Civil aviation pilot's blog livejournal. An hour before the flight

Then somehow Alexander brought up a "Merry Theme": http://arabskiy-pilot.livejournal.com/18415.html
I don't really like stories about "how we are almost the wrong one", but since the Commander of Arabas said "must", then it must be. Yalla ... (Let's go in Arabic). I began to write a response to his post, but it turned out to be a bit long, and you need to feed your LJ, so I'll post here.
Then there will be "a lot of bukaf" and scary ...

Second half of the 90s, summer. Aeroclub. Glider L-13 "Blanik". Beautiful and interesting flights. By that time I was already a third-year athlete, I already knew and knew something, and of course I could not do without "feathers from the fifth point."
That summer gasoline got really bad, and in order to avoid unnecessary takeoffs of towing aircraft, the authorities decided to "lift" two athletes in one glider - fly and train together. For the same reason, the lack of gasoline, the authorities covered us with flights along the routes (in order to avoid unplanned landings on the sites and flights of tugs behind gliders), as a result, we flew in the language of KULP-PASO-86 (course of educational flight training of glider aviation sports organizations ) Ex. 36 "Hover in the airfield area". The duration of the exercise is 2 hours, and taking into account the fact that the exercise is paired, then for all 4 hours, and in fact the whole summer day, our glider is. That day I settled in the back cabin, my friend (and colleague in study, work and everything else) Leshka in the front.
The weather that day happened "bomb" - almost windless, blue sky, uniform cumulus with a lower edge two kilometers away. This is the case when, on a glider, without any engine, using ascending air currents, we were gaining altitude without straining. And even on the contrary - we rather had an excess of it, because if we did not fly along the route, but in one area slowly and calmly, then we were already bored ...
The most "interesting" way for us to spend the height reserve and at the same time to warm up and have fun was aerobatics. True, by that time most of our gliders were almost older than ourselves, and therefore it was dumb to strain the materiel with aerobatics, but "hunting is worse than bondage." Of all the "difficult" figures, only a corkscrew was obligatory, which we must repeat at the beginning of the season with the instructors, and then, of course, many times on our own. We persuaded the same instructors (easily, to be honest) and then we twisted loops, corkscrews and even a bell - Blahnik performed well everything that was spinning in the "vertical" plane. But naturally, due to the glider's wing span, the lateral rotations were given to him much worse, and we practically did not see the same "barrels", usual for airplane aerobatics.
And having twisted everything else, one of us remembers about the "barrel" - shouldn't we twist it? - Let's!!! Before the barrel, we advise (if youth knew ...) how we can twist it. It seems that someone once saw her with an instructor, someone heard something from someone. We decide that to "spin" we need a speed of 160 km / h and everything will work out.
- Go!
Spins Leshka, he is more familiar from the front cockpit. Handle from yourself - nose down, acceleration. On yourself - the horizon. "Boom ..." - the handle goes all the way to the side - we roll. Everything goes well at first ... but as the roll increases, the nose of the glider starts to drop. Apparently Leshka is trying to hold it up by "giving" the opposite pedal or something else has gone wrong in our aerodynamics, but by the time we find ourselves in an inverted flight, the rotation stops altogether. The picture that I remember forever: we are in an inverted position, while the nose of the glider is directed strongly to the ground, and our speed is rapidly increasing. And the green field and the woods next to it, which are below us, but at that moment it seems to us that they are above us, and quickly fall into our cabins. Leshka in front shouted something very uncensored and obscene, for me it worked better than any signaling device of critical modes. It became clear that we would not be able to "tighten" the barrel, so we had to get out in a different way. Honestly, probably the most correct thing would be to give the handle away from you, go to the horizon in an inverted flight, turn off the speed, and then think about how to roll over back, but at that moment I just pulled the handle towards myself. The glider willingly continued to lower the nose, and now it has already become like a withdrawal from the loop. The only thing is that our speed was already prohibitive - initially Blahnik had a maximum speed of 262 km / h recorded in the Airplane Flight Manual, then in the Union, in order to preserve materiel, it was limited to 180 km / h. We have already dispersed in 260 ... The air stream, usually flowing around the glider with a small and smooth noise, just roared, behind us something crunched and crackled loudly. Fortunately, I was smart enough not to pull on myself too much, and fortunately the Czech comrades built "Blanik" tightly. Having marked the altitude of 600 meters at the lowest point, we jumped back up, smoothly extinguishing the speed. Taking into account the fact that we began to twist from 1500 meters, and Blahnik loses no more than 150 meters per spin, the loss of height turned out to be simply enormous - 900 meters in ten seconds (well, we were smart enough to start "twisting" this business with a margin, because that officially the lower limit of aerobatics was considered to be 600 meters of altitude ...). After that, we both swore - not that we were scolding someone, but emotions flooded. But now we flew smoothly, smoothly, listening to the slightest creaks of the glider structure behind us. Then, having calmed down a bit and looking around, we reported the end of the mission and the entrance to the circle. Someone poked us on the radio - "are you fast, are you seasick? "But we were somehow not up to jokes. For a little more and ...
Well, and of course we examined the glider for a long time, shook and pulled at different parts.
And not right away, but after a couple of weeks we told our Instructor about the incident. The strongest point in the debriefing is "what did I say to your mothers?" sunk into the soul for a long time ...

