US testing the concept of single pilot C130 and KC46 assisted by a lone loady
Correct, charliegolf - with the added bonus that his assessment was recorded as a pilot categorisation, not as a crewman’s.
Last edited by Thud_and_Blunder; 18th Mar 2023 at 14:07. Reason: Misspelled the name of the PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Single pilot operations?
To try and return this thread to its original purpose with a genuine question or two
What RW aircraft currently in service are routinely operated single pilot?
If they are operated SP, would both pilot crew positions be occupied at all times - with the non-pilot having had some formal training?
What RW aircraft currently in service are routinely operated single pilot?
If they are operated SP, would both pilot crew positions be occupied at all times - with the non-pilot having had some formal training?
Last edited by Brain Potter; 18th Mar 2023 at 16:11.
Chinooks have always been 2 pilot, and iirc Pumas went from Pilot/crewman ops to 2 pilot at Gulf War time. When Pumas were SP, the LHS was not routinely occupied. I don't recall a crewman ever having formal training.
CG
CG
The following users liked this post:
My experience has shown many helicopter are designed for single pilot operation, others can be flown by a single pilot but use two pilot crews, and in some EMS operations a single pilot aircraft will have a Medical Crew occupy the empty forward seat outbound to the pickup (some actually faced rearwards).
Instructor pilots have to be capable of flying a two pilot aircraft without assistance of the Student Pilots and sometimes inspire of the Student Pilots.
An example....the venerable Huey was designed for a ingle pilot in the righthand seat but was generally flown by two pilot in the Military but single pilot in the civilian world.
Then, when Vertical Reference flying (Long Line External Operation) the single pilot flew the aircraft from the Lefthand Seat.
Aircraft design plays a role in determining if it is a single or two pilot aircraft as well as the missions and SOP's of the Operator.
I never encountered a formal training course for Non-PIlot Crew Members to be able to assume full pilot functions although informal opportunities for them to have a go now and then did exist.
As to the Chinook.....it can be flown by a single Pilot without any other crew....why that would be done opens the discussion to lots of questions that would garner not many endorsing such.
In this day and time....could a 747 be flown by a single Pilot?
The question that has to be answered is if that single pilot becomes incapacitated for some reason....then what?
Why would one invite such a thing to happen by going to just the single pilot concept.
In single pilot helicopters I have been asked by. a. passenger what would happen if I died in flight.....and my usual reply was along the lines of you best hope your life insurance is paid up and your computer browser history has been deleted.
Instructor pilots have to be capable of flying a two pilot aircraft without assistance of the Student Pilots and sometimes inspire of the Student Pilots.
An example....the venerable Huey was designed for a ingle pilot in the righthand seat but was generally flown by two pilot in the Military but single pilot in the civilian world.
Then, when Vertical Reference flying (Long Line External Operation) the single pilot flew the aircraft from the Lefthand Seat.
Aircraft design plays a role in determining if it is a single or two pilot aircraft as well as the missions and SOP's of the Operator.
I never encountered a formal training course for Non-PIlot Crew Members to be able to assume full pilot functions although informal opportunities for them to have a go now and then did exist.
As to the Chinook.....it can be flown by a single Pilot without any other crew....why that would be done opens the discussion to lots of questions that would garner not many endorsing such.
In this day and time....could a 747 be flown by a single Pilot?
The question that has to be answered is if that single pilot becomes incapacitated for some reason....then what?
Why would one invite such a thing to happen by going to just the single pilot concept.
In single pilot helicopters I have been asked by. a. passenger what would happen if I died in flight.....and my usual reply was along the lines of you best hope your life insurance is paid up and your computer browser history has been deleted.
When I was routinely going on Boeing Flight Tests, we tested 7 days per week, naturally people got tired of working weekends and wanted some time off. So on weekends we'd sometimes get an experienced, top-notch flight test pilot, and a young 'newbe' pilot who was simply learning the ropes.
The idea was that the experienced pilot would fly all the tricky test conditions while explaining things to the newbe. If anything happened to the experienced pilot, the newbe was simply expected to get the aircraft on the ground in one piece.
I suspect the USAF has something similar in mind - the loady would get some basic training on operation of the aircraft and how to do a straightforward landing. If the pilot is somehow incapacitated, the loady's job would simply be to return to base and get the aircraft on the ground in one piece.
The idea was that the experienced pilot would fly all the tricky test conditions while explaining things to the newbe. If anything happened to the experienced pilot, the newbe was simply expected to get the aircraft on the ground in one piece.
I suspect the USAF has something similar in mind - the loady would get some basic training on operation of the aircraft and how to do a straightforward landing. If the pilot is somehow incapacitated, the loady's job would simply be to return to base and get the aircraft on the ground in one piece.
