Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

What happens if you don't bid? Do you get what's left over or do you not fly at all?

Quite a few people don't bid. Some just forget, and others never bother. You'll end up with a line constructed to the same value as everyone else. If I didn't bid, I'd still end up with 3 London trips.

 

[jb747]

jb, how often do pilots go through the crew training facility please? Thanks in advance.

There are six training sessions each year. 4 flight simulator, 1 EPs (the cabin crew stuff), and a security day.

 

[erkpod]

Quite a few people don't bid. Some just forget, and others never bother. You'll end up with a line constructed to the same value as everyone else. If I didn't bid, I'd still end up with 3 London trips.

I'm guessing that if people don't bid, that makes things somewhat simpler for those who do in terms that there's more chance of getting what they want/need due to less competition.

 

[jb747]

I'm guessing that if people don't bid, that makes things somewhat simpler for those who do in terms that there's more chance of getting what they want/need due to less competition.

To a degree. It's basically a very flawed system, and most things worth bidding for never percolate very far down the list.

 

[tallboy]

There are a lot of things that people do that show they aren't really thinking about the chance that things might go wrong. How many change into their pyjamas and have no shoes on during take off? I don't think they'd offer much protection down a slide.

Agreed. A few years ago when I was flying a lot of sectors with SQ (working for them at the time), cabin crew made a point of asking pax to put their shoes back on if they removed them before take-off (at least in J class...). Not sure if they still do this.

tb

 

[harvyk]

There are six training sessions each year. 4 flight simulator, 1 EPs (the cabin crew stuff), and a security day.

What sort of cabin crew stuff would they teach a pilot?
Also whilst you'd obviously be very familiar with everything in front of the coughpit door, how well do you know the systems in the cabin? (Or is that answered in question 1?)

 

[erkpod]

To a degree. It's basically a very flawed system, and most things worth bidding for never percolate very far down the list.

I'll swap you if you like, JB! LOL.

Rotating roster 2 week roster - your initial place is decided by seniority. If I have a permanent line (I do), I can usually work out where you are on the roster until the timetables & roster changes (usually every October). I don't do DOCs (Days Off Canceled) so it is a little easier to predict but things like training, trackwork & special events can create changes as well as (for the moment at least) train type ratings.


If you are a swinger (holiday relief), good luck!

My roster comes out on Wednesday to start on the Sunday. All swaps by phone (drivers) or by faxed form with both signatures on it (guards). I don't have work email.

 

[jb747]

What sort of cabin crew stuff would they teach a pilot?
Also whilst you'd obviously be very familiar with everything in front of the coughpit door, how well do you know the systems in the cabin? (Or is that answered in question 1?)

We have to be familiar with everything that relates to the passengers. So, start with the doors, and every piece of safety equipment. I don't know the ovens, but I know the safety systems and equipment well enough.

 

[docjames]

Four weeks before the start of the roster period, the company has the planned flying available. We've then got two weeks to make our bids. You can bid for very specific things, or very generally. The more general the bid, the more likely you are to get it. In my case I simply ask for trips of over 4 days, that pax on the first sector. Whilst there are some exceptions, that basically translates as QF9 ex Melbourne (starts by paxing from Sydney). Rosters normally become available about a week before they start.

Does that mean for you duty starts in SYD (and you have to pax) or can you arrange to start from Melbourne?

I'd have thought with the minimal A380 routings on offer the roster is simpler than when the 747s and 763s went to far more loactions?

 

[Sprucegoose]

In Feb I was fortunate enough to do a 747-400 sim session at the QANTAS jet base in Sydney. As part of the experience we were taken into the crew training area in what I thought was going to be a rather boring preamble for the main event. How wrong I was. It was a very confronting and eye opening experience. When we were in a smoke filled cabin with the FA yelling "BRACE BRACE BRACE" at us I began to get an inkling of what an emergency might be like. The reason for this post is to mention the life jacket part of the drill. I had never taken one out of the pouch before. I was amazed to see that it was in a plastic shroud and it was not immediately obvious how to open this container. We were asked for our feedback and we were told that we were not the first pax to mention this. I have noticed that on the latest version of the safety video that they have altered the life jacket section showing how to open the container. We can also see in the Pic that jb supplied that several life jackets appear to be over inflated. This happened to me and we were shown how to partially deflate and re-inflate them. I really pay attention to every safety video now! jb, how often do pilots go through the crew training facility please? Thanks in advance.

Good point D. Like everything that needs to be done quickly and automatically there's the drill, drill, drill.

Theres a safety start on a construction site or mine every shift for good reason as well.

It needs to be front of mind.

 

[RooFlyer]

JB, Did you happen to notice this 'gem' of a ruling from the US Federal Aviation Administration : Foreign pilots may be distracted at SFO doing parallel landings

Apparently there have been a couple of 'go arounds' at SFO since the Asiana crash whilst landing in parallel with another craft, leading the FAA to say (or be quoted as saying):

"The FAA enacted this measure to minimize distractions that could result from pilots receiving automated warnings about the proximity of nearby aircraft during a critical phase of flight," the agency said

.

So, according to the FAA, 'foreign' pilots, as a group are more easily distracted than US domestic pilots, so much so it endangers the craft, hence the ruling. Reckon there's a grain of truth in that? :shock:

BTW I landed at SFO on Friday, on a United A320 exactly in parallel with a Delta bird of about the same size. I dunno about our pilot, but I was mesmerized!

 

[harvyk]

JB, Did you happen to notice this 'gem' of a ruling from the US Federal Aviation Administration : Foreign pilots may be distracted at SFO doing parallel landings

Apparently there have been a couple of 'go arounds' at SFO since the Asiana crash whilst landing in parallel with another craft, leading the FFA to say (or be quoted as saying):

.

So, according to the FAA, 'foreign' pilots, as a group are more easily distracted than US domestic pilots, so much so it endangers the craft, hence the ruling. Reckon there's a grain of truth in that? :shock:

BTW I landed at SFO on Friday, on a United A320 exactly in parallel with a Delta bird of about the same size. I dunno about our pilot, but I was mesmerized!

Don't see how SFO is different to say SYD or any other runway around the world not in the US which runs in parallel with another

 

[RooFlyer]

Don't see how SFO is different to say SYD or any other runway around the world not in the US which runs in parallel with another

Just for clarification - at SFO the 2 parallel NE-SW runways commence at the waters edge at exactly the same point (unlike SYD, where there is an approx. 700m offset). Also, they are reasonably close together (edges 150m apart, whereas at SYD the 2 main runways edges are abt 800m apart).

When I landed the other day, we had the Delta plane off to our left at the same height / descent path, almost same speed; about 5 mins before touchdown we were pretty far apart, but drifted closer until just before touchdown, it felt like you could reach out and touch the other craft. I watched the other bird's landing gear go down within seconds of our own and we touched down almost in synch, running next to each other.

But yes, I'm sure there are other airports which are similar to SFO.

 

[Fruitcake]

Don't see how SFO is different to say SYD or any other runway around the world not in the US which runs in parallel with another

SFO runways are less than 250m apart. Ideally, parallel runway separation is several multiples of that distance. For example, SYD is a bit over 1000m. Two 747s tracking the centreline at SFO would have less than 200m between wingtips.

In accordance with the thread rules, I'll leave it to a pilot to interpret the significance of that with respect to the FAA announcement.

 

[jb747]

SFO runways are less than 250m apart. Ideally, parallel runway separation is several multiples of that distance. For example, SYD is a bit over 1000m. Two 747s tracking the centreline at SFO would have less than 200m between wingtips.

In accordance with the thread rules, I'll leave it to a pilot to interpret the significance of that with respect to the FAA announcement.

Yes, we're well aware of the excellent qualities of all of the US pilots. Buffalo must have been those filthy foreigners too.

I'd like to see the actual FAA bulletin, as all we are going on are media reports.

Extremely closely spaced runways, like SFO, are inherently quite dangerous. In any sensible setup, they'd use one for arrivals, and the other for departures, but SFO actually normally uses the pair of crossing runways for departures.

What they haven't addressed, and needs to be looked at, is the very nasty habit that the US controllers have of delivering the aircraft to finals with some form of offset...either high and fast, or if you're lucky, both. It would seem to me that the start of the Asiana incident was from a high energy vertical offset, and that's often an exact result of their instructions. They keep you fast because it fits their spacing issues, and high for the same sort of reason.

 

[Vaughnus]

JB, recently at LAX in a very packed 747 we taxied to the runway, before turning off again and doing some circles. From what I could tell, the flight attendants were busy shifting passengers around to ensure the aircraft is balanced. Well that's what the pilot said anyway.
1. Do you think moving a few passengers has such an effect on an aircraft that it is required?
2. How could the pilot tell that the plane was unbalanced?

 

[docjames]

You'll have seen the report on the VA 737 that had to offload pax due to no wind/ takeoff performance at Wellington.

In that situation, what is the decision process around who/what gets offloaded?

Cargo may have high net worth to the airline so shifting that off may not always be possible. How is the decision taken, is it entirely up to the captain or is it airline operations, do they go for minimum pax affected (but on a major scale), or would offloading sufficient baggage affect more pax but less significantly (delayed bag but still get to destination)? Would carry on only pax be preferred due to not needing to remove bags from hold, or not really a consideration? Would the number of offloaded pax vary depending on how much checked luggage each had?

 

[el_rooto]

Hey,

Does anyone know how much fuel costs vary between ports?

 

[petercr]

Depends on how many cents per litre discount the pilot has been able to negotiate from the appropriate supermarket chain...

 

[jb747]

JB, recently at LAX in a very packed 747 we taxied to the runway, before turning off again and doing some circles. From what I could tell, the flight attendants were busy shifting passengers around to ensure the aircraft is balanced. Well that's what the pilot said anyway.

What I see happening here is that the company has become aware that the aircraft wasn't loaded as they thought it was. It's come off the runway to get out of the way, and any circles are a result of ATC moving it to keep it out of the way.

1. Do you think moving a few passengers has such an effect on an aircraft that it is required?

Is it likely that a 'few' passengers would make it dangerous? No. But, it's quite possible that they could move it out of the legal load limits, and you must be legal. A willingness to accept a 'grey' legal position is a slippery slope, that will almost certainly eventually end badly.

2. How could the pilot tell that the plane was unbalanced?

He couldn't.