The next time it happened was obviously to go "along the edge" in a couple of years. At that moment I was still flying in the flying club, but already as a co-pilot on the An-28. We used this airplane in a variety of guises - we threw parachutists from it, and flew around Ukraine for all kinds of aeroclub needs, and drove VIPs (everything is honest and legal - an airline was registered in the aeroclub and we flew under its call sign and civil rules). It was also actively used in various demonstration flights, and the aerobatics performed on it (barrel, spinning roll) were very impressive.
And now another "big window dressing", something like the 9th of May, with the maximum amount of aeroclub equipment and an influx of spectators on the ground. Two An-28s are in one of the main roles, while the flight program provides for a pair flight with one engine off, and after their launch, passing on a collision course with barrels after a divergence, and then a joint flight with a Yak-52 group.
I'm in the booth with the Chef - the Head of the Club. He is a good Pilot, Champion of the Union in gliding, naturally flying a lot in aerobatics, including the An-28. But, as is the case with Chiefs, administrative matters take too much time, and even in the air, questions of "managing the entrusted economy" are not always let go. It let us down a lot this time.
The program was tightly packed. So that the audience would not get bored, the pauses between our visits were filled by one of the pilots on the Yak-55 and the Yak-52 group. We "passed" with the engines turned off, went "into the zone" behind the backs of the spectators to start them. While I do the launch manipulation, Operations turns and observes the situation. On the "arena" Yak-55 worked out its complex and stepped aside, but took up the wrong zone - too close to the place of the show. My Commander interferes with communications:
- Move away, you interfere !!!
The 55th rolls off, the 52nd group finishes its work, now it's our turn to enter the collision courses and barrels after the divergence. I have already started the engine by this moment, I report to the Commander. He evens out the modes of the engines, but I can see that he still looks more at the Yaki than at our own flight.
-102nd ready - the second An-28 is being recalled.
-101 is ready, come in!
The commander abruptly shifts the plane to the opposite bank, starts approaching. But apparently because of the 55th who was standing nearby, the 52s shifted their place, we have to disagree with them, the Commander is again distracted by instructions. And we find ourselves closer to the stands than the second plane. The headlights have already been switched on, the Commanders exchanged confirmations "I am observing", but we are clearly jumping forward, for the second An-28 is just finishing its turn. My Commander is doing something like a snake, but there is nowhere to go - engines on takeoff, nose down - passage and acceleration to the barrel. We disperse a little to the side of the center, now we need to "twist". The beginning of the barrel, in general, the transport, An-28 is very similar to a glider - acceleration and "pitch bully", and both take a certain amount of time. Since we have already found ourselves away from the center of the show, the Commander is in a hurry. I note to myself that at the moment of the beginning of rotation we still lacked a couple of tens of kilometers per hour speed and the pitch instead of the usual "over 40 *" turned out to be "a little over 30 *". The rotation begins as usual, but as the roll increases, the nose of the aircraft begins to bury itself. The inverted position, in which the plane usually finds itself in approximately level flight, we already pass with the nose strongly down. And in the process of the second part of the rotation, it sinks lower and lower. By a roll of 90 * we are already diving with a pitch for ... To be honest, the fig knows what the pitch was, we are falling with a wing down nafig !!!
In the forest behind the airfield, they began to build a sanatorium back in Soviet times. They managed to erect a multi-storey box of the main building and a couple of buildings lower next to it, but then the money ran out and these gray "ghosts" stuck out unfinished for many years. pine forest... So, at that moment, our trajectory confidently stuck into one of these boxes.
At normal times, the duties of the co-pilot, on show, included various auxiliary actions at the command of the Commander (flaps-headlights-control of the systems, etc.) and softly hold on to control "just in case" (the co-pilots trained to "twist" all the same the very fact that the Commanders are in the process of training, preparations, overflights in the zone, higher from the ground). But today I did have a chance to pilot actively:
- Conclusion!!! - the Chief barked in a sharply hoarse voice on the SPU. Now the two of us were unscrewing the steering wheels and pulling towards ourselves, practically resting on the full travel stops. Time stretched out, although the world outside was smeared into a green ribbon at the speed and proximity of the earth. The plane reluctantly got out of the bank, broke its trajectory, swept over the tops of the pines, fortunately past the upper floors of the sanatorium, pulled it into a set.
A short after-thought "damn it, just a little bit more!" interrupted the voice of the Commander:
- All, all, let go!
Apparently I was still holding the steering wheel tightly, preventing him from piloting.
Sluggishly flew the rest of the program, did not quite hit the 120-meter piece of asphalt, where they usually sat down on show to demonstrate a short landing, but that day it all seemed such trifles.
Taxi-turned off, usually the Chief left the cockpit quickly enough, in a hurry to do the following things, but that day he was delayed. He sat for a while looking at nowhere, pulling off his wet gloves, then turned to me:
- Sorry, they could have been killed ...
And the RP joke on the parsing, by the way, the USSR Champion in aerobatics, Viktor Mikhailovich Solovyov:
- Mikhalych, next time you should be more careful, otherwise I have already closed my eyes ...

