying more recently, and these thoughts sometimes pop in my
> head
> during those moments sitting up there at 33,000 ft. Also, people
> sometimes
> sit around and babble about "the computer flies the plane" and such, and
> I'm
> sure computers play a significant role with airliners now, but just how
> much?
> I would think that humans still take the controls at least during takeoff
> and landing, yes? And sometime I tune into the communications, and hear
> that pilots are regularly requesting altitude changes and such. So, how
> much does "the computer" fly the modern airliners now?
>
> Also, would a highly intelligent, quick-learner, who keeps his cool under
> pressure (but with absolutely no flying experience) have any chance at all
> of landing the plane without killing everyone, while taking good
> instructions
> from someone on the radio?
>
> --
> O.M.

[Dan Luke]

"Otis McNatt" wrote:
> Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
> due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence. For
> instance, one could die of a heart attack, and the other, say,
> of an aneurysm. Now, I'll admit the chances of this happening are
> remote, but it could happen; stranger things have.
>
> So, suppose it did happen. If there happened to be an airline pilot
> on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
> 717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would he
> have much of a problem landing the plane?

No.

> How about if the on board pilot had no Boeing experience, but only
experience
> with, say, Airbuses, or DC-9s, or the later MD-xx models?

No problem. Anything he needed to know he could get over the radio.

> I've been flying more recently, and these thoughts sometimes pop in my
head
> during those moments sitting up there at 33,000 ft. Also, people
sometimes
> sit around and babble about "the computer flies the plane" and such, and
I'm
> sure computers play a significant role with airliners now, but just how
much?
> I would think that humans still take the controls at least during takeoff
> and landing, yes? And sometime I tune into the communications, and hear
> that pilots are regularly requesting altitude changes and such. So, how
> much does "the computer" fly the modern airliners now?

Depends on the airliner in question. All have autopilots, many have
autoland capability.

> Also, would a highly intelligent, quick-learner, who keeps his cool under
> pressure (but with absolutely no flying experience) have any chance at all
> of landing the plane without killing everyone, while taking good
instructions
> from someone on the radio?

Pretty good chance if the aircraft were well equipped with automation gear.
Not impossible but highly doubtful if it were a more primitive type.
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

[Ron Natalie]

One of the Belvoir rags (I think it was probably IFR magazine), took three
pilots: one long time IFR pilot and controller (who I know personally), a student
pilot, and a third pilot and dumped them cold into a 737 simulator. While there's
a strong tendency to overcontrol, all three of them got the plane onto the ground.

[Dale]

In article >,
"Mike Rapoport" > wrote:


>Have you considered the posibility of the airplane being hit by a
>meteor?
>

What do you think killed the two pilots? <G>

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[Mike Rapoport]

"Dale" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote:
>
>
>>Have you considered the posibility of the airplane being hit by a
>>meteor?
>>
>
> What do you think killed the two pilots? <G>
>
> --
> Dale L. Falk
>
> There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
> as simply messing around with airplanes.
>
> http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

I thought one died of a heart attack and the other of an aneurysm. Upon
reflection, I suppose that, two people, one having a heart attack and the
other having an aneurysm is not that unlikely if they saw a big,
incandescent rock coming at them a 60,000mph, so perhaps the meteor did kill
them.

Mike
MU-2

[Peter Clark]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:15:11 -0400, "Ron Natalie" >
wrote:

>One of the Belvoir rags (I think it was probably IFR magazine), took three
>pilots: one long time IFR pilot and controller (who I know personally), a student
>pilot, and a third pilot and dumped them cold into a 737 simulator. While there's
>a strong tendency to overcontrol, all three of them got the plane onto the ground.

Hell, *I* could get it on the ground ;0

[Otis McNatt]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message >...
> You watch too much TV.

I actually watch very little TV.

> The chances of two healthy people dying from
> unrelated causes at the same time is so remote as to be inconcievable. Have
> you considered the posibility of the airplane being hit by a meteor?

Please re-read the subject line of my post, which is the main question
I was curious about. If you are unable to answer it, then remaining
quiet might be a swell idea, don't you think? I just thought there
might be someone here who knows something about the big stuff.

--
O.M.

