What is the fluctuation caused by the pilot?

During experimentation, the smallest control input can have significant effects. This is especially clear in high speeds or during complex maneuvers. The fluctuation caused by the pilot occurs when the pilot unintentionally creates a reactions ring from the control inputs that are exacerbated instead of installing the plane flying track. This phenomenon is a technical curiosity regarding the experience, but it also contributed to several Crash

In both military and civil aviation.

As a result of modern technological developments, many aircraft began to add automatic aviation control systems to this mix, with features such as automatic lands, stalling prevention, and control of the rotor of the helicopter. While these features definitely have the best intentions, many may have caused their own problems, especially when competing with the pilot for inputs. This article will shed some light on what the volatility caused by the pilot, how it can happen, and how to avoid or correct it.

How does the volatility result from the pilot occur?

An example of fluctuation caused by the pilot (Bio) It happened only yesterday, on April 9, when Boeing B777-300ER landed by Air France on Tokyo Narita Airport

(NRT). As is evident from the video of the accident above, the pilot tries to put the plane quietly on the runway, cut the speed by igniting and allowing the plane to settle, but this does not go as intended and the plane loses a small speed.

The following is excessive correction, which leads to the height of the plane and becomes unstable. To describe how this can happen, a fact paper from Skybrayy He puts it like this:

“The fluctuations resulting from the pilot or the irreplaceable fluctuations are caused by the pilot’s efforts to control the plane and occur when the plane pilot is inadvertently an increasing chain in the opposite direction.”

Cases like the above are very common, especially for inexperienced pilots, as is the case when reducing the speed, the nose rises, and the pilot appears the sky. Then they must judge whether the runway is approaching safely without looking at it. The instinct will be to lower the nose for verification, but this can prevent low speed. As with other PIOS, the main reason in this case is that the pilots’ inputs “behind” the movement of the plane and attempts to correct what makes things worse.

The main main causes of the pilot fluctuation

PiOS often occurs when the pilot participates in a very demanding control task, as is the case during approach and landing. By definition, the pilot’s inputs in the controls are what causes fluctuation, and this control can become less smooth and accurate when they are also concerned about other factors, such as decreased fuel, harmful weather or other emergencies.

Dravits, shocks and pressure can increase the pilot’s inputs CapacityWhich, in turn, leads to greater experimental control inputs for correction, which increases the exacerbation of oscillation. For pilots, the possibility of such an event can be reduced by increasing the flight experience, focusing on the offered task, and keeping a wonderful head.

Here are some examples of PIO accidents and what happened as a result:

• A333, Montreal, Canada, 2014: During landing, part of the main left landing equipment left the edge of the runway before returning to it. The wind caused the plane to start from the runway and low visibility caused a delay in the corrective action. It was found that the amphitheater had no enough vision, because the lighting was not serviceable.
• F900, South Bucharest, Romania, 1999: Because of a slight malfunction in the stadium control, the incorrect response of the crew caused violent and fast vertical vibrations. Many passengers were killed.
• CL30, northwest of Moscow, Russia, 2010: The plane witnessed a sudden annoyance on the stadium on the plane as a result of an inappropriate experimental response to the treatment of an automatic installation trim. Three unrestricted passengers were seriously injured.

NASA research on this topic

NASA gathered 100 in -depth pages a report On the causes of PIOS in 1995, which valued the dynamics of active aircraft, the patterns of human experimental dynamic behavior, and the operation of the events of the Sects to PiOS. The paper was written by Duane T. Mcruer, and summarizing its results in this section of the summary:

“The great diversity in the patterns of human experimental response, excessive delay and/or inappropriate gains in active aircraft dynamics, and transformations in the dynamics of human or effective aircraft are among the main sources involved as highly PiOS factors.”

In essence, this means that the reactions of the pilots to the unexpected events during the trip are reliable. Moreover, the delay in the plane’s reaction to experimental inputs can increase the correction by the pilot.

The paper wanders at the most extreme to investigate this matter, using many complex mathematics and control measurements, but it is summarized in a somewhat easy -to -understand concept, which is that the more the plane is the more responsive, the less PIO the event. It indicates that flying is a complex skill that is implemented in the best way when the pilot can think of the plane as an extension of its body, and move reliably, as is an employee.

The complexity of technological factors

As shown in NASA’s research above, the performance of the plane can also be a major contributor to PIOS. According to the Skybary Facts newspaper on this topic: “The majority of the extreme PIO events are the result of some deficiency in designing aircraft control systems (FCS) that lead to a negative association of the pilot with the plane.” In other words, technology holds the problem, as it interferes with the pilot’s inputs and expected output of the plane’s interaction.

Automatic aviation systems contain many benefits, such as changing the processing of the plane, or integrating navigational data to reduce the load on the operators. However, as shown in some accidents, such as a maximum prominent two crashAnd that caused FAA to put the maximum in March 2019, can have the aircraft movements caused by MCAS in Boeing in this case, severe consequences when interfering in deliberate and justified experimental inputs.

Another example is an evolution Bill 525 uncompromisingThat was shattered on a test trip. In this case, the FCS was combined with PIO to create an excessive curve in the roundabout, which destroyed the helicopter in the middle of the trip. Whether there is a defect in devices or short -sighted FCS design, it is ultimately the experimental correction that exacerbates the unwanted movement in the case of PIO, except for technological interference with the input loop and outputs.

How to correct the pilot sscilllation

As long as humans fly planes, it may be impossible to completely eliminate Pios, because it is a psychological phenomenon as it is a technological state, or rather the result of human interaction with vehicles. It can be completely important for us, but this is not without its own problems, as programmers know, because the best code can suffer from spontaneous errors. A mixture of automatic and manual movements also provides problems, as shown in the above examples.

However, when the plane control is completely manual, PIOS can be prevented in several ways after starting, breaking the feedback ring between the pilot and the plane. Good ways to do this are the following:

• Freezing controls

• The controls are launched

• It greatly reduces control input

The first two cases are the most reliable, according to what I mentioned SkybrayyStudies have shown that even experienced operators are struggling to reduce aggression in the temperature of the moment. However, it is not recommended to give up controls. To quote 38 Special:

“Just hold loosely

But do not leave

If you cling to very tightly

You will lose control.

How much should pilots worry about Pius?

Certainly, pilots should be aware of how PiOS happens, and what makes them worse as soon as it started. However, as noted FlyingPIO can be invaded with sufficient practice to go after the main gear that touches the ground. This is where the plane is touched shortly without bringing the nose equipment, then takes to the air again to take a second approach to the runway.

With regard to technology, it will be wise not to try to integrate it very quickly, or empty a lot of responsibility for technological products. It is better for each pilot to have knowledge to deal with all situations, and the boarding of the plane without anyone on the plane that has the ability to land manually, looks like a crazy possibility frankly. In some cases, it is best to keep knowledge by constantly practicing it, rather than allowing the skill to attenuate and lose it.

Since automatic control of aircraft becomes more prevalent, manufacturers continue to pay automatic flight technologies, airlines and rented companies should remain vigilant that the skill of dealing with PIO does not disappear, while making sure that they are displayed on a large part of the experimental training.