And if you look back, there were a couple of situations of a slightly different kind, when not my life was in danger, but the lives of other people who depended on me. As for me, it's even worse!
The first case that makes the hair on the back of my head move until now was when, in my student years, flying on gliders, at the same time I worked as a technician for the Wilga B-35 aircraft (a little yellow cheerful plane for "lifting" gliders and all other small necessities).

On the traditional "show" on May 9, my Airplane "worked" to its fullest: dragged the flag for opening and closing, dragged the glider in the process, at the end flew a dozen flights to the "ride". In the evening, a strong thunderstorm with wind and downpour broke out. On May 10, the whole flying club had a day off, but not for me, because it turned out that my plane was "working" for filming a movie.
I dragged myself to the wet and empty airfield, cursing and swearing ...
Not early in the morning, but there was absolutely no one at the aeroclub airfield except the watchman's aunt. Wet grass, from which my feet instantly get wet, taking into account the fact that after the thunderstorm it got colder, and I did not take this into account and was dressed only in a hebesh jumpsuit, it unpleasantly invigorates. The only good news of the day is that Anatoly Aleksandrovich Ruzhansky, who is very respected and adored by us, young people, should fly as a pilot, and even yesterday, when he set me a task, he hinted that I would probably fail to fly too. But until he arrives, I am preparing the plane.
On a piston aircraft, pre-flight preparation is a long and dirty event (low bow to the technicians who have been doing this all their lives and in any weather!). I remove the clamps, the lower engine hoods, unscrew the oil plugs of the lower cylinders, drain the oil, turn the screw, tighten and check the oil plugs back, check the oil level. Finally, everything is ready to run and try out.
I climb into a cool, but at least windless cabin, traditionally look around, shout: "From the propeller !!!". When the start button is pressed, the engine slowly shudders, sneezes, turn on the magneto, pump fuel with a syringe - cold start ... Fortunately, compared to "my" second plane, this one is much newer and easier to start in the cold. The engine grasps, the engine quits, starts to rumble. It is warming up, and I am also warming up, just from the front bulkhead drying my wet feet. And while the bottom line is, yes, I decide to check the rudders (to be honest, now I'm not even sure whether such a check is included in the pre-flight preparation by the technician, it's more of a flying part, but nevertheless). And this is where THIS happens.
I move the control stick towards myself, away from myself - order. Left - order. To the right - the handle reaches a fully deflected position and ... is jammed there tightly. All my attempts to extract her from this strange situation end in nothing. On itself, on its own, it moves, no roll!
Yesterday's active flights flashed through my head, my signatures in the Airplane's logbook - "serviceable, ready for flight" and the possible consequences of jamming the controls in the extreme position ... The shock was so serious that I continued testing the engine, with the thought "this cannot be , some nonsense, I didn't remove the clamp or something got hit during yesterday's thunderstorm.
After finishing the testing schedule, I got out of the cockpit. The ailerons "stood" with scissors, there was nothing outsider around them ...
I don’t want to load with technical details, therefore, further shortly, as it was approximately written in the "act of investigation of the preconditions for the accident": starting with ... a series of B-35 aircraft, the manufacturer (PZL, Poland), has made changes to the skin design. Instead of the initially used riveting of sheets "overlapping", the "joint-to-joint" scheme was used. In the wing tips, which are subjected to large alternating loads and relative displacements in flight cycles, such a structure has lost its tightness as it wears out, which in turn led to the ingress of a significant amount of moisture onto the attachment point of the aileron rocking link to the rib number ..., its corrosion and subsequent destruction.

P.S is another "scarecrow", already from the driver's series. Again, the same flying club, late autumn, dull evening. On the An-28 we stepped in from another VIP flight. We arrived in the dark, so we sat down at the Kiev airport Zhuliany, and then the Chief gave us a lift to the flying club where a car was parked.
The airfield is empty, the watchman recognized the Chief's car as a grandmother, a dandelion of God, went out onto the porch of the gatehouse, waved her hand. I waved back and stomped to the car park.
In the morning we flew out in the autumn - it was dry and snowless. By evening, the weather turned bad, it started snowing, and when I arrived at the parking lot, the "Nine" was a big snowdrift. Having tried to shovel at least a little of the window and found out that the snow began with rain and the glass was completely frozen over.
"Okay, I'll start, warm up, and then the glass will go away."
The car stands stern to the asphalt exit track, rolled in a day, a couple of meters it is necessary to slip through the virgin snow, under which the ground is wet. I started the engine, turned on the heaters on the glass. The rear window of the "Nine" is heated by electricity, it's cool (almost like an aircraft POS), but it takes time in the cold, but it's cold, dark, and you generally want to go home.
"I'll start driving like this, and there it will freeze ...".
I'm trying to see what's behind, but since the rain was also with the wind, the mirrors are also barely visible. "What could be there, darkness and coldness!"
I give the car a little forward in order to accelerate backward along a clean track under the wheels, stick in reverse gear, abruptly release the clutch, gas and ...
The car, quite expectedly, takes off, breaks through the snow. I twist the steering wheel to fit into the track on the road. With my peripheral vision, I notice that something large and dark rushes very close to the door and the mirror. Turning around and stopping in the headlights, I find the silhouette of the watchman grandmother.
While I was fiddling and warming up in the car, she came out of the gatehouse and stood right behind, not expecting my such a sharp start.
- Granny, what are you doing ?!
- Yes, I see that you haven't been driving for a long time, I thought - let me go out and take a look.
I suddenly get so hot that I have to take off my flight jacket ...

The conclusion is comic: Don't sing, don't dance, don't stand and don't jump, where the leadership is going or the "roll" is twisted !!! (Roll - barrel in English).
The conclusion is serious: when Comrade Commander Arabas brought up this topic, I objected that this is not the best thing to remember. But his thought was that this experience should be shared, so that later the next ones would not come across. I would very much like to believe that this will help someone. Good luck to all of us !!!

) on Airbus vs. Boeing.
I absolutely do not argue with the latter about the ergonomics of the cockpit and controls at Airbus - he is a pilot, he knows better.
But, as both authors noted, the philosophy of the companies is different, so let's see which one is more in line with the spirit of the times.

I myself am not a pilot, but a fan of aviation :) As for work, I often have to do analytical research and turn to statistics.
Here, dear, we will turn to her. Namely, to the causes of plane crashes from the 50s to the 2000s (http://planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm):

As you can see from this table, the most common cause is pilot error. Accidents caused by pilots occur more than 2 times more often than due to equipment failure... So, if those who like to "fly in their arms" were given more often these hands, the number of plane crashes would be reduced by at least two times (it is clear that provided that all aircraft are modern)

That is why the Airbus policy to reduce the pilot's functions to "operator functions" and allow him to interfere in the control of the aircraft as little as possible is more than reasonable. For the computer never makes mistakes, does not fall asleep during long night flights and does not let its children into the cockpit, so that they have a little fun there (who knows what I mean, it will understand).
So, for example, TCAS is NEVER wrong. This fact is reflected, in particular, in the "Flight Operations Manual of the TU-154M aircraft" in the following sentence: "TCAS commands are more important than ATC commands". And it was this phrase that the commander of the TU over Bodensee forgot "a little bit", then he sent his co-pilot to his mother, who, uncertainly, but TWO times drew his attention to WHAT TCAS was saying, and he sent himself, his crew, to the forefathers, and for the company, more than 100 children in the passenger compartment.
I really hope that TCAS in the future itself will direct the plane up or down, preventing the pilot from ditching all her efforts to save the car.

Now - to the main argument of those who like to "fly in their arms". The "bats" assert: "Everything is fine as long as the computer is working normally, but if a failure occurs, what will all these" operators "do without the experience of" real "piloting? Only we can save you, dear passengers! ":)

Let's turn again to the statistics, this time on the safety of airlines (http://www.jacdec.de/jacdec_safety_ranking_2012.htm), these are those that have been flying for 30 years or more - only 60 of the largest airlines.
Here is the Finnair company - 1st place in the world ranking in terms of the safety index (for 30 years) and the first in the absolute number of years without serious accidents and deaths of passengers (48 years). Fleet - 40 Airbus and 4 (four) Boeing.
But Lufthansa - 11th place, a fleet of 223 Airbus and 67 Boeing. [By the way: Lufhansa ranked 11th only because 18 years ago there was a flight accident in which 2 (two) people died.]

How is it, such high places? After all, their fleet consists mainly of Airbuses, at the helm of which "operators" sit, who only know how to press the buttons, in the opinion of the aforementioned pilots? Or Airbus pilots fly only the "old school" pilots, who were still throwing Junkers at the peak? :) But no, on the contrary, there are a lot of young people.
It is clear that the main reason is the highest level of ground handling, strict performance of all checks, quality of repairs, etc. But don't they get rejections at all? Of course there are. The little box opens simply: these companies REGULARLY "drive" their pilots to all kinds of failures on simulators, as Pilot Lech describes this process when receiving a certificate.

