Ask The Pilot

[RooFlyer]

I've just discovered your youtube videos jb, and my work productivity has gone to zero. Bloody marvelous. Young bloke is now threatening to give up engineering for flight school.

But a question, which probably refers more to smaller birds like the 737. On take-off, climbing through a cloud layer at, say 30 seconds to several minutes (because I'm not sure how high that is) , do you have much or any discretion to shift course to 'pick a hole' between cloud banks to make a smoother ride?

I would think that, knowing its not material, the answer would be 'we don't bother' but I'm surprised the number of times (esp at Sydney and ports north) I'm thinking "this is going to be a bit lumpy" because of the thick grey clouds about, whereas the plane appears to 'swerve' a bit and threads its way through a break in the clouds and no turbulence.

Real or imaginary?

if it is done, how much latitude is allowed (ie diversion off 'ideal' course)?

 

[jb747]

I've just discovered your youtube videos jb, and my work productivity has gone to zero. Bloody marvelous. Young bloke is now threatening to give up engineering for flight school.

No...tell him to complete engineering, and then look at flying. We've got many, many pilots with engineering degrees. Useful thing to have.

But a question, which probably refers more to smaller birds like the 737. On take-off, climbing through a cloud layer at, say 30 seconds to several minutes (because I'm not sure how high that is) , do you have much or any discretion to shift course to 'pick a hole' between cloud banks to make a smoother ride?

I would think that, knowing its not material, the answer would be 'we don't bother' but I'm surprised the number of times (esp at Sydney and ports north) I'm thinking "this is going to be a bit lumpy" because of the thick grey clouds about, whereas the plane appears to 'swerve' a bit and threads its way through a break in the clouds and no turbulence.

Real or imaginary?

if it is done, how much latitude is allowed (ie diversion off 'ideal' course)?

Layers aren't normally an issue. Pretty much by definition, you can't go around them. Cells, and any other lumpy bits will normally be avoided if they have any sort of radar return...many don't. But, if it doesn't look nice, then you'll normally try to go around it.

There's no latitude as such. If we want to divert, either by a heading or a distance left/right, we just ask ATC. At the busy places, they can't let you track willy nilly, but pretty much all of the aircraft will be asking for similar tracking, so they normally accommodate it. Nasty stuff in close, we'll often arrange the tracking before getting airborne (i.e. a quick turn).

 

[markis10]

Interesting incident and a good indicator of the importance of clear flight deck communication:

Investigation: AO-2012-022 - Inadvertent thrust lever asymmetry during the take-off roll involving an Airbus A320, VH-JQX

 

[RooFlyer]

Ta. Cheers.

 

[jb747]

Interesting incident and a good indicator of the importance of clear flight deck communication:

Be interesting to know what the actual engine parameters were.

One of the problems with training flights is that there is no actual FO. An FO generally won't try to finesse things. He'll tell you what is wrong and FIX it if he knows the problem, or tell you in plain english, or simply say something like 'engine problem'. Then you can stop (and below 80 knots that's a non event) and fix things in slow time. I don't think 'go' would have been my preferred option if I didn't understand the why, so in not being plain about it the training captain has actually been risking a higher speed abort for no reason. As I read the manual, the 'thrust set' call simply requires that the actual engine power be at or above that required, no reference is made to modes. It's not really relevant any more...as long as there is enough push....

Given the reversion to manual thrust, I'd expect the engines were actually at CLB. As long as that was greater than or equal to the planned T/O power, then TO/GA wouldn't be needed at all.

Of course, if a particular maker hadn't decided to reinvent the wheel, some of the automation events that have been seen might not have happened.

 

[docjames]

The Dubai London sector is within the two man crew limits.

What are the timing differences between Dubai-LHR and say sin-BNE or sin-mel?

 

[jb747]

What are the timing differences between Dubai-LHR and say sin-BNE or sin-mel?

Dubai-London is about 90% of the other two sectors. It would be pretty straight forward two man territory, except for those times of the year when diversions become real possibilities. Having diverted, you then become subject to 'slot' times, and you'd be unlikely to get one that allowed a return within the flight time limits.

 

[docjames]

Ask The Pilot

How often would the lhr flights be diverted to another EU destination.