Hmm. Despite corroboration, you seem to know otherwise. Laugh away, but perhaps this thread hijack has reached its end. Apologies all (bar one) for the diversion, and may the US fixed-wing folk reach a safe and happy conclusion to their trials.
Are there aspects of C130/KC46 ops which require a 2nd pair of hands in the cockpit during modes other than in-flight? SASless is absolutely correct that the CH47 CAN be operated single-pilot in-flight; the reason the Chinook was operated in the UK as 2 x pilot (or pilot + Nav, in the late 90s) was that in 4-wheel taxi the handling pilot couldn't monitor the flying controls AND operate the rear-wheel steering via the separate control at the left-rear of the interseat console. In extremis there were work-arounds, including the use of 2-wheel taxying or getting the No.2 crewman at the front move forward to operate it (under pilot direction if crewman's visibility was restricted).
Without confessing to past Sins....If one occupies the Left Hand Seat both the Thrust Lever (Collective for Single Rotor Helicopter Pilots) and the Power Steering Control Wheel can be operated with ease.
Unless you have some rare anatomical abnormalities one would have to rely upon the Force Trim system to monitor the Flight Controls.....that being having two complete sets of Arms in order to have your hands on the controls and the power steering knob all the time.
An Aft Gear Swivel Lock must be released and the Power Steering actuator on one of the two aft landing gear actually swivels that gear leg and the opposite gear is free to caster following the powered gear leg.
Taxiing on all fours requires setting the Cyclic in a neutral position and leaving it alone while using one's feet for braking and the left hand for applying a minor bit of power by means of the Thrust Lever.
Pedals are kept centered while using the Power Steering.
Visibility is very limited when looking cross cockpit and with scant rearwards view past the 90 Degree angle.
There are certain emergencies that would prove difficult to manage were one to be alone in the aircraft.
My knowledge of the Chinook ended with the C Model but in all of the A,B,and C's Force Trim was on all the time requiring the use of the Cyclic Force Trim Release Button and the Thrust Lever had a similar friction brake system with its own release trigger on each Thrust Lever and was on all of the time unless triggered by a Pilot.
Unless you have some rare anatomical abnormalities one would have to rely upon the Force Trim system to monitor the Flight Controls.....that being having two complete sets of Arms in order to have your hands on the controls and the power steering knob all the time.
An Aft Gear Swivel Lock must be released and the Power Steering actuator on one of the two aft landing gear actually swivels that gear leg and the opposite gear is free to caster following the powered gear leg.
Taxiing on all fours requires setting the Cyclic in a neutral position and leaving it alone while using one's feet for braking and the left hand for applying a minor bit of power by means of the Thrust Lever.
Pedals are kept centered while using the Power Steering.
Visibility is very limited when looking cross cockpit and with scant rearwards view past the 90 Degree angle.
There are certain emergencies that would prove difficult to manage were one to be alone in the aircraft.
My knowledge of the Chinook ended with the C Model but in all of the A,B,and C's Force Trim was on all the time requiring the use of the Cyclic Force Trim Release Button and the Thrust Lever had a similar friction brake system with its own release trigger on each Thrust Lever and was on all of the time unless triggered by a Pilot.
The 4-wheel taxi turns would have to be kept really really gentle - we often needed a little in-turn cyclic against the trim on some of the narrower taxiways to avoid roll cross-coupling, which wouldn't be possible with your arrangement, SASless. Your knowledge certainly still applied with the D and its equivalent(s) elsewhere. Agree re the emergencies - cockpit actions while one pilot flies the aircraft with HYD out spring to mind. Wouldn't be able to reach the Master Armament switch from the LHS, but that's probably not a consideration for these C130/KC46 tasks either.
Thanks, ExA re double assymetric; saw your earlier comment, was just wondering if there were any ground-manouevring handling considerations (unless, of course, you are saying that double-assymetric is a problem on the ground, too).
Thanks, ExA re double assymetric; saw your earlier comment, was just wondering if there were any ground-manouevring handling considerations (unless, of course, you are saying that double-assymetric is a problem on the ground, too).
Yeah, sort of, only not. This is so short-sighted an idea to address the shortage of pilots that it’s likely to happen, and there will be a day to pay the Piper when there is no time to do so. Of course the “brains” who dreamed this up and let it happen will be long gone and the blame, as usual, will go the pilot.
Dumb as dirt.
Dumb as dirt.
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe on the Klassic. Perfectly feasible to fly double asymmetric in the J solely from the LHS.
When taxiing around and on the take-off / landing roll during unprepared / natural surface ops, the non-handling pilot would provide back pressure on the yoke to offload the nose gear. Would need three hands to do that solo with your hands already on the power and nose wheel steering.