Moreover, in the last post, Pilot Lech himself confirmed that Boeing adopted the Airbus philosophy in the new aircraft, which, in general, could not be otherwise. Just before that, he, like the Arab Pilot, flew Boeing machines of the previous generation. And sitting at the simulator 777th, he writes:
"From the very first lessons, it became clear that many of our skills would have to be put aside" in a distant box. "
And so:
“Surprisingly, an airplane knows things that don't seem to come to mind right away. For example, what to do if a collision with a bird occurs. much more! "

So my friends, Airbus is a trendsetter, but Boeing is slowly pulling up, which pleases.

P.S. By the way, about the pilots who flew on Boeing and moved to the side-stick "A-shek": be sure to watch the episode from "Pilot Eye" - Lufthansa's flight from Frankfurt to Seattle. There, just such a pilot says that he likes Airbus much more. He speaks mainly about "big" cars. The pilot praises the superb aerodynamics of the Airbuses at low speeds during the approach. Compares them with sails, when setting the thrust to "idle": "the plane, like a glider, continues to move smoothly without losing altitude." And Boeing, in the same conditions, compares with an iron :); try, he says, to put "idle", he immediately "bites" his nose. In general, an educational film.

P.S.2. It is noteworthy that

Quite often, on aviation and not very forums and websites, the question is raised about how much a modern civil aircraft needs a pilot. Like, given the modern level of automation, what are they doing there if the autopilot does everything for them?

Not a single conversation is complete without mentioning unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and, as the apogee, the flight of Buran.

"You are tormented by this question, do you want to talk about it"?

Well, let's talk.

- == (o) == -

The best autopilot I've ever seen is featured in the American comedy Airplane.

However, in that film, he accidentally went out of order, and if it were not for the heroic loser, the happy ending would not have happened. Although, there was also a flight attendant ... Well, in any case, there was a man.

As a matter of fact, many pilots therefore do not enter into an argument with people far from aviation, because they know how the most modern technology sometimes behaves. I will not argue, I will just tell you, and then you will at least fight there) It's a joke.

Our autopilots are a mixture of metal, plastic, glass, light bulbs, buttons, twists and wires. And switches. Nothing human at all.

The pilot controls the autopilot (the sacramental meaning is already hidden in this phrase) through the consoles. In the photo below - the simulator's cabin is not the most modern aircraft B737CL, but in reality, in this regard, there are no global differences between it, created in the 80s of the last century, and the B787, which first took to the sky a few years ago.

The main control panel for automation in general and the autopilot in particular (MCP) can be seen almost in the middle of the photo. Each button on it is responsible for turning on one of the autopilot modes, and the four buttons on the right (A / P ENGAGE A - B) are responsible, in fact, for turning on the autopilot. By the way, with the same configuration of the autopilot controls, which is fixed in the photo, the autopilot will not turn on. Let the connoisseurs answer why.

The numbers in the windows indicate the data that is required for a particular mode of autopilot operation. For example, in the ALTITUDE window you can see 3500 - this means that if after takeoff we turn on the autopilot and set some climb mode, the plane will occupy an altitude of 3500 feet and will fly at it stupidly until the pilot sets a new altitude value and .. . will not activate any dialing mode again.

The autopilot itself will not change the altitude and will not go into the set.

Moreover. The pilot can choose an altitude, for example, 10,000 feet, however, turn on the wrong autopilot mode, and the plane will obediently fly down until it hits the ground.

Similarly, if there is a mountain in front of the heading set by the pilot in the HEADING window, then the plane will fly up the mountain and will certainly crash into it if the pilot does not take any action.

Yes, it is also worth noting that the autopilot of a modern aircraft is paired with an autothrottle - this is another set of pieces of iron and wires that are responsible for automatically changing the engine mode, that is, thrust. In the photo above, on the MCP, on the left, you can see a small switch labeled A / T ARM / OFF, it is responsible for turning the autothrottle into a ready-to-use mode. However, sometimes they have to work not in pairs (for example, if the autothrottle is faulty), which imposes significant restrictions on the autopilot, because many autopilot modes require a change in thrust. For example, the autopilot needs to go down, but the thrust set for the takeoff mode will not stupidly do this.

In the photo below you can see the control panel of the FMS - flight management system. Through this panel, you can fill in some useful data, with the help of which the automation will know about which route the plane is flying today, about what values ​​of thrust and speed will be optimal today.

After takeoff, the pilot can turn on (or it turns on automatically) the autopilot mode, in which the plane will fly according to the commands received from this system. However, as I said above, if it rests against the altitude 3500, set in the MCP window, then it will not fly higher until the pilot changes this value.

- == (o) == -

The most important limitation of modern software systems (and the autopilot is nothing more than a piece of hardware packed with algorithms) is the inability to make non-standard decisions that depend on a specific situation.

By themselves, aircraft control algorithms are not at all complicated, so autopilots began to appear on airplanes back in 1912, and in the 30s they began to become widespread.

