Ask The Pilot

[ChrisGibbs]

JB747 - I hope the MNL-HKG ferry went off without any weather related issues. Travelling on Friday nights QF A380 service (QF128) from HKG-SYD the weather appeared to be settling down - much better than what it was on Thursday evening. However I did notice that during the late afternoon HKG was down to 1 runway for take off and landings rather than the normal 2.

Back to the QF128 HKG-SYD service. At top of descent into SYD the FO made the standard PA and also added the Captain Bob Sm*** was celebrating 45 years with Qantas. Whatever the industry 45 years of service is a rarity and a great achievement to the pilot in question.

A couple of questions: In Qantas are there many pilots with 45yrs+ experience? Is there a maximum age for pilots to fly International Operations? Is there a program for pilots who can no longer fly International Operations to transfer to Domestic and/or Charter Flying - or do most pilots, when they retire, simply sign off and walk away quietly?

Thanks in advance.

 

[AVC]

Command..

That's gold right there. I might have to link that and send it to my OIC. They'll probably make it into an SOP

.A lot of that tends to gel a bit with what I do, but we have the luxury of not dying (well, for the most part), if we make mistakes..

Me too. Except when we make mistakes it's usually the stakeholder that winds up dead, not us. Well, until the witchhunt starts.

Military officer training plays a very important role in decision making. As well as tactics, weapon traing etc. equal emphasis is placed on leadership and management.

Personally I still like the 6 P's

Prior preparation & planning prevents poor performance

When I was military we called it the 7 P rule. Or are you being politically correct?

 

[Major]

That's gold right there. I might have to link that and send it to my OIC. They'll probably make it into an SOP



Me too. Except when we make mistakes it's usually the stakeholder that winds up dead, not us. Well, until the witchhunt starts.



When I was military we called it the 7 P rule. Or are you being politically correct?

Yes...I left out the other 4 letter P word

 

[FlyboyAl]

Here's one for JB - might bring back a memory or two. Being done up at March AFB south of San Bernadino. When I saw it, he was the first person I thought of!

 

[mosanator]

When I was military we called it the 7 P rule. Or are you being politically correct?

That's what I thought straight away......

 

[mosanator]

View attachment 9021Here's one for JB - might bring back a memory or two. Being done up at March AFB south of San Bernadino. When I saw it, he was the first person I thought of!

One from the Aggressors Squadrons.

 

[jb747]

JB747 - I hope the MNL-HKG ferry went off without any weather related issues. Travelling on Friday nights QF A380 service (QF128) from HKG-SYD the weather appeared to be settling down - much better than what it was on Thursday evening. However I did notice that during the late afternoon HKG was down to 1 runway for take off and landings rather than the normal 2.

There's often late night works at HK which drops it back to one runway. They also tend to shy away from 07R (for arrivals) when the wind is off Lantau. We landed on 07L, and the weather was ok.

Back to the QF128 HKG-SYD service. At top of descent into SYD the FO made the standard PA and also added the Captain Bob Sm*** was celebrating 45 years with Qantas. Whatever the industry 45 years of service is a rarity and a great achievement to the pilot in question.

I'm sure many of the younger blokes would suggest that they need a life. 45 years is rare, though there are quite a few with 40. Basically joined as 20 year old cadets, and managed to be in the right place at the right time, as a couple of retirement age extensions happened. The last was about 5 years ago, so they would have been close to mandatory retirement when the rules changed.

A couple of questions: In Qantas are there many pilots with 45yrs+ experience?

Very few. Over the years, the retirement age has extended from 57, to 60, then to 65. So, basically this current batch is the first lot to reach those years of service.

Is there a maximum age for pilots to fly International Operations?

Currently 65 for international ops as a captain, though unrestricted as an FO. I don't think there are any restrictions domestically.

Is there a program for pilots who can no longer fly International Operations to transfer to Domestic and/or Charter Flying - or do most pilots, when they retire, simply sign off and walk away quietly?

Most simply walk away. They can bid back to be FOs, or they can bid for the 767 (not available any more) or the 737. One bloke who was retiring said that if he missed it, he'd just sit in his wardrobe all night.....

 

[Awesom Andy]

Options are very limited at that point, as you really can't rotate to a steeper attitude without running an extreme risk of a heavy tail strike.

Would I be correct to say that, if the alarm goes off at the flare, it basically means max throttle and hope for the best?

However I did notice that during the late afternoon HKG was down to 1 runway for take off and landings rather than the normal 2.

I believe there was a technical issue with an aircraft, which resulted in the closure of 1 runway for a period of time on Friday.

 

[markis10]

I believe there was a technical issue with an aircraft, which resulted in the closure of 1 runway for a period of time on Friday.

Second time this year it's happened, this time it was a A330 that burst it's undercarriage, it was an EK A380 in April.

 

[jb747]

Second time this year it's happened, this time it was a A330 that burst it's undercarriage, it was an EK A380 in April.

It's not an uncommon event at any airfield. All sorts of things can close a runway for a while. Obviously having an aircraft emergency can shut it down for days (London 27L after the 777), but even a tyre failure will make it unusable for while as the various pieces are removed.

It's something to consider if you are operating to an airfield that has no close alternates.

 

[markis10]

Must admit the only time I lost a runway was when an aircraft forgot its gear at night, although I can remember a few notable ones at Sydney when I was not working, namely AN:

VH-INH Boeing 747

And UA

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...BWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=c-cDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2822,10339784


Ironically the UA flight was the same flight number that had the cargo door issue ex HNL in the months prior.

On another note, given the current 747 fleet is nearing retirement for the unrefurbished units, it's interesting to read this pilots account of taking that last flight :

United captain's painful account of parking a 747-400 for good - Unusual Attitude

It must be weird to shut down the engines for the last time knowing there is every chance the bird is permanently grounded in most cases.

 

[mjt57]

In the blog interview, JB, you're discussing the differences between the A380 and B744 with regards to fuel dumping. The A380 will leave you with about 80t of fuel, yet you can drain down to what's left in the "collector tanks".

Are these the equivalent to the A3's feed tanks, for which each engine has one off?

 

[jb747]

On another note, given the current 747 fleet is nearing retirement for the unrefurbished units, it's interesting to read this pilots account of taking that last flight :

United captain's painful account of parking a 747-400 for good - Unusual Attitude

It must be weird to shut down the engines for the last time knowing there is every chance the bird is permanently grounded in most cases.

Sad really. It depends how sentimental you want to get about what is, after all, a machine. But, a 747 would have seen a lot in it's life. Much boring, some interesting. All sorts of weather, occasional failures. And imagine the people who have flown on one over its life. Pity they can't write an autobiography...be more interesting than most humans.

 

[jb747]

In the blog interview, JB, you're discussing the differences between the A380 and B744 with regards to fuel dumping. The A380 will leave you with about 80t of fuel, yet you can drain down to what's left in the "collector tanks".

Are these the equivalent to the A3's feed tanks, for which each engine has one off?

If I recall correctly, the collectors aren't actually separate tanks, but rather the area within a feed tank where the pipe inlets are.

The 747 lets you dump down to about 6,000 kgs remaining, which is effectively nothing. The 380 on the other hand may leave you with up to 80 tonnes, in which case you'll still be above max landing weight.

That's always struck me as a bit odd, but Airbus just don't seem to have an issue with the occasional overweight landing. The aircraft does perform pretty well at heavy weight, but there seems an inherent assumption in this that the overweight landing won't involve additional brake or flap problems...we know that never happens.

Neither of the aircraft are all that nice at the other end of the scale either. At the lightest weights I've seen (about 210 for the jumbo, and 300 for the A380), they just don't want to land.

 

[mjt57]

they just don't want to land.

Yeah, I get that a lot when we squeezing it for the connecting flights....



Another one regarding the A380, are the fuel pumps driven off of the engine or are they electric? QF32's No. 1 engine wouldn't shut down, yet RdC said that the left wing was "electrically dead" in his book.

The GTs that we ran (P&W FT4Cs) were equiped with mech. fuel pumps when running in diesel mode. Just wondering if similar gear is used on the aviation variants.

 

[jb747]

The pumps are electric, but, if the pumps are off, the engines will be gravity fed.

 

[mjt57]

The pumps are electric, but, if the pumps are off, the engines will be gravity fed.

And that begs the question; how's the fuel admitted into the engine under such low pressure? The pressure within the combustion chambers must be fairly high.

 

[jb747]

The engine contains a mechanically driven fuel pump. The pumps within the wings are just directing fuel to it.

 

[simongr]

The 747 lets you dump down to about 6,000 kgs remaining, which is effectively nothing. The 380 on the other hand may leave you with up to 80 tonnes, in which case you'll still be above max landing weight.

That's always struck me as a bit odd, but Airbus just don't seem to have an issue with the occasional overweight landing. The aircraft does perform pretty well at heavy weight, but there seems an inherent assumption in this that the overweight landing won't involve additional brake or flap problems...we know that never happens.

Isn't this something decided by the airline running the a/c? So if QF set a policy of "Don't land above MLW" surely the aircraft being operated should be able to deliver to that requirement otherwise what is the point of the instruction - although I work in Audit I come from the perspective that if the company doesn't feel the need to enforce the control/policy then don't have the policy/control.

 

[albatross710]

Crosswinds and the 747.

Is it possible that in a max component crosswind landing that the pilots may be physically be 'landing' to the side of the runway surface.

What is the max crosswind component?

If it is about 25 mtrs from the main gear to the nose gear with another metre (maybe) to the pilot, then working the angles must make this possible on a runway with width of less than about 32 metres. Irecall hearing somewhere that the 747 wheels caster to accommodate a 15 degree angle of aircraft to runway.

Just putting it out there.