Re: Design Philosophy -Reply

John Bent (jbent_at_glink.net.hk)
Thu, 27 Mar 1997 18:14:54 +0800

With almost 100 X 777 pilots and 345 X A340/A330 pilots (160 of which fly
BOTH), we do have an insight into pilot appreciation of new technology.
Our pilots love BOTH!! The advances are mostly safety enhancing - not the
other way round. Regarding training (some other comments) there is realy no
big deal about training requirements - BUT old style training programmes
won't work well. Lots of thought and preparation has to go into
appropriate training, not more of the same. If you use the traditional
approach it will be a monster experience, involving weeks of technical
indigestion. "Operational" training is the key, as exemplified by US AQP
processes. CRM is also essential on new technology types.

I have flown the 777 simulator and been close to the launch managers of the
same, and the flight deck is indeed a marvellous working environment on
that aircraft (apart from that strange lump of metal where the meal tray
should be!). However, IF I am ever stupid enough to have to AVOID
something, I know which one I'd prefer - the one which requires no skill -
just full backstick, and optimal performance without stalling!

Let's have some more fun in this debate, together with the serious!

(I would love to get a time machine forward 10 years and look back on some
of the observations in this debate!)

John Bent
FTM(Policy)
Cathay

At 10:49 27/03/97 +0400, you wrote:
>Wow,
>Did someone open a can of worms or what?
>Good discussion people, though it seems to me that they are two opposing
>camps here, neither of which is willing to give an inch, (make that
>centimeter).
>I fly the older generation Airbus (300-600 and 310) which share some of the
>philosophies of the 320, albeit in an simpler manifestation.
>The problems mostly stem from one root cause. A poor understanding of the
>aircraft and what it will do under a given set of circumstances, which in
>turn comes from the *worst* written aircraft manuals in the industry. The
>books people are SH*T. They have to be seen to be believed, after seven
>years on the airplane I still have trouble finding important bits, not the
>least because of an unbelievable amendment philosophy. We've re-written
>them over here but unfortunately the bean counters wouldn't let us publish
>as they have decided to replace these with 330's starting next year.
>Anybody thought of studying manuals from a HF perspective?
>Having said that, the aircraft is good and once understood a pleasure to
>fly. John Bent is quite right, the Cali accident might have been averted if
>the spoilers were to retract automatically in a Go-Around situation. This
>is the case with the 320/330/340, but not with the 300/310.
>For the record, I have bid for the 777 in preference to the 330. Make your
>own conclusions.
>Suren Ratwatte
>
>Captain - A-300-600/A-310-300
>Emirates Airlines
>Dubai. UAE.
>
>Usual disclaimers apply,about opinions being my own.....etc.
>
>