Ask The Pilot

[mjt57]

Congratulations on making it to page 388, jb747

388? 380-800...

 

[jb747]

Don't you just love the way that Boeing and Airbus started out numbering their latest at 800. That's taking the rule about not buying the 100 model of anything to extremes, but you'd think the airlines would have noticed.

 

[Must...Fly!]

Don't you just love the way that Boeing and Airbus started out numbering their latest at 800. That's taking the rule about not buying the 100 model of anything to extremes, but you'd think the airlines would have noticed.

I have thought of this. It is curious that they start at such a high number - I can only presume that while we know the difference between a 747-100 and 747-400 (or -800) is more than significant, to the layman it is probably just a 747.

Why this concerns an aircraft manufacturer I don't know, I suppose they consider airlines place an importance on customer impression of model/make? Confusing!

 

[legroom]

UAE Travel: Tourist: Drug guidelines - UAEinteract

Quite a significant list that requires permission otherwise a copy of the doctors script is all that is needed.

http://uae-embassy.ae/Embassies/au/Content/757

Some 'simple' cough mixtures are on the list (6,7,9,10,11).

Not sure why the contraceptive pill is on the list too (345,346).

 

[mjt57]

Why this concerns an aircraft manufacturer I don't know, I suppose they consider airlines place an importance on customer impression of model/make? Confusing!

Jetstar seems to go to great pains to point out that its A320s are actually A321s. What the difference between the 20 and the 21 is, I don't know. But I'd expect that the 21 is as noisy and as uncomfortable as the 20...

JB, what are they gonna call the next iteration of the 380? The -900 or -9xx? Maybe the 801, in which case you'll have to change your YT username...

 

[jb747]

Jetstar seems to go to great pains to point out that its A320s are actually A321s. What the difference between the 20 and the 21 is, I don't know. But I'd expect that the 21 is as noisy and as uncomfortable as the 20...

JB, what are they gonna call the next iteration of the 380? The -900 or -9xx? Maybe the 801, in which case you'll have to change your YT username...

No matter what they call it, it won't be around in my time, so my user name is safe (especially as it's still 747 not 380). Whilst there are plans for a larger A380, I'd think their sales to date would make it very hard to justify. A version with greater max take off weight would be useful, but that can be done within the current airframe. The world seems to have turned to the 787/350 sized aircraft, with the 380 reserved for those few places that are extremely slot limited.

 

[mjt57]

so my user name is safe (especially as it's still 747 not 380

I was refering to your YouTube (YT) one...



In any case, if they upped the MGTOW of the A380 would this entail merely larger engines, or the current ones uprated?

 

[jb747]

In any case, if they upped the MGTOW of the A380 would this entail merely larger engines, or the current ones uprated?

Most likely not. Firstly the engines are available with quite a range of optional power ratings now, and I don't think there's any physical difference between them. Just a different 'performance' chip, and most likely different maintenance requirements and costs.

But, even with the engines we have, the performance applications often give us answers that are over 600 tonnes, so the wing and engines can lift the weight. Whether it is actually cost effective is another question entirely. For instance, 20 tonnes of extra MTOW, if used totally for fuel (and the current tanks can already hold it without mods), would translate to about another 400 NM of range. The extra weight would itself increase the fuel burn, so you'd never get the full value of that extra fuel.

 

[iRobbo]

Jetstar seems to go to great pains to point out that its A320s are actually A321s. What the difference between the 20 and the 21 is, I don't know. But I'd expect that the 21 is as noisy and as uncomfortable as the 20...

The A321 is a different aircraft altogether from an A320. It was derived from the A320 but significantly longer and can carry approx 40 more passengers. It tips into the 'D' performance category, whereas all the B737 family and A320's are in 'C'. It was developed to compete with Boeings 757. Similarly, the A319 and A318 were also derived from the A320 and, somehow logically, are smaller derivatives (none flying for Australian airliners).

The majority of Jetstars fleet are A320's, they have some A321's but I have no idea of the numbers.