[Otis McNatt]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message >...
> "Otis McNatt" wrote:
> > Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
> > due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence. For
> > instance, one could die of a heart attack, and the other, say,
> > of an aneurysm. Now, I'll admit the chances of this happening are
> > remote, but it could happen; stranger things have.
> >
> > So, suppose it did happen. If there happened to be an airline pilot
> > on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
> > 717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would he
> > have much of a problem landing the plane?
>
> No.
>
> > How about if the on board pilot had no Boeing experience, but only
> experience
> > with, say, Airbuses, or DC-9s, or the later MD-xx models?
>
> No problem. Anything he needed to know he could get over the radio.

One would think so anyway. I remember reading something written by
an airline pilot once, in which he said in effect that when an airline
pilot begins training on a new aircraft, it can be almost as bewildering
as with his first aircraft. I was just curious about just how much trouble
an MD-88 pilot, say, would have with a 737, if he were just thrust into
the cockpit in an emergency situation, without ever having been there before.

--
O.M.

[david renner]

"Otis McNatt" > wrote in message
om...
> Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
> due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence. For
kind of a neat question that most of us have wondered at some point (meteors
not withstanding.) I've knew a guy who talked a non-jet pilot through a
landing in a lear with no problem. btw, small though they are, lears are not
that forgiving. there are a lot of particulars involved with each jet. i got
a chance at a little stick time in a straight wing citation, and even though
it was a much simpler airplane than any of the jets i've flown, i was not
familiar with it. i've sometimes thought that the tough part for someone who
was jumping in a jet with no experience would be the wing loading and power
response. without a ball park target power setting on final, one might start
chasing power, airspeed and sink rate, and not catch up in time.
could most professional jet pilots land another jet? sure, but they would be
on the radio asking someone who flew that type about system operation,
target values, etc.

[Dan Luke]

"Otis McNatt" wrote:
> I was just curious about just how much trouble
> an MD-88 pilot, say, would have with a 737, if he were just thrust
> into
> the cockpit in an emergency situation, without ever having been there
> before.

Could he pass a checkride for the type rating? Probably not. Could he
land it? Yes.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Marco Rispoli]

"Otis McNatt" > wrote in message
om...
> Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
> due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence. For
> instance, one could die of a heart attack, and the other, say,
> of an aneurysm. Now, I'll admit the chances of this happening are
> remote, but it could happen; stranger things have.
>
> So, suppose it did happen. If there happened to be an airline pilot
> on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
> 717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would he
> have much of a problem landing the plane?
>

The most modern airliners are automated.

The pilot takes off and climbs until at a safe point enganges the autopilot
and the plane flies itself from that point on.

Most modern airliners have a Flight Management Computer which pretty much
does everything, including serving coffee (joke).

Best case scenario: a plane with a full automated autloand system (Cat IIIb
I think it's called) , requires the pilot to only dial the right nav data;
it will intercept the localizer, descend, flare, touchdown, brake, and steer
itself down the runway to a stop. When everything works, it's quite amazing
to watch ... the first 3-4 times. Then I am ready to bet, it gets boring.

So if the plane was not damaged in the accident that killed the two pilots,
a person with zero knowledge of piloting, under the guidance of experts on
the ground, can land the plane ... for the very simple reason that the plane
will land itself. All he/she will have to do is dial the right data in.

pilots are there in case something goes wrong and they make sure that the
plane is flying great when nothing is going wrong.

1 - the difference between the professional pilot and the rookie is that the
rookie is always surprised when an emergency happens, the pro is surprised
when no emergency happens.

2 - (this comes from my instructor) thousands and thousands of engeneering
hours went into your plane. It knows more about flying than you'll ever do.

Just my personal, non-qualified, attempt at an answer.

--
Marco Rispoli - NJ, USA / PP-ASEL
My on-line aviation community -> http://www.thepilotlounge.com

[Chris W]

Marco Rispoli wrote:

> Best case scenario: a plane with a full automated autloand system (Cat IIIb
> I think it's called)

Unless things have changed in recent years, there are very few runways
that are equipped with a Cat IIIb ILS.


--
Chris W

Not getting the gifts you want? The Wish Zone can help.
http://thewishzone.com

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Otis McNatt > wrote:
>If there happened to be an airline pilot
>on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
>717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would he
>have much of a problem landing the plane?

