Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

Is there anything else which needs to happen when a mayday call come in? Also how much latitude is given to pilots after a mayday call, are they simply told "the sky is yours, tell us what you need" or are they still given some boundaries to fly within? (eg cleared to certain levels etc...)

Implicit in the mayday call is the understanding that the aircraft will no longer be subject to any ATC instructions, or any form of restriction whatsoever. ATC can help, but they can't hinder....

 

[markis10]

Implicit in the mayday call is the understanding that the aircraft will no longer be subject to any ATC instructions, or any form of restriction whatsoever. ATC can help, but they can't hinder....

Thats a good way of putting it, the block I was referring to is usually self imposed by ATC on themselves to keep the other aircraft away from the possible movements of the aircraft in strife, not sure if I was clear.

 

[SenZubEanS]

My initial reaction, without having seen the details, is that it is the first positive thing I've seen for a while.

Speaking on just a personal level are you going to miss SIN as a slip destination or looking forward to something different after a few years?
Also, do you miss not having as varied a flight route on the 380 as opposed to the 744?

 

[jb747]

Speaking on just a personal level are you going to miss SIN as a slip destination or looking forward to something different after a few years?
Also, do you miss not having as varied a flight route on the 380 as opposed to the 744?

Well, I certainly don't miss Singapore yet. Most places become mundane pretty fast. Sadly a lack of variety is the way of the aircraft.

 

[Alanslegal]

Well, I certainly don't miss Singapore yet. Most places become mundane pretty fast. Sadly a lack of variety is the way of the aircraft.

However I am looking forward to some DXB takeoff and landings videos on your YT channel

 

[jb747]

However I am looking forward to some DXB takeoff and landings videos on your YT channel

The YT stuff is still very much a work in progress. Biggest problem is that the aircraft always seems to fly in difficult lighting situations. Bright daylight means that the coughpit is dark/or the sky burnt out, or, alternatively night means the screens are visible, but not much else. LA the other day offered quite good dawn light, but sadly the camera hung after a few minutes.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

JB747 - I recently read both the Aerospace Society interview with David Evans - EXCLUSIVE - Qantas QF32 flight from the coughpit | Aerospace | The Royal Aeronautical Society as well as the QF32 book. I would be interested in your thoughts on what considerations you as the PIC gives to either continuing to fly the plane, assessing the state of the aircraft, performing control checks, etc compared to getting the plane on the ground as quick as possible. Would the QF engineering team have input into the decision that is made?

Thanks in advance.

 

[jb747]

.... I would be interested in your thoughts on what considerations you as the PIC gives to either continuing to fly the plane, assessing the state of the aircraft, performing control checks, etc compared to getting the plane on the ground as quick as possible

There cannot be a hard and fast rule on how to handle any situation. In the case of QF30, we wanted the aircraft on the ground ASAP, and the procedures that were done had to fit the time available (i.e. the time it took to fly from the event position to a runway). QF32 was more procedure driven, with many important things needing to be done before landing reached the top of the list. I really don't understand where all the discussion about control checks has come from. They aren't always needed or appropriate, but if you feel they are, then do them. We had no reason to in the 30 (although we did keep some fuel as insurance in case that changed), whilst the 32 had numerous items that really called for them to be done.

Would the QF engineering team have input into the decision that is made?

Not really. It's more than likely that you wouldn't even talk to them airborne. My understanding is that the QF32 guys did only when they were trying to work out how to drown the #1 engine.

 

[Flashback]

LA the other day offered quite good dawn light, but sadly the camera hung after a few minutes.

Hopefully there's still many more chances to give it a try then! :mrgreen:

 

[Tortuga]

Any thoughts on this JB? Flying formations with passenger jets... Wouldn't aircraft wake create problems?

Airbus's | Travel | video

 

[jb747]

When you fly formation your position should keep you out of the other aircrafts' wake. Formation positions are not in the same plane, but always step down.

Basically this video is just a bit of Airbus self promotion. Whilst birds do a great job of formation flying, and the drag reduction might even be real, I can see lots of issues to be overcome. Notice that the videos only depicted lovely skies....how would it work on one of those s****y nights over the Bay of Bengal? Manouevering one aircraft is hard enough at times, but a formation, with a bank limit that's likely to be in single digits would be a recipe for nasty weather encounters. Insurance might be an interesting issue to. Anyway, it would all require some Airbus software to work perfectly, and that only happens in media productions. Heck, I'd be impressed if they could even make an aircraft that looked like the one in the video.

The other item they mention, steeper climbs after take off, also comes with some issues. Firstly I can really imagine the passengers being impressed. The pitch attitudes of the more powerful aircraft (767s) already scare many of the passengers...something in excess of 45 degrees would be horrifying for most. Also, to achieve that sort of climb attitude means the aircraft has a massive excess of thrust, something which simply never exists. More thrust will equal bigger intakes/engines and these in turn are not needed in the cruise. The saving in climb fuel burn would never pay for it. As it is now, aircraft can save fuel by climbing at max thrust, but invariably, some form of derate is used. The fuel saving NEVER pays for the reduction in the life of the engines. Hate to see an engine failure whilst pitched up like that too.

Of course the counter argument will be that the 'software' will take care of such issues, but sadly about the first thing to always fail in any AB incident is the software.

 

[mjt57]

Heck, I'd be impressed if they could even make an aircraft that looked like the one in the video.

Sort of like how McDonalds presents its hamburgers in adverts compared to the soggy glop that they hand to you out of the drive thru' window...

The other item they mention, steeper climbs after take off, also comes with some issues. Firstly I can really imagine the passengers being impressed.

Every year, when I'm down Phillip Island at the MotoGP, I'm totally impressed when the F18s depart, in "goose-speak, Mav's going ballistic, yee har!"..

I love takeoffs and to a lesser extend, landings, in aircraft. The acceleration is impressive, probably on par with my bike. Of course, by the time it hits 300 kays, the aircraft is probably in "positive climb, gear up"...

I'd love it if future passenger aircraft could do what that fellow from AB was speculating about. It would make an otherwise boring trip a bit more memorable.

 

[simongr]

Hey jb747

Just another thanks on a very different topic today. For the record my wife is a nervous flyer and nervous about me flying. Today in SYD they closed a runway and at the house the trees were swaying ALOT. My wife was quite concerned about me flying back from MEL. I could sense she would rather I stay in MEL.

I was very lucky - I could confidently say - look hon, you know I met jb747 and he has absolute commitment to safety and he has that driven through his training and the pilots he flies with - if it wasnt safe to fly he wouldnt fly and his colleagues in QF wouldnt fly.

As soon as I said that she calmed totally and we talked about our son not about risks of flying.

Cheers

S

 

[AVC]

The other item they mention, steeper climbs after take off, also comes with some issues. Firstly I can really imagine the passengers being impressed. The pitch attitudes of the more powerful aircraft (767s) already scare many of the passengers...something in excess of 45 degrees would be horrifying for most.

I must admit, my jaw dropped open a bit when I saw that one. That's one hell of a rate of climb. That would be enough to eject a loose catering trolley straight out through the tailplane. No pre-takeoff drinks on that flight thanks.

The acceleration is impressive, probably on par with my bike. Of course, by the time it hits 300 kays, the aircraft is probably in "positive climb, gear up"...
.

Your bike must be smaller than what I'm used to. I think if a 747 accelerated the same as a hypersports bike it would be more horrifying for the PAX than that crazy military climbout in the video. My bike will do 300kmh in about 900 metres (Eastern Creek main straight) A 747 can get to 300 in what? A third of the runway? Half? (JB needs to chime in here). Mind you above 200 the wind resistance (on the bike) is really starting to kill the rate of acceleration, unlike the aircraft which basically would just breeze past 200. On the bike hitting 100 takes about 2 seconds, literally, but you've done it in less than 50 metres, the step to 200 takes about another 5 seconds, and you've used less than a third of the straight, after that your looking at running out of road to get to 300. Turn one is a No Brake turn for a reason. It is down hill though.

 

[jb747]

A 747 can get to 300 in what? A third of the runway?

Too many variables. How heavy? How long is your runway?

About 900 metres will get a 550 tonne A380 to 200 kph, but it will need another 1800 to get the next 120.

 

[mjt57]

Your bike must be smaller than what I'm used to.

It's a Blackbird. So, it probably doesn't have the outright acceleration of a sportsbike. As for comparing it with a jet, no doubt I'd be halfway down the runway, but JB would be catching me rather quickly.

I think they've done the Jet v Bike thing to death on the likes of Top Gear. The point that I was trying to make was that I'm used to that sort of performance, so, to experience an aircraft "going ballistic" would be, for me, a ride of a lifetime.

But, a JB pointed out, I doubt that the majority of pax would see it that way. When he flies, the emphasis is on passenger comfort. Although, when we flew from Orlando to West Palm Beach, once, the guy driving the UAL 737 must've thought that he was still in the military, given how steep some of the turns were. (and quite a rapid transition from horizontal to what seemed to be a 45deg bank).

 

[jb747]

...Although, when we flew from Orlando to West Palm Beach, once, the guy driving the UAL 737 must've thought that he was still in the military, given how steep some of the turns were. (and quite a rapid transition from horizontal to what seemed to be a 45deg bank).

I'll bet it didn't exceed 30 degrees. That's the nominal max.

 

[day-heg]

I'll bet it didn't exceed 30 degrees. That's the nominal max.

Talking of max bank angles, for the last couple of years, QANTAS have used a 747 as the 'display' aircraft for the F1 at Albert Park, albeit the A380 is considered the fleet flagship. I'm pretty sure they used an A380 in 2010 for a fairly tame flyby in formation with RAAF aircraft? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong...

Is that to do with max bank angles, and the Airbus (in normal law) not allowing the pilot to exceed certain bank angles?
I remember the 747 doing some pretty crazy turns over the track this year at what seemed like low speed. I'm sure flaps were extended to a degree.

Also, Is this sort of flight considered a 'positioning flight' or similar with only essential personnel on board? I assume it's not at the start or end of a commercial flight with revenue pax?

Cheers again JB for all your input & answers!

 

[jb747]

Talking of max bank angles, for the last couple of years, QANTAS have used a 747 as the 'display' aircraft for the F1 at Albert Park, albeit the A380 is considered the fleet flagship. I'm pretty sure they used an A380 in 2010 for a fairly tame flyby in formation with RAAF aircraft?

Well, you certainly aren't going to get formation aeros. And remember that the wake of a 380 is probably quite dangerous to the likes a PC-9. A380 may be the 'flagship', but they aren't generally all that available....

Is that to do with max bank angles, and the Airbus (in normal law) not allowing the pilot to exceed certain bank angles?
I remember the 747 doing some pretty crazy turns over the track this year at what seemed like low speed. I'm sure flaps were extended to a degree.

Whilst it might have looked extreme compared to normal ops, within about 30 degrees left and right, and up, you have a fair bit of latitude.

Also, Is this sort of flight considered a 'positioning flight' or similar with only essential personnel on board? I assume it's not at the start or end of a commercial flight with revenue pax?

Anything that goes outside of the normal will be done with an empty aircraft.

 

[mjt57]

I'll bet it didn't exceed 30 degrees. That's the nominal max.

Probably not, but the guy did seem a tad enthusiastic in executing the turn. Normally, they're "slow and graceful". This one wasn't.