 

[CaviAck]

I'm actually still on leave for most of the roster period. I had great plans for a trip to WA, but it was all pushed aside by some family illness. Stuff happens....

Anyway, my roster for the period is actually overwritten by the training required from being away, so I lose an LA trip, and 'gain' an HK. So, I'm doing the 128 ex HK on 28/04.

On the 5/5 I get my first Dubai.

QF01 5/5 SYD/DXB
QF01 8/5 DXB/LHR
QF10 10/5 LHR/DXB
QF10 12/5 DXB/MEL

Losing that LA trip isn't too bad, as I recall you prefer not to have transpac flights anyway. Is the HK flight "gained" a check flight with a check captain. Sorry if I'm asking the obvious.

Congratulations on making it to page 388, jb747

Next up page 747 for nostalgia sake?

Jetstar seems to go to great pains to point out that its A320s are actually A321s. What the difference between the 20 and the 21 is, I don't know. But I'd expect that the 21 is as noisy and as uncomfortable as the 20...

JB, what are they gonna call the next iteration of the 380? The -900 or -9xx? Maybe the 801, in which case you'll have to change your YT username...

The A321 is a different aircraft altogether from an A320. It was derived from the A320 but significantly longer and can carry approx 40 more passengers. It tips into the 'D' performance category, whereas all the B737 family and A320's are in 'C'. It was developed to compete with Boeings 757. Similarly, the A319 and A318 were also derived from the A320 and, somehow logically, are smaller derivatives (none flying for Australian airliners).

The majority of Jetstars fleet are A320's, they have some A321's but I have no idea of the numbers.

JQ have a fair few A320s and very little A321s. According to JQ they have 51 A320s in JQ, 17 in 3K, 7 in GK and 5 in BL. As for the A321s there's 6 in JQ apparently.

 

[jb747]

The A321 is a different aircraft altogether from an A320. It was derived from the A320 but significantly longer and can carry approx 40 more passengers. It tips into the 'D' performance category, whereas all the B737 family and A320's are in 'C'. It was developed to compete with Boeings 757. Similarly, the A319 and A318 were also derived from the A320 and, somehow logically, are smaller derivatives (none flying for Australian airliners).

It is simply a stretch, not a different aircraft. Same sort of relationship as the Boeing 767-200 and -300.

The 757 was an interesting idea, and I really don't understand why it didn't work out all that well...basically a narrow bodied 767. I've actually got an endorsement for it in my log book!

 

[jb747]

Losing that LA trip isn't too bad, as I recall you prefer not to have transpac flights anyway.

I don't particularly like them, nevertheless, losing it costs me quite a few $.

Is the HK flight "gained" a check flight with a check captain.

Yep. Actually did exactly the same thing about this time last year.

 

[mjt57]

The majority of Jetstars fleet are A320's, they have some A321's but I have no idea of the numbers.

Must have a few, or either that they see my name on the ticket and assign one for me, because that's all I've travelled on...

Anyway, JB, why does the DXB route cost you $$. Is it based on flying time? ie. shorter distance to DXB from MEL or SYD?

 

[jb747]

Must have a few, or either that they see my name on the ticket and assign one for me, because that's all I've travelled on...

Anyway, JB, why does the DXB route cost you $$. Is it based on flying time? ie. shorter distance to DXB from MEL or SYD?

Losing the LA and having it replaced with the much shorter HK trip costs....

It's just the way the system works. I could have offered to come back from leave and fly a sim, but as far as I'm concerned that ruins the leave.

 

[Awesom Andy]

Losing the LA and having it replaced with the much shorter HK trip costs....

Ignoring the $$, would you prefer LAX or HKG? Also, since HKG is not A388 daily, would the crew get an extended stay in HKG or would they pax back?

 

[jb747]

Ignoring the $$, would you prefer LAX or HKG? Also, since HKG is not A388 daily, would the crew get an extended stay in HKG or would they pax back?

Half of the LAs start in Melbourne, but none of the HK do, so I prefer LA on that basis. When the 747 did QF29/30, that was my preferred trip because it started and finished in Melbourne.

Most of the crews have a 24 hour slip, but one crew has a long slip.. It doesn't make sense to pax them back, because you'd almost immediately have to pax another crew up.

 

[Simo]

I'm actually still on leave for most of the roster period. I had great plans for a trip to WA, but it was all pushed aside by some family illness. Stuff happens....

Anyway, my roster for the period is actually overwritten by the training required from being away, so I lose an LA trip, and 'gain' an HK. So, I'm doing the 128 ex HK on 28/04.

On the 5/5 I get my first Dubai.

QF01 5/5 SYD/DXB
QF01 8/5 DXB/LHR
QF10 10/5 LHR/DXB
QF10 12/5 DXB/MEL

Hope all is well with the family now.

It might have been asked but have you all done multiple SIM seasons on DXB

What is your favourite destination apart from MEL

 

[anat0l]

It might have been asked but have you all done multiple SIM seasons on DXB

The Behind The Scenes video on the QF-EK alliance on Qantas' Youtube page seems to show the inside of a simulator with a narrative saying that pilots have been working through scenarios which include Dubai.


I suppose my "follow on" question is that flying to Dubai will be a new experience (apart from diversions, and when Dubai was part of the existing paths beforehand). Whilst simulators are expensive contraptions which are intended to really emulate the real thing, what are the key grains of salt / differences pilots have to take away when the go from simulator to the real thing (apart from one involves pax and the other doesn't, and one can have fatal consequences and other not)?

I suppose in asking that, it's the difference between training for flying to Dubai, versus the real thing now...

 

[jb747]

Hope all is well with the family now.

Thankfully yes. Pneumonia and old people don't mix well, but she's slowly on the mend.

It might have been asked but have you all done multiple SIM seasons on DXB

Dubai was a subject of a sim about 6 months ago. It will most likely appear again, but there's nothing particularly difficult about it. The airfields chosen for the sims aren't necessarily ones we operate to, but ones that could come up. So, a few recent ones have had Amsterdam, KL, Batam. I'd expect Sharjah, Doha, etc, are likely to appear. Of all of the airports I've operated to, I've probably only done sim exercises to about half of them. Many are, more or less, generic. The guys who write the sims look for things out of the ordinary, that will trip you up....

What is your favourite destination apart from MEL

On the A380...London. Overall, Canada

 

[jb747]

The Behind The Scenes video on the QF-EK alliance on Qantas' Youtube page seems to show the inside of a simulator with a narrative saying that pilots have been working through scenarios which include Dubai.

One sim, but I expect it will be followed up.

I suppose my "follow on" question is that flying to Dubai will be a new experience (apart from diversions, and when Dubai was part of the existing paths beforehand). Whilst simulators are expensive contraptions which are intended to really emulate the real thing, what are the key grains of salt / differences pilots have to take away when the go from simulator to the real thing (apart from one involves pax and the other doesn't, and one can have fatal consequences and other not)?

The sims feel very real. So real that the first time you fly an aircraft now, it will have passengers, whereas when I did my 747 Classic and 767 training, we took empty aircraft and flew many circuits at Avalon and Amberley. If anything, sim exercises tend to be hurried. There are things that have to be done for the exercise to be ticked off as complete, whereas in the real world you can work with the problem until both you, and the aircraft, are ready for the landing. So, the real world most likely offers more time, and it's always a good idea to use all the time that you need...don't be rushed into anything. QF32 was a great example of that, and I remember reading some very ill advised comments on pprune in which people were advocating an immediate landing, and I think we all now know that would have been a bad idea.

I suppose in asking that, it's the difference between training for flying to Dubai, versus the real thing now...

As I don't consider Dubai will a difficult airport, I expect the biggest difference will be getting a handle on the accents of the controllers (assuming they aren't all from the UK).