How much lack of similarity in airliner flying?

"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.

"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

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.


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."

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"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

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

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/

On 27 Sep 2004 09:24:02 -0700, (Otis McNatt)
wrote:

For
instance, one could die of a heart attack, and the other, say,
of an aneurysm.

Especially in commuter aircraft flying with the cockpit door open (I
suppose they don't do that any more!) I have whiled away many a
satisfactory hour by taking over the controls and landing the plane
safely at a remote airport to the applause of the world.

The problem I always had was not in flying the aircraft, but in
getting the comatose pilots out of their seats. Have you considered
the problem there?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org

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)

(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.

"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