Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post any technical issues here. This forum gets priority from our staff.
Artur
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 306
Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 08:37

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by Artur »

As for 'serious package' thing that i really miss here is interactive checklist, something similar as is done in freeware DC3 by Manfred Jahn
Generally I feel like i fly only with F/O and Betty, right seat is empty - no actions, no interaction, same as navigator who is not existing...

User avatar
CAPFlyer
A2A Aviation Consultant
Posts: 2241
Joined: 03 Mar 2008, 12:06
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas, USA

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by CAPFlyer »

Nfinger wrote:Not sure if you have Aerosoft A 319/320/321. They have implemented a true Crew environment where depending on IAS the FO raises/lowers gear and flaps automatically including checklists, which can be turned on or off. So it has AI build in and is magnificent. I was expecting something similar but misunderstood video and manual. It would be nice to specifically rule it out in the manual as advisories/suggestions and not actions actually done by the crew.
I do have the Aerosoft Airbus Extended and fly it often - with FS2Crew. I've never flown it with the Aerosoft crew active, but if it's automatically moving the gear and flaps, then it's unrealistic and I'd turn it off anyway. In the real world, the Pilot Not Flying (PNF) NEVER changes the aircraft configuration without coordination and direction with the Pilot Flying (PF). So it's much easier on programming resources to leave things which you need to command anyway to what's already there.
Image

Nfinger
Airman Basic
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 Jul 2015, 07:57

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by Nfinger »

CAPFlyer wrote: I do have the Aerosoft Airbus Extended and fly it often - with FS2Crew. I've never flown it with the Aerosoft crew active, but if it's automatically moving the gear and flaps, then it's unrealistic and I'd turn it off anyway. In the real world, the Pilot Not Flying (PNF) NEVER changes the aircraft configuration without coordination and direction with the Pilot Flying (PF). So it's much easier on programming resources to leave things which you need to command anyway to what's already there.
It is actually quite realistic and beats FS2Crew hands down in my opinion. You should try it before dismissing it. It also follows realistic RL practices as to when gear/flaps should be operated. It is truly magnificent and demonstrates what can be done with AI. Checklist are read out and you can perform actions yourself or let FO do it for you. You can watch one of my videos to see it in action.

User avatar
CAPFlyer
A2A Aviation Consultant
Posts: 2241
Joined: 03 Mar 2008, 12:06
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas, USA

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by CAPFlyer »

I'm sorry, but we're going to have to disagree here. I have never encountered much less heard of a single certificated airline or other professional operation where the PNF is ever allowed to change the aircraft's configuration without the PF's consent/command. There is a reason that the "Gear Up" response to "Positive Rate" is not listed with a timeframe and why intermediate flap configurations are not specifically referenced in the checklist. There are times when the PF may not want the flaps or gear to be moved at a given point/speed. There's also a reason why all checklists are prompted by the PF. Watch any YouTube video from the cockpit of a professional crew and you'll never see the PNF doing a checklist or changing configurations without the PF telling them to.
Image

Nfinger
Airman Basic
Posts: 5
Joined: 12 Jul 2015, 07:57

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by Nfinger »

CAPFlyer wrote:I'm sorry, but we're going to have to disagree here. I have never encountered much less heard of a single certificated airline or other professional operation where the PNF is ever allowed to change the aircraft's configuration without the PF's consent/command. There is a reason that the "Gear Up" response to "Positive Rate" is not listed with a timeframe and why intermediate flap configurations are not specifically referenced in the checklist. There are times when the PF may not want the flaps or gear to be moved at a given point/speed. There's also a reason why all checklists are prompted by the PF. Watch any YouTube video from the cockpit of a professional crew and you'll never see the PNF doing a checklist or changing configurations without the PF telling them to.
Never mind, ask Aerosoft, they know what they are doing. Perhaps looking into how it is developed and used. We are talking about PF giving commands to FO thru checklist. It also helps to keep an open mind by looking into proven concepts how AI can work in FS environments that actually work brilliantly, for Aerosoft. Not saying that A2A should do the same, just comparing. I must say that I enjoy the Connie very much too. I will leave it at that and thank you for the conversation.