Hell, I could probably land it. But I can't tell you what systems are
powered by electrical bus B, or whether loss of hydraulic system A
renders the auto brakes inop. That's the difference between being a
pilot and having a type rating.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Bob Moore]

Chris W > wrote

> Marco Rispoli wrote:
>> Best case scenario: a plane with a full automated autloand system
>> (Cat IIIb I think it's called)
>
> Unless things have changed in recent years, there are very few runways
> that are equipped with a Cat IIIb ILS.

NOT required!
At least in the Boeing jetliners that I flew at PanAm. You are
confusing "Approach Categories" with "Autoland". In the B-727,
the autoland system functioned quite well from a CAT II ILS.
Our B-727 minimums were CAT II and if we saw any of the Part 91
"things" at or above minimums, we could just leave the autoland
engaged to touchdown.
Autoland IS required for CAT IIIb approaches but in my experience,
was optional for CAT II operations.

Bob Moore
ATP B-707 B-727
PanAm (retired)

[Otis McNatt]

(Teacherjh) wrote in message >...
>
> There's a difference between learning an aircraft's systems, and landing the
> darn thing. One one level they all work the same. "Push forward, the houses
> get bigger. Pull back and the houses get smaller. Keep pulling back and the
> houses get bigger again."

I would suspect so.:) Thanks for the feedback guys.

--
O.M.

[Marco Rispoli]

"Bob Moore" > wrote in message
. 122...
> Chris W > wrote
>
> > Marco Rispoli wrote:
> >> Best case scenario: a plane with a full automated autloand system
> >> (Cat IIIb I think it's called)
> >
> > Unless things have changed in recent years, there are very few runways
> > that are equipped with a Cat IIIb ILS.
>
> NOT required!
> At least in the Boeing jetliners that I flew at PanAm. You are
> confusing "Approach Categories" with "Autoland". In the B-727,
> the autoland system functioned quite well from a CAT II ILS.
> Our B-727 minimums were CAT II and if we saw any of the Part 91
> "things" at or above minimums, we could just leave the autoland
> engaged to touchdown.
> Autoland IS required for CAT IIIb approaches but in my experience,
> was optional for CAT II operations.
>
> Bob Moore
> ATP B-707 B-727
> PanAm (retired)

Thanks for the clarification Bob.

As I said, I am unqualified and just going by what I am learning in IFR
basics ... and MS Flight Sim.

:)

--
Marco Rispoli - NJ, USA / PP-ASEL
My on-line aviation community -> http://www.thepilotlounge.com

[Tamas Feher]

>Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
>due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence.

Unfortunate? You mean Al-Kaida?
Then a bearded guy will fly the plane into some tall building...

[Tamas Feher]

>Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
>due to some incredible, but unfortunate coincidence. For
>instance, one could die of a heart attack, and the other, say,
>of an aneurysm. Now, I'll admit the chances of this happening are
>remote, but it could happen; stranger things have.
>
>So, suppose it did happen. If there happened to be an airline pilot
>on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
>717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would
>he
>have much of a problem landing the plane?

Airliners are all very similar. A DC-9 pilot would have no difficulty in
landing a B-777 under reasonable VFR conditions, given 2 miles of a
runway. In the USA it is easy to find big dry salt lakes 5 miles across.
Guess, even a Twin Otter pilot could land a B-777 there if talked to on
radio. A quad-jet may be another matter, but you could always turn off
the outboard engines and land in twin-jet mode just a little bit harder.

Damn it, some planes like the A-320 can fly completely automatically,
take-off, fly, land and roll to the terminal. I guess the pilots are
bored and keep busy by ****ing the stewardesses in-flight. Which
increases the risk of cardiac arrest. Especially if the stewardess is
blone, britney and TOXIC...

[Capt.Doug]

>"Bob Moore" wrote in message >In the B-727,
> the autoland system functioned quite well from a CAT II ILS.

During Cat II trials, my colleagues logged a successful Cat II with autoland
at an airport without a Cat II ILS.

D.

[David Cartwright]

"Otis McNatt" > wrote in message
om...
> Suppose *both* pilots in, say, a B-737, were to die in flight
> [snip ]
> So, suppose it did happen. If there happened to be an airline pilot
> on board who was certified in any of the other Boeing models, from the
> 717 up the 747 and 777, but having no experience flying the 737, would he
> have much of a problem landing the plane?