I am more than sure that even then there was talk that the "pilot" profession would soon become obsolete, like the "coachman" profession. Many years later, Anatoly Markusha, in one of his books, recounted the conversation he had overheard of one girl, who complained to her young man that he needed to look for another profession, they say, soon the pilots will not be needed.

Since then, another 40 years have passed, and this topic - decision-making in non-standard situations by the creators of the latest aircraft has not been defeated.

Yes, many aviation professions have sunk into oblivion - the flight engineer who was in charge of the "household", the navigator who provided navigation, the radio operator who communicated ... They were replaced by smart systems, this is indisputable. True, at the same time, training requirements for this increased ... and in some situations, the load on the two (!) Pilots remaining in the cockpit. Now they have to not only cope with a bunch of systems (the way and the most automated), but also have a lot of knowledge in their heads, which were not usually used by them in flight (and weathered over time), because narrow specialists in these areas sat in the cockpit.

Yes, some UAVs fly autonomously (and some are controlled by operators from the ground), and Buran has successfully completed one (!) Automatic flight without a pilot on board. But these are exactly the algorithms, the programming of which has been possible for a very, very long time.

Any interested programmer for the sake of sports interest can come up with an add-on to Microsoft. Flight simulator and plant your Burany even in Zavyalovka, and then go to the aviation forum and scoff at the profession of "airplane driver".

But here I am, an "airplane driver", having an understanding of situations that arise in the sky, for which constant decision-making is required, I will not dare to board an airplane, the brain of which is not a person, but the Autopilot v.10.01 program, in which programming errors are fixed identified in the previous ten disasters.

For example, today, despite the practical possibility of creating such a regime, aircraft do not take off automatically. And this despite the fact that automatic landing and automatic run after it have been mastered for a very long time. Why?

Mikhail Gromov also said "The takeoff is dangerous, the flight is beautiful, the landing is difficult."... True. Taking off is easier than landing, however, if something happens on takeoff, sometimes it goes by a split second. During this time, the pilot needs to make a decision - to stop takeoff or continue. Moreover, depending on factors, for the same reason, it is better to stop the takeoff on one day, and it is better to continue on the other. While the pilot is thinking, a heavy aircraft with a huge supply of fuel is rapidly accelerating, and the strip is rapidly decreasing. Failures can be very diverse (alas, technology still fails) and the failure does not always come down to a banal engine malfunction. And engine failures can also be different.

That is, a programmer who wants to remove a person from the aircraft control loop and the decision-making loop will need to write a bunch of algorithms for actions in various kinds of emergency situations. And after each unreported case, release new version firmware.

Currently, "unaccounted for cases" are resolved by the fact that there is a man in the cockpit who will swear (or keep silent, depending on the endurance), but will cope with the situation and return the plane to the ground.

And in most cases, idle ordinary people simply do not know about such cases, because not everything is reported in the press.

None of the instructions provide for such an oversight - to leave a piece of the emergency escape cable outside the plane. What would Autopilot v.10.01 do in this case, how would he know that he will soon break a window? No way. He would have continued to climb 11 km in altitude, and when a window would have broken there, according to the established program, he would have undertaken an emergency descent with the ejection of masks ... but they would not have helped the passengers very much.

What did the pilots do? First, we received information about the outgoing transmission early enough. Secondly, despite the undetected nature of the phenomenon, they understood how this non-standard situation could end and made the only right decision - to descend and return to the departure aerodrome.

And this is just ONE of the situations that happened in the careers of only TWO pilots (me and the co-pilot). And there are thousands of pilots, and hundreds of thousands of situations.

Some "householders" oppose figures, they say, a person is a weak link, according to statistics, 80% of all catastrophes have occurred through the fault of the human factor.

Everything is correct. The technique has become so reliable that in most cases a person refuses. However, I will remind you once again that idle "householders" simply do not think that many flights, in which the equipment failed, ended well only because there was a human factor in the cockpit.

I assure you that if you remove the pilots from the cockpit, the share of the human factor will increase even more, but only in this case the human factor will be understood as a programming error.

Further, in an airplane the whole flight may work very well, however ... it may not work very well on the ground. In order for the plane to fly to the airfield and land there, a whole bunch of systems have been created, which what? ... That's right, sometimes they fail. And in this case, the pilot "wakes up" and does his job.

Banal decision making when avoiding thunderstorms. For example, my flight to Genoa, I called it "tinsmith's flight"

Or a flight to Sochi:

And that's just three flights. And only one individual pilot has hundreds of times more of them.

Thunderstorms look different on radar, and not always one bypass solution will be as good for another. And when this thunderstorm is in the area of ​​the airfield ... And if this airfield is mountainous? You have to think and make decisions ...

If lightning strikes the plane, or it grabs a static discharge, then people from this hit will not die, but the systems can fail unpredictably. And there were cases that ended well just because the pilots were in the cockpit.

It is worth adding to all of the above that not all airports today can make an aircraft automatically land. It needs pretty greenhouse conditions compared to those in which a pilot can land. Of course, this is a matter of programming algorithms, but the task is difficult enough to ensure equal reliability.