User avatar
bobsk8
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 900
Joined: 04 May 2015, 12:53
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by bobsk8 »

Nfinger wrote:
CAPFlyer wrote:I'm sorry, but we're going to have to disagree here. I have never encountered much less heard of a single certificated airline or other professional operation where the PNF is ever allowed to change the aircraft's configuration without the PF's consent/command. There is a reason that the "Gear Up" response to "Positive Rate" is not listed with a timeframe and why intermediate flap configurations are not specifically referenced in the checklist. There are times when the PF may not want the flaps or gear to be moved at a given point/speed. There's also a reason why all checklists are prompted by the PF. Watch any YouTube video from the cockpit of a professional crew and you'll never see the PNF doing a checklist or changing configurations without the PF telling them to.
Never mind, ask Aerosoft, they know what they are doing. Perhaps looking into how it is developed and used. We are talking about PF giving commands to FO thru checklist. It also helps to keep an open mind by looking into proven concepts how AI can work in FS environments that actually work brilliantly, for Aerosoft. Not saying that A2A should do the same, just comparing. I must say that I enjoy the Connie very much too. I will leave it at that and thank you for the conversation.
Checklist or no checklist, the PNF never does anything without the PF saying it is OK or directing it.
MSFS 2020
ATC by PF3

Image

User avatar
CAPFlyer
A2A Aviation Consultant
Posts: 2241
Joined: 03 Mar 2008, 12:06
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas, USA

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by CAPFlyer »

Nfinger wrote:Never mind, ask Aerosoft, they know what they are doing. Perhaps looking into how it is developed and used.

First error. Never assume someone knows what they're doing.
We are talking about PF giving commands to FO thru checklist.
That's not what you said before. You said the FO moved the gear lever and changed flap settings based on altitude and speed and automatically retracted the gear after takeoff. If he's setting things based on a checklist you call for, that's different and not what I was discussing. That's an "interactive" crew, not a "living" crew, and is simply a different way to implement things from how A2A has chosen to go.
It also helps to keep an open mind by looking into proven concepts how AI can work in FS environments that actually work brilliantly, for Aerosoft. Not saying that A2A should do the same, just comparing. I must say that I enjoy the Connie very much too. I will leave it at that and thank you for the conversation.
I have a very open mind about how AI can work in the FS environment. I have a very narrow mind about using it improperly and unrealistically. Gear and flap movement isn't part of any checklist. The checklists have CHECKS to ensure that things are properly configured, but the actual manipulation of those controls are via direct command from the PF to the PNF as required. If he's doing things via a checklist you tell him to run, then it's not AI. It's a script that is run automatically - same as what FS2Crew does.
Image

AviationAtWar
Technical Sergeant
Posts: 899
Joined: 30 Nov 2014, 19:07
Location: US
Contact:

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by AviationAtWar »

I thought this might be of interest.

I was messing around flying with different combinations of engines out/in flight restarts at the same time this thread was running, with the flight engineer on I had an unexplained shutdown of my only running engine. Again this week I've tried it to find that it's a repeatable issue. I haven't had issues when only one or two engines are shut down (I've only flown a few minutes in those configurations though), but shortly after shutting down a third engine the flight engineer will kill the last one by pulling the mixture. I know that single engine flight isn't something you'd normally do, but if there was a situation where three had failed for real then I'd be pretty attached to that last running engine. I've repeated this three more times and it happens very shortly after shutting the last one down. It doesn't matter which engine is still running either. As you can see from the video it isn't showing carb ice and engines are all ok per the hangar and crew report.

The FE pulls the mixture on the good engine at 9:13. Note that fuel pressure was still up and torque pressure didn't drop until mixture was pulled. At 10:50 I try to restart by putting the mixture lever back but it does not start. You'll see that 1 & 3 would not restart until I used the auto start feature, which I used when I started to worry about altitude. 2 and 4 did not start with autostart, but that may have been because I hadn't unfeathered (although number 2 did try). With the first two running again then I was able to air start the other two.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSDFP89CBP0[/youtube]

User avatar
CAPFlyer
A2A Aviation Consultant
Posts: 2241
Joined: 03 Mar 2008, 12:06
Location: Wichita Falls, Texas, USA

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by CAPFlyer »

Actually, he only shut off the mixture after the engine went dry because all 4 tanks were closed. I suspect there might be something with his balancing logic at play there where he closed all 4 tanks off because of the odd situation. Also, the way you failed the engines (pulling the mixture) probably didn't help since pulling the mixtures is part of what triggers his shutdown procedures and I wonder if somehow they didn't get triggered accidentally after you shutdown the 3rd engine and then the tanks started looking weird. I'm sure Scott and Rob will see this and take a look.
Image

Pip Bond
Airman
Posts: 49
Joined: 10 Nov 2010, 02:01

Re: Four Engine Loss - No Crew Support!

Post by Pip Bond »

This may be an idea for resolving the limitations of AI "Engineers", give that AI cannot do everything a person can do "yet" and if it did flight sims would probably get dull!! "an audio cue from the engineer "we have a problem!" (perhaps without saying what problem) in the same way the passengers scream when I land, would at least alert the real pilot to the need to do something.

In addition, a big stick to poke the "engineer" to do something to fix it in the form perhaps of a button on the back of his seat, that way either, you the Pilot can hop in and take charge, or if you are in mid take off, just look around and "yell, communicate calmly or what ever you feel" and push the "do something button" and he can do his best :D (or nothing if he is in a panic)

new reply

Return to “Lockheed Model 049 Tech Support”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests