Question Is it possible to land a Boeing 747 being a layman

[SuprunP]

I remember watching the film Turbulence (1997) and thinking (even though I was a kid and could have easily believed the story I, for some reason, didn't) something like 'could she really do that'?

Well, I'll try to recall the plot:
1) Ryan Weaver and another prisoner are escorted by four air marshals on a Boeing 747 on a commercial flight.
2) (As you have already guessed) The pilot and co-pilot are killed.
3) Teri Halloran, an air hostess, must be instructed by radio how to land.
4) She safely lands the plane.

Even if we try and forget that she must have been on the verge of a full-on nervous breakdown with all the murders going on could she actually land a Boeing 747?

P.S. My father keeps telling me that he could have easily pulled that off; I, in my turn, keep smiling and shaking my head as if saying "Yes, sure, no doubt whatsoever!"

Thanks.

 

[Star Voyager]

 

[blane]

Got to love Airplane! :lol:

I'd say it's easily possible as long as you have a good AC guy who guides you through all the steps. Basically a 747 can land automatically with almost zero intervention by the pilot. However, it'd depend on factors like wind or if there's any damage to the vessel.

 

[SuprunP]

Should those pilots then study (I hope they do study, don't they?) for such a long time if everything that makes you a pro is an ability to hear and execute a good AC guy's instructions (oh, yeah, and a Boeing 747)? :hmm:

 

[blane]

Pilots receive the expensive training so they are able to control the plane even if the autopilots are failing. Or other crucial systems. And this is where a layman would have a very hard time landing such a bird, no matter how good any AC instructions are.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

Didn't they do this on Mythbusters (cannonball not included)?

They did a before with no help (failed miserably)
and an after with help. (not great, but not fatal).

 

[SuprunP]

Didn't they do this on Mythbusters (cannonball not included)?

They did a before with no help (failed miserably)
and an after with help. (not great, but not fatal).

I only managed to catch the last scene - when they were discussing their results.
On the other hand, I can dock a Space Shuttle with the ISS sitting in my cozy room listening to a good song. I'm not so sure I could replicate this being far above the Mother Earth...

 

[Artlav]

Sufficiently intelligent passenger being talked over the radio by a skilled pilot can land a plane in good weather and conditions, as Mythbusters shown.

With no guidance whatsoever - only with some very good luck, and only if he have at least some related skills.
An engineering person or a physicist could figure out the controls in real time, several other professions's worths of knowledge can help.

If none are available - make sure the people on the ground know where to put the hay:

 

[blane]

Not a 747, but here is some recent report with video which demonstrates how the AC instructs the passenger.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-passenger-lands-plane_N.htm

 

[n72.75]

The 747 is hardly the most difficult aircraft to fly.

It has excellent dihedral and pitch stability.

 

[Cras]

With autoland, the 747 is very easy to land. Without it, having the Flight Deck on the second level may present some problems. She is a heavy, so getting her to slow down will not be the easiest thing in the world, and it lands fast, so you really have to stay ahead of it.

I guess it depends on how much of a layman. If you have no knowledge of Boeing automation, the logic, and how the MCP and FMS go together, it is going to be rough. If you have a rough idea of how to use basic MCP functions, things can get better. If you know how Boeing's work, the FMS will be very familiar as will the MCP, it will be quite easy to get a CAT II approach plugged and get the thing to autoland.

This assumes the plane is in good working order and all critical systems are functioning. Now if systems start to fail, then that is a different story.

 

[blane]

Am I actually the only one who fantasizes about a trip in an airliner where some kind of incidents requires a passenger to take over and your Flight Simulator experience actually makes you the best suited candidate? :lol:

 

[Cras]

It would be a thrill, no doubt, but I have to say, it will never happen. Flight Attendents are trained with basic knowledge of the systems, so they will be able to take control of the autopilot and get the plane down safely. I am not sure how they would go about going to a field with not advanced ILS. The rule may be to divert to a field that they can autoland. Even with ILS, at somepoint who ever is up in the flight deck needs to take control and land the plane.

 

[garyw]

A few things to be aware of - if you are talking a 747 you'll probably have 4 or 6 pilots. 2 for the outbound, 2 or 4 for the cruise and the original 2 for the landing.
With flight crew limitations on the hours you do end up with quite a few pilots on a long-haul flight. You might even have a pilot or two on the plane dead heading to the destination so landing a 747 shouldn't be an issue.

Now, looking at short-haul, 737, A320, etc. Only two crew so if both are incapacitated the simple landing method is a CAT-III dual autopilot autoland. Chances are that a passenger has some flight experience so that shouldn't be an issue.

Where it gets interesting are older planes like the RJ-85 that don't have full CAT-III capaibilites. In those cases you'd want someone with some experience of actual flying to be in control rather than joe public.

 

[blane]

Now, looking at short-haul, 737, A320, etc. Only two crew so if both are incapacitated the simple landing method is a CAT-III dual autopilot autoland. Chances are that a passenger has some flight experience so that shouldn't be an issue.

As Cras pointed out, wouldn't the on-board crew usually take over instead of a passenger? (Unless of course there's an actual pilot on board)

 

[garyw]

As Cras pointed out, wouldn't the on-board crew usually take over instead of a passenger? (Unless of course there's an actual pilot on board)

Chances are that flight crew would take over, yes. Chances are that at least one other 'passenger' is company flight crew.

 

[T.Neo]

Chances are that flight crew would take over, yes. Chances are that at least one other 'passenger' is company flight crew.

A few (at least) years back SAA used 747s for flying to/from Cape Town/Johannesburg. Wouldn't an aircraft on such a short duration flight be carrying only one flight crew?

 

[garyw]

A few (at least) years back SAA used 747s for flying to/from Cape Town/Johannesburg. Wouldn't an aircraft on such a short duration flight be carrying only one flight crew?

Yes but with an aircraft that size what are the chances that other crew are dead heading?

 

[T.Neo]

Yes but with an aircraft that size what are the chances that other crew are dead heading?

I have no idea. :shifty:

 

[Artlav]

A few things to be aware of - if you are talking a 747 you'll probably have 4 or 6 pilots. 2 for the outbound, 2 or 4 for the cruise and the original 2 for the landing.
With flight crew limitations on the hours you do end up with quite a few pilots on a long-haul flight. You might even have a pilot or two on the plane dead heading to the destination so landing a 747 shouldn't be an issue.

What if the plane was hijacked?
It could conceivably turn out so that the fighting to retake the plane would incapacitate all the crew.
In fact, hijacking is probably the only likely scenario that would leave a big plane with no pilots.

Other kind is much spookier - a ghost plane like the [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522"]Helios Airways Flight 522 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame] , when everyone on board died from lack of oxygen except for one sturdy fellow, who tried to land it but the fuel ran out too early.