Ask The Pilot

[el_rooto]

There's nothing nasty in tomorrow morning's forecast for Brisbane.

But..

	22:34 UTC, 16/07/2011 TAF YSSY 162234Z 1700/1806 33008KT 9999 -SHRA SCT020 SCT030 FM170200 36008KT 9999 SCT025 SCT035 FM171200 30008KT 9999 SCT020 INTER 1700/1702 4000 SHRA BKN010 RMK T 15 16 16 14 Q 1024 1022 1021 1022
	00:04 UTC, 17/07/2011 TTF METAR YSSY 170000Z 31005KT 9000 VCSH FEW001 SCT050 BKN120 14/12 Q1025 RMK RF00.0/000.0 INTER 0030/0200 4000 SHRA FEW006 BKN010

[TD="colspan: 2"]*SYDNEY YSSY[/TD]

That's the Sydney forecast and actual taken off the BoM site a few minutes ago. Note that the forecast, issued at 23:34Z yesterday gives conditions for right now as 33008KT, 9999 (10 km) vis, showers, scattered cloud at 2000, scattered at 3000. Also temporarily reducing to 4000mtres, showers, broken cloud at 1000.

The actual weather is a bit different though. Wind and vis are close, but now there's cloud at 100 feet. The amount isn't an issue today, but you see that the forecast, issued many hours beforehand, often has little relationship to what is actually experienced.

True, thanks mate.

 

[harvyk]

in regards to fly the b747 with a fifth engine mounted, does the flight crew need any special training or certifications to do so? or is it a relatively easy thing to do?also does the fifth engine cause any other special considerations apart from the weight (eg aerodynamics, additional fuel burn beyond just additional weight etc)

 

[jb747]

in regards to fly the b747 with a fifth engine mounted, does the flight crew need any special training or certifications to do so? or is it a relatively easy thing to do?also does the fifth engine cause any other special considerations apart from the weight (eg aerodynamics, additional fuel burn beyond just additional weight etc)

Carrying the fifth pod was a pretty simple exercise. Different performance figures (from a different part of the manual). Basically a reduced max IAS and mach, and slightly slower cruise. Max altitude also reduced. If I recall correctly, slightly different trim presets were used at take off. The engineers would 'tell' a -400 that it was fifth podding, and the FMC would automatically use different performance values.

No specific training, though there was normally some discussion with the operating captain to ensure everyone had read the appropriate limits from the manual. It was pretty rare....I can only recall doing it twice in the 13 years I flew on the jumbo.

 

[QF WP]

I have been really enjoying the content in this thread...not that I understand a lot of the technical terms . Keep the questions coming.

Have to catch up with my neighbour who was previously flying with Qatar, moved back and after a DRW-based job, is now currently a DJ pilot on the Pacific routes - I'm sure he'll understand and be able to explain some of these particulars.

Saw him leaving this morning (8am) for a BNE/DUD/BNE day (well, his wife and I walked our dogs together so it was easy to find out).

 

[rechoboam]

Captain-
Am flying MEL to LAX then ORD. Is there a way of generating a reasonably real life like flight path over the Internet so that I can take a look on my simulator? Will the LAX approach just depend on the weather?

 

[jb747]

Captain-
Am flying MEL to LAX then ORD. Is there a way of generating a reasonably real life like flight path over the Internet so that I can take a look on my simulator?

Not really. Basically over the Pacific they plan on 'free' tracks, that mostly don't stick to designated airways. It makes the most of the wind, but can be pretty random. You may even have a new route uplinked to you in flight.

Will the LAX approach just depend on the weather?

Depends what aircraft you are on. Mostly they prefer to land the A380s on 24R, as that limits how much they have to taxi around the airport. To do that, they will often track you to the north, up towards Ventura. But depending upon the traffic, you could be brought in from the south, and cut across the other approach paths. Very rare to land on 06 or 07.

On the other hand, the 747s almost always land on 25L, and come in via Santa Catalina and Seal Beach.

 

[QF029]

Depends what aircraft you are on. Mostly they prefer to land the A380s on 24R, as that limits how much they have to taxi around the airport. To do that, they will often track you to the north, up towards Ventura. But depending upon the traffic, you could be brought in from the south, and cut across the other approach paths. Very rare to land on 06 or 07.

On the other hand, the 747s almost always land on 25L, and come in via Santa Catalina and Seal Beach.

A quick search shows that 24R is the shortest runway at 2,720m. Am I missing something wondering why the biggest aircraft prefers the shortest runway?!

 

[jb747]

A quick search shows that 24R is the shortest runway at 2,720m. Am I missing something wondering why the biggest aircraft prefers the shortest runway?!

It doesn't prefer it..it's just that it's such a pain to taxi around LAX that it's the best option. For the same reason, the 380s normally depart from 24L.

 

[Tortuga]

Hey JB, what is the highest cruising altitude you have used while being a commercial pilot? Is there a limit to how high the A380 can cruise at? I'm assuming the cruise altitude is based on wind/weather patterns and traffic in the area? It also seems there is less weather disturbance at the higher altitudes.

Is there any way to detect clear air turbulence?

What type of storms and turbulence are the planes made to handle, I was amazed watching the engines flop around during turbulence, they seem to be quite flexible.

Do you communicate with other pilots in the area?

During bad weather do you prefer to take control and make decisions regarding diverting, or is the FO trained and allowed to make those decisions - if for instance you were asleep and the FO was in command?

Do some pilots not worry about diverting for turbulence and fly straight though it? I know you said you prefer to divert around the bad weather when possible.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

QF honorary Captain John Travolta used to have a QF badge on his cap like real pilots do but it's disappeared & he now resembles a bus conductor.

Whilst I understand he his endorsed on a B707 which was previously owned by QF, is he actually endorsed on any aircraft in the current QF fleet?

How do QF Pilots really feel about him being a QF ambassador?

 

[jb747]

Hey JB, what is the highest cruising altitude you have used while being a commercial pilot? Is there a limit to how high the A380 can cruise at? I'm assuming the cruise altitude is based on wind/weather patterns and traffic in the area? It also seems there is less weather disturbance at the higher altitudes.

The ultimate limiting factor with cruise altitude is the aircraft weight. As it becomes lighter, ATC permitting, we normally climb. When you level off at the initial cruise altitude, your speed will be about .85. As the aircraft becomes lighter, the speed is slowly reduced (not by much ...about .02 mach), until you reach a weight at which going to the next level is viable. The optimum cruise level is generally around 2000 feet below the maximum level.
The Airbus is limited to FL430. The 747 was limited to FL451, and the 767 to FL431. I've been to 43, but don't recall going higher. Highest I've ever been was 499 in an A4G....couldn't quite make 50.

Is there any way to detect clear air turbulence?

No. We get some indication from the forecasts, but most information is obtained by listening to other aircraft commenting on the radio (i.e. asking for another level due turbulence).

What type of storms and turbulence are the planes made to handle, I was amazed watching the engines flop around during turbulence, they seem to be quite flexible.

Quite honestly...more than you can imagine.

Do you communicate with other pilots in the area?

The radios are normally set up with one on ATC, and the other on 'guard', which is an emergency frequency. It's extremely bad manners to chat on guard, but some particular nationalities are prone to it. If you want to chat to someone, there is another frequency which seems to be used worldwide. There's very little chatter between aircraft...

During bad weather do you prefer to take control and make decisions regarding diverting, or is the FO trained and allowed to make those decisions - if for instance you were asleep and the FO was in command?

Whether I'm on the flight deck or not, if the FO is flying the aircraft, I expect him to make the decisions about diverting around weather.

Do some pilots not worry about diverting for turbulence and fly straight though it? I know you said you prefer to divert around the bad weather when possible.

Watching other aircraft on the TCAS, you certainly get the feeling that some airlines are much more prone to going through it than others.

Sometimes you have little choice but to penetrate a line of weather, but even then you should be picking the line of least resistance. Remember too, that seat belt signs or not, a small percentage of passengers simply will not buckle up. Having people kissing the ceiling is generally something to be avoided.

 

[jb747]

QF honorary Captain John Travolta used to have a QF badge on his cap like real pilots do but it's disappeared & he now resembles a bus conductor.

Yes..you'd think he'd take better care of his cap.

Whilst I understand he his endorsed on a B707 which was previously owned by QF, is he actually endorsed on any aircraft in the current QF fleet?

He did the complete First Officers course for the 747-400. This was only in the sim, he's never flown one of the aircraft.

How do QF Pilots really feel about him being a QF ambassador?

I know that those who have met him say that he's quite a decent bloke.

 

[Sifor]

Highest I've ever been was 499 in an A4G....couldn't quite make 50.

I take it that going beyond the service ceiling, in some circumstances, is therefore safe....?

According to Wiki the ceiling is 42,250, off the Aus Navy page 40,000, I wasn't aware you could exceed it by that kind of margin. In my readings it has been said going beyond the ceiling increases the risk of engine flameout amongst other things such as stalling.

 

[jb747]

I take it that going beyond the service ceiling, in some circumstances, is therefore safe....?

According to Wiki the ceiling is 42,250, off the Aus Navy page 40,000, I wasn't aware you could exceed it by that kind of margin. In my readings it has been said going beyond the ceiling increases the risk of engine flameout amongst other things such as stalling.

Have a look here Ceiling (aeronautics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Neither 42,250 nor 40,000 were limitations. F500 was a limit, as you required a pressure suit to go above it, and we didn't own any (nor would the aircraft get there in the configuration that I flew it).

And, the way down from up there was to point the aircraft vertically down, and just leave it at full power....

 

[Sifor]

I see, well I guess the Wiki and Navy articles are incorrect.

 

[jb747]

I see, well I guess the Wiki and Navy articles are incorrect.

They're certainly both incorrect. But you also have to be a little careful of aircraft terms. Service ceiling is not a limitation...it's simply a number that can be achieved with a given configuration and manoeuver margin. Actual limits were always well defined, but could vary dramatically with different loadings, as the stores themselves would have speed/altitude limits. The performance limited ceiling with 9 five hundred pounders on board would very likely be less than 25,000.

Same sort of thing applies to speed limits. The aircraft was limited to 640 kias or mach 1.2, whichever you hit first. So, obviously at low level, 640 was the limit, whilst up high it was 1.2 (in practice, some, but not all, of the aircraft could hit 640 in level flight, but to get the 1.2 you needed a shallow dive). But, hang some stores on it, and everything changed. The drop tanks were limited to 575 kias and .9 mach. Mechanically fused bombs were limited to 475 kias...and so on.

Looking at airliner operations, we have absolute maximum altitudes defined in the manuals (i.e. 451 for the jumbo), but the maximum altitude actually available at any given time will vary with the weight and temperature. Even that can be varied by the operators. For instance QF operates the 747 with a 100 fpm climb margin (which means it must still be able to climb at that rate at the max altitude), as well as a 1.3 g margin...which means that it should have sufficient performance available to carry out a 1.3g turn (about 39 degrees angle of bank) without losing speed. On the other hand, Singair operate with a 1.2g margin. That means they can normally get a bit higher than us, but they have less performance margin at that altitude.

 

[Major]

Whilst on this thread we must mention the SR71 which has a record of FL850. An aircraft way ahead of it's time.

SR-71 Blackbird Speed and Altitude Records

 

[rechoboam]

Not really. Basically over the Pacific they plan on 'free' tracks, that mostly don't stick to designated airways. It makes the most of the wind, but can be pretty random. You may even have a new route uplinked to you in flight.


Depends what aircraft you are on. Mostly they prefer to land the A380s on 24R, as that limits how much they have to taxi around the airport. To do that, they will often track you to the north, up towards Ventura. But depending upon the traffic, you could be brought in from the south, and cut across the other approach paths. Very rare to land on 06 or 07.

On the other hand, the 747s almost always land on 25L, and come in via Santa Catalina and Seal Beach.

Who plans? Technical staff, then is there ATC over the Pacific?
Ventura approach is obviously frequently filmed by YouTube users...

 

[jb747]

Who plans? Technical staff, then is there ATC over the Pacific?

Much of the northern Pacific is controlled by Oakland Centre. So, yes, you're always being controlled by some ATC agency. A flight from Sydney to LA, will have you talking (much of the time via data link) with Sydney, Brisbane, Nandi, Oakland, SoCal. You might also deal with Tahiti, Auckland and Honolulu.

There is an entire department dedicated to flight planning...and they are an extremely professional mob.

 

[Sifor]

Whilst on this thread we must mention the SR71 which has a record of FL850. An aircraft way ahead of it's time.

SR-71 Blackbird Speed and Altitude Records

Don't forget the Lockheed U-2! Here's a link to James May's ride: ‪James May from Top Gear rides in a U-2 spy plane‬‏ - YouTube