When taxiing around and on the take-off / landing roll during unprepared / natural surface ops, the non-handling pilot would provide back pressure on the yoke to offload the nose gear. Would need three hands to do that solo with your hands already on the power and nose wheel steering.
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Looking north out to sea
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
4 Posts
A couple of things to throw into the fray.
Having been streamed to Gp1, my first tour having never failed anything, was on the Puma in 82! I did 2 tours, the second as the Sqn Trg Officer, both with single pilot ops as normal. This, considering how poor the nav kit was at the time and the heights we flew at, was hard work. Consequently the crewmen (of multiple backgrounds) gave excellent help in the front when not need in the rear. As CG stated two pilot ops started to come in as the norm about the Gulf War time and for NI ops. NVG was coming in big time in the late 80’s and was proving to be an issue on manpower as was proved in the Gulf War. The Sqn in RAFG had 17 a/c and 17 pilots….. Indeed, on some exercises I recall being ferried back to base to pick up another frame as we had more of them than crew and on one occasion flew completely solo; it was allowed then.
Anyway, on to NVG. Yes, this needed 2 in the front. In the late 80’s I completed a conversion and started the slow process of getting others up to speed. As part of this it was intended to use the Navs in the LHS. Consequently, I was tasked with getting them up to speed to fly the aircraft if needed so yes some non pilots were given training. However, there was sometimes a reason why they were navs, not pilots!
Events overtook this and the Gulf War arrived and the trawl went out for Puma pilots, or anyone that had seen one and the most current ended up in the ME. It was then the job of a couple of us to get all trained up for NVG. 90 mins for the RHS, 60 for the left. Not a single incident and the Puma force became NVG capable and the end of single pilot ops dawned.
In the way of the RAF, I then headed off to pastures new and a Flt Cdr tour on the C130K. Here, unless you were on SF(!), it was 2 pilot ops. A grand time was had in the TAC role in a great multi crew environment. However, in answer to the question above, even practice double asymmetric flying was not easy. The outer engines on the C130 are a long way out from the centreline and they were at full power at times. Flying was all manual and it was impossible to trim out the rudder forces and there was subsequent aileron deflection. Basically, the captain flew, the rest of the crew operated. I am aware that modern aircraft are different having flown the A321/330.
So, in summary, whilst single pilot ops are and were for many years, possible but on some occasions, particularly on angry ops, not a good idea.
To further explore some more parts of the thread. Gp3 was called that because it came after fighters and transport a/c and was therefore logical. It was not for the also rans. One of my fellow streamed Gp3 colleagues was replaced by a medically downgraded student and he went to lightnings and several I knew transitioned to Hawk instructor, Buccaneer and Harrier. In all forms of flying I have done, I have met some excellent pilots and crew and as said above, we are all on the same team.
Me
Having been streamed to Gp1, my first tour having never failed anything, was on the Puma in 82! I did 2 tours, the second as the Sqn Trg Officer, both with single pilot ops as normal. This, considering how poor the nav kit was at the time and the heights we flew at, was hard work. Consequently the crewmen (of multiple backgrounds) gave excellent help in the front when not need in the rear. As CG stated two pilot ops started to come in as the norm about the Gulf War time and for NI ops. NVG was coming in big time in the late 80’s and was proving to be an issue on manpower as was proved in the Gulf War. The Sqn in RAFG had 17 a/c and 17 pilots….. Indeed, on some exercises I recall being ferried back to base to pick up another frame as we had more of them than crew and on one occasion flew completely solo; it was allowed then.
Anyway, on to NVG. Yes, this needed 2 in the front. In the late 80’s I completed a conversion and started the slow process of getting others up to speed. As part of this it was intended to use the Navs in the LHS. Consequently, I was tasked with getting them up to speed to fly the aircraft if needed so yes some non pilots were given training. However, there was sometimes a reason why they were navs, not pilots!
Events overtook this and the Gulf War arrived and the trawl went out for Puma pilots, or anyone that had seen one and the most current ended up in the ME. It was then the job of a couple of us to get all trained up for NVG. 90 mins for the RHS, 60 for the left. Not a single incident and the Puma force became NVG capable and the end of single pilot ops dawned.
In the way of the RAF, I then headed off to pastures new and a Flt Cdr tour on the C130K. Here, unless you were on SF(!), it was 2 pilot ops. A grand time was had in the TAC role in a great multi crew environment. However, in answer to the question above, even practice double asymmetric flying was not easy. The outer engines on the C130 are a long way out from the centreline and they were at full power at times. Flying was all manual and it was impossible to trim out the rudder forces and there was subsequent aileron deflection. Basically, the captain flew, the rest of the crew operated. I am aware that modern aircraft are different having flown the A321/330.