I'm sure that anyone with an ATPL and experience of some sort of airliner
would be able to get it on the ground, assuming that the systems were
functioning normally (i.e. you only had to contend with the mechanics of
approaches and landings, not broken flaps, hydraulic failures, etc). And a
friend who's a commercial pilot reckons that even a PPL with a decent amount
of experience stands a reasonable chance of landing something like a 737 so
long as there's someone on the radio telling him what buttons to push, what
speeds to use, etc, etc - though for a PPL the problem would be navigating
to the nearest suitable airfield using tools that probably aren't familiar.

This said, a flying instructor friend of mine has a relative who
transitioned from the B757 to the B747 a while back. No real problems except
that the first time he landed this much bigger aircraft, in which the pilot
sits much higher off the ground: "the ground happened rather sooner than I
expected it to".

D.

[David Lesher]

"Mike Rapoport" > writes:

>You watch too much TV. The chances of two healthy people dying from
>unrelated causes at the same time is so remote as to be inconcievable. Have
>you considered the posibility of the airplane being hit by a meteor?


Food poisoning disabling the crew is a possibility, however. I seem
to recall a rule that the left & right seats have to choose different
meals. I.e. one gets the rubber chicken, the other the cardboard
steak.

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[Dylan Smith]

In article >, David Cartwright wrote:
> approaches and landings, not broken flaps, hydraulic failures, etc). And a
> friend who's a commercial pilot reckons that even a PPL with a decent amount
> of experience stands a reasonable chance of landing something like a 737 so

I can say first hand that's possible. I did the ATOP course when United
were running it in Denver (12 hrs of groundschool, and 1 hr flight time
in their Level D sim). The B737 just wasn't hard to land, nor was it
difficult to hand-fly an instrument approach.

I would say I've got good confidence that most PPLs who've flown a high
performance single could pull it off given instructions on what to push
over the radio.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[David Brooks]

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, David Cartwright wrote:
> > approaches and landings, not broken flaps, hydraulic failures, etc). And
a
> > friend who's a commercial pilot reckons that even a PPL with a decent
amount
> > of experience stands a reasonable chance of landing something like a 737
so
>
> I can say first hand that's possible. I did the ATOP course when United
> were running it in Denver (12 hrs of groundschool, and 1 hr flight time
> in their Level D sim). The B737 just wasn't hard to land, nor was it
> difficult to hand-fly an instrument approach.
>
> I would say I've got good confidence that most PPLs who've flown a high
> performance single could pull it off given instructions on what to push
> over the radio.

If they can figure out how to use the particular radio, which was one of the
things the 9/11 terrorists screwed up despite reading the manuals. Hell, I
have enough difficulty switching among the various stacks in our rental
fleet of 172's. Is there a big red arrow labeled "PTT SWITCH HERE" in the
737?

-- David Brooks

[Ron Natalie]

"David Brooks" > wrote in message ...

> If they can figure out how to use the particular radio, which was one of the
> things the 9/11 terrorists screwed up despite reading the manuals. Hell, I
> have enough difficulty switching among the various stacks in our rental
> fleet of 172's. Is there a big red arrow labeled "PTT SWITCH HERE" in the
> 737?
>
Finding the PTT is easy. Trying to figure out where/how to select the frequency
can be daunting.

[Newps]

Is there a big red arrow labeled "PTT SWITCH HERE" in the
>>737?

They don't have PTT's, they have microphones that they hang up on a
hanger on the sidewall.

[Ron Natalie]

"Newps" > wrote in message ...
>
>
> Is there a big red arrow labeled "PTT SWITCH HERE" in the
> >>737?
>
> They don't have PTT's, they have microphones that they hang up on a
> hanger on the sidewall.
>
It's on the yoke, just make sure you don't mistake the a/p disconnect or
the trim control for it.

[Chris W]

Capt.Doug wrote:
>>"Bob Moore" wrote in message >In the B-727,
>>the autoland system functioned quite well from a CAT II ILS.
>
>
> During Cat II trials, my colleagues logged a successful Cat II with autoland
> at an airport without a Cat II ILS.

That's not too surprising. A Cat 1 ILS can be with in the limits of Cat
II, it's just not guaranteed to be that way all the time.

--
Chris W

Not getting the gifts you want? The Wish Zone can help.
http://thewishzone.com

[John Gaquin]

"Bob Moore" > wrote in message
>
> NOT required!
> ......In the B-727,
> the autoland system functioned quite well from a CAT II ILS.
> Our B-727 minimums were CAT II ....

I concur.

John Gaquin
B727, B747