Ask The Pilot

[flychrisfly]

I haven't done any domestic stuff for a long time, so I'm not up on the details of the system they're using. But, each aircraft (at certain times of day) will be allocated an off chocks time that it has to meet to for airport congestion management. Basically a slot time, but applied at the gate. Miss your slot and it may mean a long wait, or even cancellation of the flight.

Another question, if I may, for airports with congestion management for all (?) aircraft, do they use off chocks timings or are there other methods the airports use to encourage timing compliance from the airlines?

I guess I'm thinking of LHR and DXB here.

 

[jb747]

Does "off chocks time" = "push back time"?

Not quite. Off chocks is generally the point at which all the doors are closed, and the brakes are released. Push back time is pretty obvious. But, for recording purposes, off chocks is what the automatic systems record.

So, if you were ready to go on time, but ATC aren't able to give you a push back clearance, you could record an 'on time' departure simply by releasing the brakes.

 

[jb747]

Another question, if I may, for airports with congestion management for all (?) aircraft, do they use off chocks timings or are there other methods the airports use to encourage timing compliance from the airlines?

I guess I'm thinking of LHR and DXB here.

The QF departure times from both London and Dubai aren't too bad with regard to controlled departure (slot) times. Basically, if you're on time you're out of the worst of the congestion. Singapore, headed northbound was terrible, because they controlled congestion over Afghanistan by giving airborne times at Singapore.

Slot times are airborne times. I think it's fair to say that we (pilots) hate them, as it's largely pure luck as to whether you make them or not. Any form of time constraint makes that last, missing, passenger all that much more critical.

"Encourage timing compliance"....that's a bit of a laugh. Firstly the airlines are virtually never late on purpose. Historically, applying any form of pressure to an aircraft operator is a great way of causing an accident. What will be missed, or not done, because of the pressure to make a slot? How do we handle that late passenger? Or fixable fault?

 

[petercr]

How do we handle that late passenger?

Make them walk??

 

[jb747]

Make them walk??

And in days past, that's exactly what used to happen. But, these days, when passengers and luggage have to go on the same aircraft, any late passenger will mean at least a 20 minute delay whilst their luggage is removed. In places with slots, you will invariably lose your slot. You may be lucky and be able to swap or simply be granted another within a reasonable time frame. But, as congestion increases, it's just as likely that you won't and the next slot on offer will be an hour or two away.

 

[anat0l]

"Encourage timing compliance"....that's a bit of a laugh. Firstly the airlines are virtually never late on purpose. Historically, applying any form of pressure to an aircraft operator is a great way of causing an accident. What will be missed, or not done, because of the pressure to make a slot? How do we handle that late passenger? Or fixable fault?

I have to say that after reading many posts like this, I have had a lot more respect for making sure I board my flight on time and do not attempt to hold up the aircraft.

And in days past, that's exactly what used to happen. But, these days, when passengers and luggage have to go on the same aircraft, any late passenger will mean at least a 20 minute delay whilst their luggage is removed.

Well, these days a bit of a "no checked bags" revolution is going on, so it may just be like the old days and you can just shove them off and be done with.

OK I jest - it hasn't happened to that degree yet.

 

[Skyhigh777]

You may be lucky and be able to swap or simply be granted another within a reasonable time frame. But, as congestion increases, it's just as likely that you won't and the next slot on offer will be an hour or two away.

I could see that being an issue your allowed flying hours.

 

[legroom]

Hi JB,

If you were to land at an unfamiliar airport (for some benign reasons: sick pax etc ...), would the ATC have to give you directions even on the grounds after landing to direct you to the allotted gate or that sort of info would be available on your iPad ?

The plane I was on this week at ORD took forever ... (well, some 8-10 min) taxiing to the gate after quite a few left / right turns.

Personally, whenever I go to a different Westfield carpark, I'm bound to get lost looking for the right centre entrance.

Thanks again for your time.

 

[jb747]

If you were to land at an unfamiliar airport (for some benign reasons: sick pax etc ...), would the ATC have to give you directions even on the grounds after landing to direct you to the allotted gate or that sort of info would be available on your iPad ?

The plane I was on this week at ORD took forever ... (well, some 8-10 min) taxiing to the gate after quite a few left / right turns.

The A380 has a quite restricted list of airports that we are allowed to use, and their data is available for us on the OANS (a map of the airport that we can bring up instead of the normal in flight displays). That is a moving map and is very useful. iPads also have the Jeppesen taxiway charts. One issue we have to be very careful with is that even at places we operate to as a matter of course, there are always many taxiways that are not available to us because of wing clearance...or lack thereof.

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/4/6/0/1823064.jpg

and

IMCAD - Success

Some airfields are interesting places to navigate around (Narita comes to mind). Generally a bit of care, and taking things slowly is all that's needed. If you really need help, then just stop, and ask for a 'follow me' vehicle.

8-10 minutes isn't bad. I've seen aircraft at JFK that have taken hours to get to their gate. All you need is the right sort of weather, and long delays for departures, and there's nowhere for the arrivals to go. My own personal record is around 3 hours from landing to the gate, but that was a very unusual day in London.

 

[Flying Fox]

My own personal record is around 3 hours from landing to the gate, but that was a very unusual day in London.

I'm assuming that you still had the engines running, so did you run out of fuel or how close did you get to running out?

Would passengers have been allowed to use the bathrooms & get drinks during this time?

 

[jb747]

I'm assuming that you still had the engines running, so did you run out of fuel or how close did you get to running out?

Would passengers have been allowed to use the bathrooms & get drinks during this time?

It was the day of the liquid bombs at Heathrow. We very nearly diverted to Amsterdam, but ended up being the very first aircraft to land once they started accepting (very limited) arrivals. Nobody had left, so there was nowhere to park. In the end I think Cathay, Virgin, BA, and ourselves were the only ones allowed to land, everyone else was told to go elsewhere. When we landed, we probably had about 8 tonnes of fuel...less than normal, as we'd actually held as long as we could. On the ground, that would have lasted 3-4 hours with all engines running, and then it would become cold and dark...and more to the point we'd not be capable of moving. We started up the APU, and shut down 3 engines. This was done by most of the aircraft. We had to restart a couple of times, so that we could move, but ATC were giving everyone warning that a move was coming up, so that wasn't an issue.

When we were in a semi shut down state we allowed very limited movements in the cabin. I think water was available, but nothing else. Most of the cabin crew had to stay at their doors, as they were still armed. Not a normal situation by any means.

 

[workingman]

JB

I found this video clip of a landing into Queenstown NZ. Apart from the beautiful views the thing that got me was the absolute faith you must have in your instruments to land like this. At 2:50 when the plane descends into the cloud the camera perspective makes like you are still flying at a mountain, and that mountain is disappearing down into the clouds where you are turning. The training to fly into that must be pretty intense.


this is why we fly.... - YouTube

Way back in this thread you mentioned that you loaded some videos up to YouTube, but you had taken them down by the time I got to this thread. A shame that you apparently had to put up with what seems to be bad comments. Have you had a thought about somewhere else you could load them, maybe Vimeo, where hopefully it will not be as hostile?

 

[legroom]

Thanks, JB

What I meant was that the AA plane kept taxiing on for 10 min.

It was not stationary at all.

That gave me the impression of a very long, tortuous route to the gate which (I thought) may confuse a pilot landing there for the first time.

But with the map and the follow-me vehicle that shouldn't be like me getting lost in Miranda Westfield car park - every time !

(Plus, I had only 25 min between landing and next flight departure at ORD so every minute of that taxiing was painful)

... 8-10 minutes isn't bad. I've seen aircraft at JFK that have taken hours to get to their gate. All you need is the right sort of weather, and long delays for departures, and there's nowhere for the arrivals to go. My own personal record is around 3 hours from landing to the gate, but that was a very unusual day in London.

 

[a330j]

Great clip. When s/he breaks through the cloud base he is bang on height - two white two red lights beside the runway. Haven't flown into Queenstown, but the clip makes me want to.

 

[anat0l]

Thanks, JB

What I meant was that the AA plane kept taxiing on for 10 min.

It was not stationary at all.

That gave me the impression of a very long, tortuous route to the gate which (I thought) may confuse a pilot landing there for the first time.

But with the map and the follow-me vehicle that shouldn't be like me getting lost in Miranda Westfield car park - every time !

(Plus, I had only 25 min between landing and next flight departure at ORD so every minute of that taxiing was painful)

I don't see why it couldn't happen. Maybe long and torturous, maybe unfortunate that you landed on the farthest runway from the allocated gate (for some reason). I haven't been to ORD; I know that it is a huge airport but for the major airports around the world nothing surprises me any more.

Mind, landing on the third runway at SYD and taxiing to the terminal can feel like a long taxi. I don't know if it's ten minutes, but I can tell you it isn't short by any means.

 

[jb747]

I found this video clip of a landing into Queenstown NZ. Apart from the beautiful views the thing that got me was the absolute faith you must have in your instruments to land like this. At 2:50 when the plane descends into the cloud the camera perspective makes like you are still flying at a mountain, and that mountain is disappearing down into the clouds where you are turning. The training to fly into that must be pretty intense.

I'd expect it's a GPS based, RNAV approach of some sort. Lots of rocks in those clouds. I haven't seen an approach chart for Q'town, but I know that the QF pilots flying into there required special qualifications, and I think they only used the HUD equipped 737s.

And on the tourist side...if you haven't been there, you should go...it's a great place.

Way back in this thread you mentioned that you loaded some videos up to YouTube, but you had taken them down by the time I got to this thread. A shame that you apparently had to put up with what seems to be bad comments. Have you had a thought about somewhere else you could load them, maybe Vimeo, where hopefully it will not be as hostile?

I just got sick of "know it alls" who play MS flight sim. They may return at some stage.

 

[jb747]

What I meant was that the AA plane kept taxiing on for 10 min.

It was not stationary at all.

That gave me the impression of a very long, tortuous route to the gate which (I thought) may confuse a pilot landing there for the first time.

But with the map and the follow-me vehicle that shouldn't be like me getting lost in Miranda Westfield car park - every time !

(Plus, I had only 25 min between landing and next flight departure at ORD so every minute of that taxiing was painful)

Aircraft don't taxi all that quickly. Maximum of 30 knots, and an average that's less than 20. So to go 2 nautical miles will take you 6 minutes at least.

 

[anat0l]

I just got sick of "know it alls" who play MS flight sim. They may return at some stage.

I think you can disable the ability to leave comments on your videos. That would prevent good comments being left as well, but it is a solution to prevent errant and malicious comments being left.

 

[Awesom Andy]

And on the tourist side...if you haven't been there, you should go...it's a great place.

Adding to this, if you have time for a day-trip to Milford Sound, most companies offer a fly-back option in a light aircraft. Of course, they probably won't operate in low visibility, but the scenery is excellent - and you might be lucky enough to be in the front seat next to the pilot.

 

[legroom]

Hi JB,

On a recent AA flight, I looked out the window and saw another AA plane flying at right angle / towards us (NS vs EW, if you like) but at a lower horizontal plane to us.

It was scary as I could see all its markings (plane was roughly about 1000mm long (visually, not physically) from my window seat - to give you an idea of the separation).

It disappeared after some 6-8 seconds afterwards.

Captain explained that the allowed separation is 1000 feet and that was normal.

Wonder what the Australian regulation on that is ?

Same for wide-bodied jets like your (A)bus or more ?

Thanks again