So, in summary, whilst single pilot ops are and were for many years, possible but on some occasions, particularly on angry ops, not a good idea.
To further explore some more parts of the thread. Gp3 was called that because it came after fighters and transport a/c and was therefore logical. It was not for the also rans. One of my fellow streamed Gp3 colleagues was replaced by a medically downgraded student and he went to lightnings and several I knew transitioned to Hawk instructor, Buccaneer and Harrier. In all forms of flying I have done, I have met some excellent pilots and crew and as said above, we are all on the same team.
Me
Double asymmetric on the K was a problem owing to the outboard nature of the thrustlines coupled with the fact that the props all rotated in the same direction with No1 engine being the most critical (port outer). You only ever got to see 'Practice Asymmetric' on the OCU at altitude (ie 2 engines actually shut down), otherwise it was simulated asymmetric (ie 2 engines throttled back to zero torque). Even then it was a handful and affected things like flap and gear selection sequences. For eg you'd take approach flap before the gear (so the u/c warning horn fuse would be pulled by the Flt Eng.
You may recall the Albert that landed gear up at Brize a few years ago - that was off a simulated double asymmetric approach.
I never flew the J, but on the K, if you were flying from the RHS it could be problematic to reach the 'T Handles' (electrical engine shutdown handles that also pre-route the fire extinguishant) since, unlike the 'Condition Levers' (mechanical engine sutdown levers) which were mounted next to the throttle quadrant, the T Handles were mounted on the eyebrow panel in front of the LHS. I certainly know of one K Series Co-pilot who was restreamed because he couldn't reach the T Handles.
WRT T&B's Q. Double asymmetric on the ground wasn't a problem per sé save for the fact that you could not select reverse. An a/c came very close to going off the end at Gib after a double engine failure on T/O.
You may recall the Albert that landed gear up at Brize a few years ago - that was off a simulated double asymmetric approach.
I never flew the J, but on the K, if you were flying from the RHS it could be problematic to reach the 'T Handles' (electrical engine shutdown handles that also pre-route the fire extinguishant) since, unlike the 'Condition Levers' (mechanical engine sutdown levers) which were mounted next to the throttle quadrant, the T Handles were mounted on the eyebrow panel in front of the LHS. I certainly know of one K Series Co-pilot who was restreamed because he couldn't reach the T Handles.
WRT T&B's Q. Double asymmetric on the ground wasn't a problem per sé save for the fact that you could not select reverse. An a/c came very close to going off the end at Gib after a double engine failure on T/O.
Last edited by ExAscoteer2; 19th Mar 2023 at 20:04.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2 View Post
Double Asymmetric as I explained before.
Maybe on the Klassic. Perfectly feasible to fly double asymmetric in the J solely from the LHS.
Double Asymmetric as I explained before.
Maybe on the Klassic. Perfectly feasible to fly double asymmetric in the J solely from the LHS.
Easier handling aside, and the J could fly level with the gear down at most weights and temps, the J still had the same drills to perform if utility hyds were out. With no co and the ALM (PA) not in the RHS because he’s down the back doing his best ‘Windy Miller’ impression there would be no one to read out the drill. If the ALM had recently practiced it he might be ok doing it from memory but it’s an example of an emergency drill that required 3 (or preferably 4) people. How likely is it to occur so could be disregarded for a 2 man crew? Probably cleared at the accountant’s level but it would take a brave senior officer to make that call I believe.
I never did double asymmetric in the K for training, it was always simulated in the aircraft, in the J it was purely done in the sim. I always found real single asymmetric in the J was different (and a bit trickier) in the aircraft than in the sim so my suspicions were that double asymmetric for real would be considerably worse than it was in training. I did do it in the sim with an ALM in the RHS, that experience led me to believe that they should always stay in the middle seat, where they were used to sitting, as I found it capacity sapping having to explain what I needed him to do to help me. He would have needed a great deal more training to have occupied that seat in my opinion, and I would always have preferred a co sitting there.
During the OCU teach of double asymmetric in the J we would always end with a confidence booster, a double EFATO at rotate at max AUW (70.3T), which was normally survivable albeit with some hefty use of the controls and they sometimes needed the hill off the end of R25 at EGDL to maintain flying speed. Yes, they were expecting it as it was a briefed event, and it was always engs 3 & 4 that went so they kept the hydraulics and could get the gear up, but it was designed to instill a confidence in them at what the aircraft could do. I recall in the K having to brief on route departures in the warmer months were I was going to crash the aircraft if we lost 2 engines during the takeoff…