I am familiar with the occasional dxb stop on sin-lhr-sin, but can't recall the last time an lhr flight diverted to a close-ish destination?

 

[jb747]

How often would the lhr flights be diverted to another EU destination.

I am familiar with the occasional dxb stop on sin-lhr-sin, but can't recall the last time an lhr flight diverted to a close-ish destination?

It isn't common, but it certainly happens. Crosswinds onto a wet runway will be the biggest issue...that was the reason I took a 747 to Amsterdam a few years ago. The are enough airfields close by that you can use as a alternates to let you fly an approach...and once you get to that point, in most conditions you'll land. But, if the wind is outside the wet runway crosswind limit (which is a lot less than dry), then you're stuck. And, as we've just seen, snow slows things terribly, which in turn burns your fuel, and that's always a finite resource.

Frankfurt seems to suffer more than London, and it's quite common on the return trips, as the equatorial regions are more subject to thunderstorm.

 

[docjames]

Thanks jb. I'd have to say as a passenger I'd rather see a three man crew on these legs. But no doubt will be an interesting battle of the bean counters.....

 

[mjt57]

That's a fairly complex wish list.

Yeah, I s'pose it is.

If it can't be done, no big deal.

Apparently they'll hang on to the skin of a light aircraft at well above that. I've tried it on a car to a reasonable speed.

I wish that my TomTom's suction cup were half as good. It's forever falling off the windscreen with a crash and bang and scares the hell outta the co-pilot, who then rips into me...


(and by "co-pilot", to give it an aviation connotation, I mean the check captain...)

 

[Flying Fox]

I wish that my TomTom's suction cup were half as good. It's forever falling off the windscreen with a crash and bang and scares the hell outta the co-pilot, who then rips into me...

May I suggest a visit to eBay and you will find many in-expensive replacement units.

 

[docjames]

Ask The Pilot

Try the dash mounted bean bag. Not the windscreen mounted ones.

I thought pilots knew about gravity..... ;-)

 

[jb747]

Thanks jb. I'd have to say as a passenger I'd rather see a three man crew on these legs. But no doubt will be an interesting battle of the bean counters.....

The 380 isn't really much harder to operate two man than (say) something like the 767 or 330, and nobody thinks twice about them flying with only two pilots. I don't see it as an issue either way.

 

[mjt57]

The 380 isn't really much harder to operate two man than (say) something like the 767 or 330, and nobody thinks twice about them flying with only two pilots. I don't see it as an issue either way.

What about new pilot training? If they dispense with SOs what will they do to get new pilots up to speed with airline ops?

 

[Fruitcake]

What about new pilot training? If they dispense with SOs what will they do to get new pilots up to speed with airline ops?

The A380s fly routes other than DXB-LHR. SOs will still be needed on all the other routes.

 

[jb747]

What about new pilot training? If they dispense with SOs what will they do to get new pilots up to speed with airline ops?

Its only one particular sector that they may not be on. They'll still go to LA, HK, and Oz-DXB.

The 747 has operated this way for years (as per the 767/330). SOs are carried as required by the flight time limits, or as required. For instance the 747 flight to JFK is normally two man crew, but an SO will be added to the crew depending upon the weather forecasts in New York. The 767, when it flew to Vancouver, used to leave the SO behind in Hawaii.

 

[mjt57]

The 767, when it flew to Vancouver, used to leave the SO behind in Hawaii.

I'll bet that he wouldn't have complained about that...

 

[jb747]

I'll bet that he wouldn't have complained about that...

Ah, no, he didn't get to wait for the return, but would pretty much immediately head back to Oz.

 

[docjames]

The 380 isn't really much harder to operate two man than (say) something like the 767 or 330, and nobody thinks twice about them flying with only two pilots. I don't see it as an issue either way.

I was thinking more in terms of rested pilots, diversions and "tolerance for irregular occurrences" than having two in the coughpit at any particular time. If a two pilot crew has a suitable "buffer" for diversion flexibility, and the pilots are suitably rested to do their job safely, I agree, no issue.

Thanks for answering all my questions - pilot and crew rostering I find interesting as there are safety / work limit parallels to the medical workforce issues and patient safety.

Part of the "Swiss cheese theory" basically.