• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Buttonolgy 101

webmaster

The Grass is Greener!
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
VNAV is your high maintenance girlfriend: a lot of input, everything needs to be just right before she works correctly. FLCH is the girl next door: reliable and predictable, does what you want, when you want. V/S is the crazy one: looks great at first, but deadly if you don't pay close attention.
 

xj220

Will fly for food.
pilot
Contributor
I don't know, I'm all about VNAV. It's complicated but it makes things so much easier if you understand it.
 

dustydog

Registered User
pilot
I generally use V/S to start my initial descent from cruise. VNAV works fine as long as you don't get step downs or vectors all over Gods green acre. VNAV only exists to save to airlines gas $$.
 

flynsail

Well-Known Member
pilot
VNAV is your high maintenance girlfriend: a lot of input, everything needs to be just right before she works correctly. FLCH is the girl next door: reliable and predictable, does what you want, when you want. V/S is the crazy one: looks great at first, but deadly if you don't pay close attention.
Autopilot off is the girl you have always wanted: she is gorgeous, does everything you want with no complaints as long as you stay within her acceptable boundaries, but Dad and your friends don't like you dating her.
 

xj220

Will fly for food.
pilot
Contributor
I generally use V/S to start my initial descent from cruise. VNAV works fine as long as you don't get step downs or vectors all over Gods green acre. VNAV only exists to save to airlines gas $$.
Altitude Intervene, baby!
 

ChuckMK23

Instructor, Flight.
pilot
Some of the cloud systems I work on are hosting platforms that GE Aviation has designed to give in cockpit directions for very detailed fuel optimizing navigation as well as descent and climb profiles - that are more detailed than what ATC/flight plan give - in an attempt to save .5 - 1% fuel burn. Also includes similar "in cockpit" behavior monitors if you are running the APU more than you need to - or not optimizing single engine taxiing. We borrowed the technology from what our locomotive business is using for in cab engineer cues to optimize fuel consumption. Southwest, New Zealand Air, and Asiana are all early adopters.

 

webmaster

The Grass is Greener!
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
Also includes similar "in cockpit" behavior monitors if you are running the APU more than you need to - or not optimizing single engine taxiing.
Whaaaaat?!?! F that. Seriously you are helping to add more monitoring and reporting? It's insane already what the plane can send back about the flight. Now you are going to get cues (how intelligent is the system?) to shut down the APU (hmm the ground power doesn't work on this gate or consistently doesn't hold a load or the Ac doesn't work worth shit at the gate so we need to start the apu early to keep from overheating the tube and pissing off pax) or cues to single engine taxi (hmmm pulling up to a gate that doesn't permit single engine OPS). How about we just be a highly trained pilot and operate the plane without software engineers coding cues to nag us for of all things fuel savings?!! We already have data analysis for Captains on fuel efficiency, last thing I think we need is another distraction in the cockpit.

Oh and for that .5-1% fuel savings. More savings could be realized with reducing gate departure and arrival delays among other things. Or we could all taxi like those speed demons over at southwest! :)
 

webmaster

The Grass is Greener!
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
They are working to replace you with machines.
Already have for a large portion of what we do. But I think we have a lot of job security since there are so many unseen variables that we deal with day in and day out.

I am all about the efforts to make the operation better but as with any business model that has feedback from expert systems. Especially real time. There needs to be a balance on how intrusive that monitoring is. It's mind boggling how much data per flight is collected and how FOQA crunches it looking for safety items. So far I have been impressed with how that and the ASAP program are run. I just get leery when I read articles or proposals to put more monitoring in the cockpit. At what point is it counterproductive? Has that point already been reached? Greater profit margins can be realized with optimized gate arrivals and minimizing Tarmac delays in addition to optimizing arrivals and departures but more planes are getting built and operated and placed into a congested system of limited gates.

And I think cargo transport will be the first to succumb to the robot overlords. Or at least maybe get reduced to the single pilot flight deck?!? (Professional pot stirring attempt here!) :)
 

ChuckMK23

Instructor, Flight.
pilot
Whaaaaat?!?! F that. Seriously you are helping to add more monitoring and reporting? It's insane already what the plane can send back about the flight. Now you are going to get cues (how intelligent is the system?) to shut down the APU (hmm the ground power doesn't work on this gate or consistently doesn't hold a load or the Ac doesn't work worth shit at the gate so we need to start the apu early to keep from overheating the tube and pissing off pax) or cues to single engine taxi (hmmm pulling up to a gate that doesn't permit single engine OPS). How about we just be a highly trained pilot and operate the plane without software engineers coding cues to nag us for of all things fuel savings?!! We already have data analysis for Captains on fuel efficiency, last thing I think we need is another distraction in the cockpit.

Oh and for that .5-1% fuel savings. More savings could be realized with reducing gate departure and arrival delays among other things. Or we could all taxi like those speed demons over at southwest! :)
Peace I get it - don't shoot the messenger :) We are also talking "in cockpit advisory" to the professional pilot humans in the loop and not just reporting to the overlords.

It's the Carriers that are asking (in droves) for this. Believe me I totally get it. I just work on the infrastructure, not the apps themselves :)

But the VOC (thats GE speak for "voice of customer") from DL, AA, SWA, etc is they want more data, not less and the Aviation business has a huge campaign on the "Power of 1%" (fuel reduction, etc). They literally measure in minutes how much longer the APU is being run more than optimal or if you are taxiing more than optimal on two engines, etc.

This is why you have collective bargaining :)
 

webmaster

The Grass is Greener!
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
Peace I get it - don't shoot the messenger :)

It's the Carriers that are asking (in droves) for this. Believe me I totally get it. I just work on the infrastructure, not the apps themselves :)

But the VOC (thats GE speak for "voice of customer") from DL, AA, SWA, etc is they want more data, not less and teh Aviation business has a huge campaign on the "Power of 1%" (fuel reduction, etc). They literally measure in minutes how much longer the APU is being run more than optimal or if you are taxiing more than optimal on two engines, etc.

This is why you have collective bargaining :)
Oh I recognize all that. We have existing feedback plus daily/weekly updates on all the metrics. On time departures. Delay coding. Apu burn. Etc.

As you mentioned, this is another good reason to have a union to represent worker interests.
 

ChuckMK23

Instructor, Flight.
pilot
and it's data, data everywhere. A typical GE90 on a 777 or CFM56 on a 737 will generate around 300 GB in a day of operations. We run that data through tools such as Hadoop, and get that down to 10 GB of "key value pair" data (counting the counts) that we archive forever for that motor.

Really durable archive data storage costs about half a penny per GB, per month. It's cheap.
 

nittany03

FUBIJAR
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Greater profit margins can be realized with optimized gate arrivals and minimizing Tarmac delays in addition to optimizing arrivals and departures but more planes are getting built and operated and placed into a congested system of limited gates.
But then who would the airport project managers be able to look out the window and make fun of after Southwest goons away the gate scheduling for the umpteenth time? :)

The congestion comment is right on the mark. Speaking from my brief experience at SeaTac, it's going to be a snail's race to the finish line there to see whether the bureaucracy can get the facilities in the airport master plan built in time to keep the place from turning into a complete shitshow.

But then again, this is the "Seattle Process" we're talking about here. Hey, has Bertha broken down again?
 
Last edited:
Top