Ask The Pilot

[Simsy85]

Ok, JB can you just explain for me what the rank/order is on board... ie captain, SO, FO (also what they stand for )

Can you also run down what each one does?

Awesome thread - its my happy place when work frustrates me.. hahah

 

[jb747]

Just how difficult is it to find the correct taxiway to reach the allocated gate ?

To me, some airports just seem like spaghetti junction with taxiways going to different terminals and different gates in all directions.

To a degree, you're quite right. There's always a logic to what the taxiways do, but the conventions by which they are named, the ways they are lit, and the rules by which you can use them vary dramatically.

The newest aircraft help a lot by providing map displays that replace the normal in flight displays. But, you still need to have carefully read the charts for the airport, as many taxiways have restrictions on them. It's quite easy for me...I just assume my aircraft is too big for almost everything.

Possibly the most confusing airport I've ever operated at is Tokyo Narita...there the best idea seemed to be to find someone who looked like they knew what they were doing, and follow them. Winner for worst that I've operated to is JFK. Narrow, no fillets on most of the turns, and controllers who are, at best, unforgiving. An airport from a bygone age I guess.

Easiest...Vancouver. It had the simplest, and most easily understood system of neon signage that I've seen. Not standard...but just better.

 

[jb747]

Ok, JB can you just explain for me what the rank/order is on board... ie captain, SO, FO (also what they stand for )

Can you also run down what each one does?

Well, you've got them in the right order. Captain is just that. He is responsible for the aircraft, everything on it, and, well, everything.

FO...First Officer, or co-pilot. In most operations, he operates every second sector. He's the second in charge. A good first officer, especially when things are getting a bit hard, makes all the difference.

SO...Second Officer. In our operation they are junior pilots, who can sit in either seat, but only above 10,000 feet. They do not do take offs or landings in line operations. They're there so that we can get a break...but also as an apprenticeship on the way to being an FO.

 

[NM]

Well, you've got them in the right order. Captain is just that. He is responsible for the aircraft, everything on it, and, well, everything.

FO...First Officer, or co-pilot. In most operations, he operates every second sector. He's the second in charge. A good first officer, especially when things are getting a bit hard, makes all the difference.

SO...Second Officer. In our operation they are junior pilots, who can sit in either seat, but only above 10,000 feet. They do not do take offs or landings in line operations. They're there so that we can get a break...but also as an apprenticeship on the way to being an FO.

So typically how long (hours on task and elapsed years) is typical for an SO to progress to an FO and for an FO to progress to a Captain?

 

[Kendall Roy]

jb747, interested in your thoughts on your favourite slip port throughout your years of flying...... Is there a general consensus amongst Int'l pilots?

 

[jb747]

So typically how long (hours on task and elapsed years) is typical for an SO to progress to an FO and for an FO to progress to a Captain?

That's a bit of a magic question, that all SOs wish they could answer.

But, in a static and stable environment (in which retirements aren't being distorted by extensions to the age, and the fleet is neither growing or shrinking), and given the current makeup of the fleet, the numbers in each rank are approximately equal (there are more SOs than Captains or FOs on the big jets, but they don't exist on the smaller ones). In this situation the average career will have time in each rank equivalent to the relative percentage of people in each rank...i.e. if there are a third in each rank, then you'll spend a third of your time in each rank. So, if the average career is 30 years, then 10 in each rank.

Historically, the longest times were around the time of the introduction of the 747, when the much smaller 707 was replaced with a much larger aircraft. Around then, the times blew out to 15 years as a SO. But, these same people then had their FO time coincide with the introduction of the 767, and most spent only a couple of years as FOs, and then they got the bonus of having the captains in from of them retire at initially 55, then 57, whilst they got to go to 60 and now 65. There are even some 8 year captains, although they have just about mythical status. Just have to be in the right place, at the right time, with all off the right boxes ticked.

Fleet growth leads to shorter times, and contraction to massively longer. Currently SOs see little chance for promotion ever, as they need Captains to die before any slots will become available. In my career, I have never seen so many junior pilots actively looking at alternative airlines (and none will consider the 'Qantas' group). If, as some expect, QF decides that no current QANTAS pilots are to fly the 787, then we'll see demotions and retrenchments on a massive scale. On the other hand, Emirates, Qatar, etc, will have little trouble recruiting well trained and qualified people.

 

[Voyages]

Hehe! I doubt flirting with the captain will get you upgrade in this instance.

Hehe I was just saying what I was thinking. Flirting with the captain? Me? Nooo....:mrgreen:

 

[SenZubEanS]

If, as some expect, QF decides that no current QANTAS pilots are to fly the 787,

Sorry JB, could you elaborate here? Who is going to be flying it if not Qantas pilots? Or do you just mean J*?

 

[harvyk]

Are there any airports (current or past) which you love flying from \ to and are there any airports you hate flying from \ to.
and are there any reasons as to why?

and do you get standard duty free allowances everywhere you travel, or do you get a restricted allowance \ no allowance?

 

[samh004]

There are even some 8 year captains, although they have just about mythical status. Just have to be in the right place, at the right time, with all off the right boxes ticked.

So how long have you been a captain?

If that's not too personal.

 

[jb747]

Sorry JB, could you elaborate here? Who is going to be flying it if not Qantas pilots? Or do you just mean J*?