Of course, if you skimp on reliability, then it has long been possible on the line to release aircraft without pilot-operators.

The main reason why planes without pilots have not yet entered civilian lines is this very RELIABILITY. For the needs of the military or for shippers, the reliability may not be as high as for transporting people by air.

Of course, the degree of automation will continue to grow. This also determines the reliability of the "Crew-aircraft" system. Of course, the search for the best solutions to ensure that the aircraft reliably flew without human intervention. True, it will be possible to completely exclude human participation from flight only when artificial intelligence is invented, which is not inferior to the intellect of a trained person. The problem of making decisions in non-standard situations is not going anywhere. The plane is not a car, so that in a non-standard situation it is simply stupid to stop on the side of the road.

One option is to control the aircraft from the ground. That is, the operator on the ground controls the flight of one or more aircraft, making decisions in non-standard situations. If something happens that he is not able to solve from the ground, he remains alive ... And the passengers are killed. Then the next version of the software appears.

So let's focus our efforts not on discussing the profession of a pilot (each such discussion sooner or later turns into the topic "why do pilots get TAAAK money?"

Fly Safely!

In the early 90s, I had the good fortune to work in Nigeria, flying with a local airline on Tu-134 leased from our airline. Now, after almost 20 years, to compatriots who are already accustomed to civilization, this may seem like a reference, but then it was a breakthrough into another life and invaluable flight experience, not to mention an order of magnitude higher salary compared to the impoverished Motherland at that time. And to make the picture of "happiness" complete, I will say that I spent in Nigeria Honeymoon... No, I'm not a fan of exotic things - I just got married, finally, for the second time in between African business trips, and there were simply no options to leave my wife for six months. Such is the exclusive honeymoon. Some to the Seychelles, some to Paris, and we, what is there - to Nigeria ...
The plane, by the way, in the photo is really one of those that flew there. We drove them almost all to Syktyvkar from Interflug after the unification of Germany. Even the coloration is basically the same. Only the company name, flag and registration have changed.

One of the stories from there:

The planes flew to Nigeria usually along the Syktyvkar-Sheremetyevo-Prague-Casablanca-B amako-Kano route. We spent the night in Casablanca with pleasure, and in the morning there was a 4-hour, at maximum range, throw across the desert. And so one of the crews, consisting of a flight chief, a young co-pilot who was flying abroad for the first time, a navigator who rarely flies abroad, and, thank God, a veteran of these flights - a boomechanic, took off for the adventure. They flew through Europe like clockwork. Upon arrival in Casablanca, the navigator told the flight mechanic how much kerosene should be refueled for the flight to Bamako. And this figure turned out to be one and a half times less than the usual filling. The flight mechanic was surprised, but did not delve into the intricacies of the calculation and filled, just in case, as usual, full tanks. Here it is necessary to clarify: on the Tu-134, the fuel system and its indication were invented, probably, to make life as difficult as possible for the crew. The pilots delved into its intricacies usually when passing off tests and immediately forgot them safely until the next time. Only the boomechanics knew the real gas station. Before the flight, they set the amount of fuel poured on the "clock" - a flow meter with a dial similar to a clock, which, as the fuel was consumed, rewound the readings back. His indication was a no brainer. Another device, the fuel gauge itself, showed the actual fuel in the tanks, but its readings were available only to the most gifted pilots.

So, our flight mechanic put the fuel calculated by the navigator on the "watch", and they took off into the unknown. Further, from the words of the co-pilot: When we were already in the middle of the desert, the navigator suddenly lit a cigarette (he had not been seen smoking on board before) ... He began to count something hard again, lit a cigarette again, plucked up courage and confessed that we had fuel not enough ... It turns out that during the calculation he forgot that he was dealing with nautical miles, not kilometers (all his previous international experience was in flights to Bulgaria and, accordingly, calculations in kilometers). A mile is twice as long as a kilometer, roughly speaking. Accordingly, the fuel. When recalculating, it turned out that it would have to end, at best, during the landing approach. A dumb scene. The curtain ... Together with the cold sweat, everyone has about one thought: “Y. your mother !!! " And, before my eyes, a picture of the wreckage of Tu-134 among the dunes. The co-pilot has an additional thought: “What are you killing for? For the first time abroad, and I haven’t had time to live yet ... ”. Out of hopelessness, the commander still tugged at the fuel gauge selector, in which he still did not understand anything, and asked for a cigarette (he had never smoked before) ... Thoughts also flew through my head about the inevitable, albeit posthumous, shame, washing of bones during parsing, telegrams on measures to prevent similar incidents hanging in all navigational countries. And the journalists will not even write that the crew took the plane away from residential buildings due to the complete absence of these in the alleged crash site.

The flight mechanic gave them another ten minutes to enjoy the sensations of the inevitable end, and with the words "Your fuel has run out, now we are flying in mine" set the "clock" to the actual amount in the tanks ...

In general, boomechanics and flight engineers are sometimes peculiar people. Pilots often underestimate them. Well, and they sometimes respond with a refined reciprocity. Another example from the life of my current airline:

The plane landed at the wrong airfield ... Rarely, but it happens. I don’t remember the reason (usually they confuse closely located airfields with similar runway configurations), but that’s not the point. During the investigation, spicy circumstances emerged: the commander, a real ass hole, was very rude to the flight engineer during the flight and, as a result, ordered him to shut up and speak only if he asked him himself. With the Arabs, alas, this is in the order of things. Okay, whatever you say, but he naturally harbored anger. The opportunity to take revenge turned up a couple of hours later. After landing, the commander, when to his horror, realized that they had landed in the wrong place, pulled himself together and told the flight engineer to contact the company's control center and report this unpleasant incident. The trouble lies, for a minute, in being written off as punishment from flight work for several years. "And I already said," said the flight engineer, "when we were still flying on the landing straight ..."

As I promised, I am posting the final post about the most interesting authors of LJ. And it will be devoted to a highly specialized topic, namely aviation, and everything connected with it. Why this particular topic? If, for example, take nature, rarely who can resist greatness mountain ranges and oceans. So it is in technology. Graceful multi-colored handsome airplanes, both in the sky and on the ground, have always attracted and will continue to attract the enthusiastic glances of people. This topic did not pass me by either. I have been fond of airplanes and air spotting for a long time, and I keep a separate one in my own blog.

There are dozens of bloggers for whom the airport is their second home. And among them there are real pros who lead very, very interesting blogs. In my first post, under # 5 favorites, I already mentioned Alexandra Chebana alexcheban and today I will introduce you to other interesting authors. Of course, the people I will talk about below know each other very well, have been friends for a long time and are professional colleagues. But the rest of the authors and readers of LiveJournal, perhaps, will discover new faces and a stunning, exciting world of civil and military aviation.

In the first place I will put the inimitable Marina Lystseva fotografersha - a professional aviation photographer, author of dozens of simply gorgeous posts, whether it be a report from an aviation festival, a major air show, or from a new model of an airliner.

02. Marina.

Selected publications and collections of Marina, recommended for viewing:

Aviator - Sergey Martirosyan aviator_ru also known to many. No one can represent him better than himself: " My love for aviation began a long time ago, but only when I began to take notes, and to save pleasant moments and images in photographs, I began to actively express myself. I have a fairly large archive of personal aviation photographs that I took at airports, in flight or just like that, as well as at various air shows.

08.Sergey.

My friends call me Aviator, I can’t walk past an airplane taking off or look into the sky, noticing a contrail of an airplane or admiring a handsome airplane parked at the airport. Coming aboard the plane, I feel at home, saying “Hello hostesses” to the flight attendants, and after completing my always enjoyable flight “Thank you for the job” to the crew. The sky, the plane, the runway are all that make up my life. "

10. Airbus A350-1000 - the most spacious of the entire A350 family, 74 meters long and with a maximum capacity of 440 passengers.

11. The Airbus A350-900 has a distinctive carbon fiber livery, which symbolizes the advanced technologies for the use of composite materials in aircraft construction (over 50%).

WITH Julia Loris relax_action I am well acquainted personally, thanks to the first official spotting at our Kaliningrad airport Khrabrovo. Julia is an amazing person! It is not only interesting to shoot planes with her, but also to talk on many topics. Julia is not only a wonderful photographer and spotter, but also a professional designer.

13. Julia in the Kaliningrad Khrabrovo.

Thanks to Yulia, many spotters in our country have in their collections unique aviation keychains, branded T-shirts and safety vests. Julia is also the author of such a wonderful "branded" event as "". The term "podzaboring", habitual among spotters, has acquired new facets thanks to it.

Creative work as a designer directly affects Yulia's photographs, making them bright, unusual, and also shot from non-standard angles.

Another great master of air spotting - diman7777 . Dmitriy lives in the south of Germany, practically on the border with Switzerland, and thanks to him we can enjoy magnificent colorful reports from the best airports in Germany and the rest of Europe. Not so long ago, Dmitry visited, very beloved by me, the island of Fuerteventura on Canary Islands and, thanks to good traffic, brought from there dozens of wonderful pictures, which I recommend that you familiarize yourself with without fail.

Rounds out the top five Maxim Holbreicht max_sky from Omsk, which has a unique airport "Omsk-Central", located within the city limits. Maxim is not only an active participant in many official spotting in various Russian cities, but also the author and compiler of a unique in its kind catalog of LiveJournal spotters from Russia and the CIS countries. If you suddenly did not have enough of the five air bloggers I am describing, thanks to Maxim, you can always get to know a few dozen more similar authors.

-----------------
Did you like my blog? Subscribe!

All the latest news and publications can also be found on my pages in