'Contact lost' with Malaysia Airlines plane

Trusty said:
is there anyway you could scramble a plane signal?
Click to expand...

Well sure if you think it'll help?

fritatta_whisking.gif


:D

E: Beat me to it!
Sliver said:
You'll need a hot pan and a rapid stirring motion with a spatula. ;)
Click to expand...
 
neodude said:
That's just crap tbh. The vast majority of landings are carried out manually.
Click to expand...

i dont sit in a cockpit, and havnt done much reseach other than to watch a documentary which up until that point didnt even realise a plane could autoland, so if thats the case i stand corrected but im only going off what ive viewed
 
neodude said:
:confused:
Click to expand...

In a lot of cases of landings world wide, the pilot of a commercial liner will not touch the controls when landing unless absolutely necessary (or for the pleasure of landing the craft themselves). In severe weather, it's mandated that the pilots allow the aircraft to land on it's own and the ILS will land a plane with no input from a human.
 
Last edited:
Django x2 said:
In a lot of cases of landings world wide, the pilot of a commercial liner will not touch the controls when landing unless absolutely necessary (or for the pleasure of landing the craft themselves). Even in severe weather, the ILS will land a plane with no input from a human.
Click to expand...

Oh dear.... right back at ya.

Sorry, but that's just incorrect. Like I said, the vast majority of landings are carried out manually. In fact Autoland is rarely used outside minimal visibility conditions except for pilot training and currency.

There are a number of conditions on the airfield that must be met in order for an Autoland to be carried out including protection of the ILS signal and having backup generators running. Obviously having these procedures in place slows the operation down and makes it more complicated. Hence the reason why autoland isn't used unless it is required (Low Vis Procedures)
 
Not sure if anyone has said it yet but....... Aliens

does anyone a film where either planes were being abducted by Aliens or humans from the future. Could be Alien Humanoids from the future. I remember seeing a bit of it as a kid and didn't want to fight as a kid because of it haha. Cant remember the name but when I heard of this terrible event it was the first thing that came to mind as stupid as that sounds.
 
neodude said:
Oh dear.... right back at ya.

Sorry, but that's just incorrect. Like I said, the vast majority of landings are carried out manually. In fact Autoland is rarely used outside minimal visibility conditions except for pilot training and currency.
Click to expand...

Source?
 
Cosimo said:
Source?
Click to expand...

Seems legit

Q: I'm curious about when pilots use the automated systems versus controlling the plane "hands on." Are there times when one is preferable?


A: More than 99 percent of landings are performed manually. There is such a thing as an autoland where you set up an auto approach and, to put it coarsely, the airplane will land "hands off." But I see only a few of those a year—they're only performed in extreme low-visibility conditions, and the airplane, pilot, and airport all have to be certified.
Click to expand...
 
neodude said:
Oh dear.... right back at ya.

Sorry, but that's just incorrect. Like I said, the vast majority of landings are carried out manually. In fact Autoland is rarely used outside minimal visibility conditions except for pilot training and currency.

There are a number of conditions on the airfield that must be met in order for an Autoland to be carried out including protection of the ILS signal and having backup generators running. Obviously having these procedures in place slows the operation down and makes it more complicated. Hence the reason why autoland isn't used unless it is required (Low Vis Procedures)
Click to expand...

Correct.
 
neodude said:
....but a quick search of pprune....

http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/377777-autoland-function-question-pilots.html
Click to expand...

Its not as simple as that some airlines insist on auto landings or at least used to. Which have lead to crashes. Since then perhaps its changed. But just because one company does, doesn't mean they all do the same.
I mean the one I remember in aircraft confidential, they knew the computer wasn't working properly and still tried landing on autopilot. As that was company procedure. If they landed manually there wouldn't have been any issues.
 
Last edited:
Like I said, certain procedures need to be in force on the airport side to allow autolands. From an airport point of view these procedures vastly reduce our capacity and require more resources. Outside of Low Vis Procedures I perhaps see a "Practice" autoland about once a month, and even then, because it's a practice, the pilot is ready to take over at any point should he need to.

Are some of you guys perhaps getting confused between Autoland and an Auto-Approach?
 
Last edited:
neodude said:
Like I said, certain procedures need to be in force on the airport side to allow autolands. From an airport point of view these procedures vastly reduce our capacity and require more resources. Outside of Low Vis Procedures I perhaps see a "Practice" autoland about once a month, and even then, because it's a practice, the pilot is ready to take over at any point should he need to.
Click to expand...

Which airport is this at?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom