Ask The Pilot

[Mwenenzi]

Next morning…
This time it was a licence renewal sequence that I’d missed. The profile for this exercise was a change from all that had gone before, with much less emphasis on checking, and much more on training. So, getting something wrong was no longer sudden death, which makes you much more willing to experiment and see ‘what if’. Mostly these prove to be bad ideas, but if you’ve had a go, and it didn’t work, you do tend to remember.]

So if anyone failed the first day what happens ?

The exercise started by taking off from Melbourne 09, flying out a few miles, and then joining the visual approach via SHEED (over Essendon) for a right hand base onto 34.

Named after a coach ? (I doubt it )

 

[MEL_Traveller]

They often include facets of real incidents, and real events do shape the way the sims are run. For instance, in years past, it was generally taken that in a 747-400 it would be best to fly any emergency descent with the autopilot engaged, and it was ALWAYS practiced that way. Of course, when one really happened, one of the consequences was loss of all of the autopilots, so training and reality diverged almost immediately. Now, when this exercise is practiced, you may, or may not, have an autopilot and adjust as necessary.

Is that unique to Qantas? And did it take a QF incident to realise auto-pilot may not be available? Or was that shared from an emergency experience of another operator? (how much information sharing is there?)

 

[jb747]

Is that unique to Qantas? And did it take a QF incident to realise auto-pilot may not be available? Or was that shared from an emergency experience of another operator? (how much information sharing is there?)

Real emergency descents can be counted on the fingers of one hand, so there was no 'other operator' experience to go on.

QF went away from that knowing that the training they had provided worked perfectly well, and then worked to make that training even more appropriate. What better outcome could you have?

 

[jb747]

So if anyone failed the first day what happens ?

QF are flexible enough to adjust training as needed. If the recency had indicated I was not ready for a cyclic, then we would have done another, more pointed perhaps, recency sim. People coming back to flying can be in a variety of situations. It may be a return from a medical, in which paperwork was the major issue (i.e. me), but it could be somebody who has had major surgery, or cancer, or just had horrid stuff happen in their lives.

Named after a coach ? (I doubt it )

You may well be right. There are all sorts of amusing waypoint names around the world. I guess it becomes hard to think of them when you are limited to five characters (so the FMCs will accept them). Girls names are common, and one sector did, I think, have the names of most of the female controllers who worked it. There is a sector that is all names of F1 people.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Real emergency descents can be counted on the fingers of one hand, so there was no 'other operator' experience to go on.

QF went away from that knowing that the training they had provided worked perfectly well, and then worked to make that training even more appropriate. What better outcome could you have?

so would that be something qantas would now share with other 744 operators? (ie that auto-pilot may not be available and therefore to incorporate that in their training)

 

[jb747]

so would that be something qantas would now share with other 744 operators? (ie that auto-pilot may not be available and therefore to incorporate that in their training)

Within the aviation world, incident, or even error, reporting is quite open. The decision was taken many years ago by some inspired aviation accident people to try to make the entire process 'blame' free, and whilst not all countries have worked out what that means, in general people are willing to report issues, even if they were own goals, and that information is passed along.

Sadly some major countries still haven't taken the concept on board, so it's always worth avoiding an issue in Greece, France or Japan, to name a few.....just divert elsewhere.

 

[777]

There are all sorts of amusing waypoint names around the world. I guess it becomes hard to think of them when you are limited to five characters (so the FMCs will accept them). Girls names are common, and one sector did, I think, have the names of most of the female controllers who worked it. There is a sector that is all names of F1 people.

Stupid technical question but what actually is a way point. Is It simply an agreed location on your charts or in your systems or does it have a beacon or tower or transmitter on the ground.? If the latter what do they look like?

 

[Orca]

Stupid technical question but what actually is a way point. Is It simply an agreed location on your charts or in your systems or does it have a beacon or tower or transmitter on the ground.? If the latter what do they look like?

It can be either. These days, the vast majority are simply a set of agreed upon coordinates given the proliferation of GPS technology used for aircraft navigation. Some waypoints do still have co-located, ground based navigation aids such as NDB's, VOR's etc. You can see such equipment at most aerodromes - usually looks like a smallish backyard shed sitting in the middle of nowhere with a big aerial next to it.

Named after a coach ? (I doubt it )

You may well be right. There are all sorts of amusing waypoint names around the world. I guess it becomes hard to think of them when you are limited to five characters (so the FMCs will accept them). Girls names are common, and one sector did, I think, have the names of most of the female controllers who worked it. There is a sector that is all names of F1 people.