I don't want this thread to convert into an industrial one, so I'll just make this a quick answer.

The fear is that the QF intention is to start some form of external pilot contractor company, which will provide all of the pilots for the 787. Probably all based overseas, and on foreign pay scales/contracts.

That leaves all of the current blokes out in the cold. Given that the QF safety record is in large part based on what the pilots have done over the years, the level of disgust is pretty high.

But, let's leave this subject here for the time being.

 

[jb747]

jb747, interested in your thoughts on your favourite slip port throughout your years of flying...... Is there a general consensus amongst Int'l pilots?

I've had a few favourites over years.

Canada, be it Vancouver or Toronto was always great. Canada is a top spot.

Always enjoyed New York. London is good too.

My favourite though...rather closer to home. Poor old Christchurch. Lovely people, very pretty. Great scenery within a short drive.

 

[jb747]

Hehe I was just saying what I was thinking. Flirting with the captain? Me? Nooo....:mrgreen:

Flirting with people on the internet, is, I'm told, a dangerous activity.

 

[jb747]

So how long have you been a captain?

If that's not too personal.

19 years in December.

 

[jb747]

Are there any airports (current or past) which you love flying from \ to and are there any airports you hate flying from \ to.
and are there any reasons as to why?

Well, I generally don't like LA, although the airport works well enough. The flight across is borrrrrring. All can have their ATC idiosyncrasies. Most have poor weather at times (JFK gets you in winter with the snow, and then thunderstorms in summer...a 3-5 hour taxi isn't uncommon). Australian airports don't rate highly on navaids...in fact they are at the poor end of the scale.

and do you get standard duty free allowances everywhere you travel, or do you get a restricted allowance \ no allowance?

No allowance is quite common. Also, crew are often not allowed VAT/GST refunds as well.

 

[Simsy85]

a 3-5 hour taxi isn't uncommon

Your [bleepin] me right? 3 - 5 hr taxi?!?!?!

 

[jb747]

Your [bleepin] me right? 3 - 5 hr taxi?!?!?!

Not at all.... When the queue is like a Disney queue, and extends multiple times around the airport...then that's what happens. And unless you actually join the queue, you don't progress at all.

And, just for fun, it can be almost as bad after landing.

 

[Simsy85]

Not at all.... When the queue is like a Disney queue, and extends multiple times around the airport...then that's what happens. And unless you actually join the queue, you don't progress at all.

And, just for fun, it can be almost as bad after landing.

OMG.... I'm speechless - is this niave of me? I mean i've never been to the states, never had this problem in europe... was thinking about going State side in 2012.. what airports should I avoid?

 

[anat0l]

Your effing $hitting me right? 3 - 5 hr taxi?!?!?!

From a personal judgement, considering the traffic that would back up at these airports and difficult conditions possibly limiting the avenues of departure and landings, that kind of timing would probably not be unheard of.

I heard a lot of bad waiting times when snow hit EWR in the previous year or so. Some aircraft were lucky just to get off the ground (i.e. before either needing further de-icing or simply just back to terminal and cancel, possibly due to the storm picking up).

In saying that, I'd like to hear about an experience from jb747 when the taxi has been this long (and this bad). It probably comes to no surprise that long taxis on the ground are extremely boring as pax (probably because no IFE, no food and, for me, no good certainty we will actually get out of here!); I suppose there is enough going on in the coughpit for the pilots not to be twiddling their thumbs, even in what we pax perceive as the longest lull during a flight.

Also, jb747, can you describe (if you have experienced it) any interesting experiences with de-icing procedures (and where)? I've heard frequently that it can be a real pain when traffic builds up in snowy conditions, partly because there's a queue to get de-iced, plus risks of both running out of de-icing fluid and the weather becoming so bad that there is / was no point getting de-iced in the first place!

 

[jb747]

The only place where I have hit delays of this magnitude more than once was JFK. But, on those days, all of the regional airports would have had the same sort of problem.

It can be caused by ice/snow, but when I was there, the delays were caused by thunderstorms affecting the departures. And, you can't just sit at the gate, because then you're limiting the number of available gates/parking for any aircraft that manage to land. On one occasion the delay was so extended that the cabin crew started making 'duty time limit' noises...which did quiet somewhat when I pointed out an Air France 777 that had been waiting hours to get to a bay. In our case it was likely going to be quicker to fly to LA, than to get back on a bay.

Deicing has its own issues. It takes an appreciable amount of time to deice a large aircraft. The deice is good for a limited time (called the 'hold over'). This time applies from the time at which the deicing started. If the snow is falling heavily, you may need to take off the instant the job is finished...you can't afford any sort of taxi delay. If the job takes longer than the hold over, then...you can't go. Hold over time varies with the method and chemicals used, as well as how heavily the snow is falling.

Worst snow I've seen was in Frankfurt. In very heavy snow, we had little more than 5 minutes to get from pushback to take off. SO was timing it all....and we just made it. But, it was late at night, and we were about the only aircraft on the move. Any other traffic, and it would not have worked.

One other time when we had a multi hour delay getting to the gate after landing...London, on the day of the liquid bombs. We were actually the first aircraft allowed to land, and it took about 4 hours before we got to a bay (all of which were occupied, as virtually nobody had departed). Most other aircraft had diverted to various places in Europe.