In that vein, a couple of examples of the more amusing waypoints in the Australian FIR... Consecutive waypoints can often cause a chuckle e.g. PUDYA SWEET LIPPS CLOSA TOUDA PHONE or WALTZ INGMA TILDA. Around Williamtown (Newcastle) are a couple of favourites; being CRAVN and WONKA. So "Jetstar 216 recleared Willy WONKA is a favourite". Or (on coordinating an inbound aircraft with WLM ATC), "Velocity 1106 is CRAVN Willy". On that note, another controller favourite involves a frequency transfer with a waypoint called BALLS... e.g. "Qantas 767 contact centre on 133.0 with your BALLS position"

 

[jb747]

In that vein, a couple of examples of the more amusing waypoints in the Australian FIR... Consecutive waypoints can often cause a chuckle e.g. PUDYA SWEET LIPPS CLOSA TOUDA PHONE or WALTZ INGMA TILDA. Around Williamtown (Newcastle) are a couple of favourites; being CRAVN and WONKA. So "Jetstar 216 recleared Willy WONKA is a favourite". Or (on coordinating an inbound aircraft with WLM ATC), "Velocity 1106 is CRAVN Willy". On that note, another controller favourite involves a frequency transfer with a waypoint called BALLS... e.g. "Qantas 767 contact centre on 133.0 with your BALLS position"

Just cleaning the coffee off my keyboard.....

 

[xt_20]

Just read all 500+ pages (over several weeks/months), thanks jb for providing such an interesting (to me) insight about what you do.

Just 1 question:
Can A330 pilots pilot the A332 or A333 interchangeably? Are they essentially the same up in front? (other than the fact the A333s are quite old while some A332s are brand new)

 

[Cynicor]

I might have missed this in a past SIM discussion, but do you talk about your actions out loud (so the supervisor knows/understands), as you do them, or do you actively discuss things with the FO as issues arise or is it a lot of reflex work, which takes little discussion? I doubt its the last option as you mention realising the windshear warning was false, etc.

My question comes from our exams which were sometimes supervised pt examinations. While doing them you generally talk through what you are doing the whole time so the supervisor understands what you are looking for and why etc. I've ended up in the habit so I still talk through a lot of my exams to the pt but try to dial down the latin a bit...

 

[jb747]

Just 1 question:
Can A330 pilots pilot the A332 or A333 interchangeably? Are they essentially the same up in front? (other than the fact the A333s are quite old while some A332s are brand new)

Yes, they are close enough to identical up front.

The 747-400 in its various configurations/engines and models is flown under one endorsement, as were the 767-200/300. The 74s all felt much the same, but there was quite a bit between the various 767 models.

 

[WheelieBagWanderer]

Hi JB,

If you have a look at this video (and please disregard the sensationalist title!) - it shows the spoilers on the 767 in the video raised during take-off.
Crazy dangerous takeoff 767 in severe storm!! - YouTube

Am I correct in assuming this is to compensate for cross-winds/roll during take-off and if the port wing has them extended as in the video then the starboard wing WON'T have them extended?

Also, in severe crosswinds would spoilers be extended for take-off on all commercial aircraft types - eg A380, 747, A330 etc, or is the 767 unique in this regard?

Thanks in advance for your answer to this - and all your other answers.

 

[jb747]

Hi JB,

If you have a look at this video (and please disregard the sensationalist title!) - it shows the spoilers on the 767 in the video raised during take-off.
Crazy dangerous takeoff 767 in severe storm!! - YouTube

Am I correct in assuming this is to compensate for cross-winds/roll during take-off and if the port wing has them extended as in the video then the starboard wing WON'T have them extended?

Also, in severe crosswinds would spoilers be extended for take-off on all commercial aircraft types - eg A380, 747, A330 etc, or is the 767 unique in this regard?

Thanks in advance for your answer to this - and all your other answers.

The same overwing panels are used at different stages of flight for different functions.

On the ground, if the speedbrakes are raised, it is purely to dump lift. In that case ALL of the panels, on both wings, are up, at their full extension.

In flight, if the speedbrakes are selected, most of the panels (but not all) will rise, but to a max of about half extension (to reduce structural loads).

If more than about half roll control is applied, then there is a partial panel rise on what would be the downgoing wing.

So, all that we're seeing here is a totally normal crosswind takeoff, in which a large amount of aileron has been applied to keep the aircraft wings level. You do normally try to avoid having so much aileron applied that you have spoiler rise, but if you need it then it's quite ok. It has a slight effect on the takeoff roll, but is not a particular issue.

So, what you're seeing is a roll control function, NOT speedbrakes. If the speedbrakes were up, it would result in a takeoff configuration warning.

The comments are amusing. Even the bloke who claims to fly a 319 has no idea....

 

[jb747]

I might have missed this in a past SIM discussion, but do you talk about your actions out loud (so the supervisor knows/understands), as you do them, or do you actively discuss things with the FO as issues arise or is it a lot of reflex work, which takes little discussion? I doubt its the last option as you mention realising the windshear warning was false, etc.

My question comes from our exams which were sometimes supervised pt examinations. While doing them you generally talk through what you are doing the whole time so the supervisor understands what you are looking for and why etc. I've ended up in the habit so I still talk through a lot of my exams to the pt but try to dial down the latin a bit...

When you're in the sim you do things as you would in the aircraft. You don't vocalise anything unless it has meaning for the other crew. The sim instructors can work out what you're doing...it's their problem, not yours.

 

[mjt57]

JB, interesting article in the paper today about the C17 Globemaster.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

They interviewed a pilot whose father is one of your colleagues.

Now, this guy must have all the ratings and quals to command a 4 engined jet. How would that look with regards to selection should he or others of similar experience go if applying for a job with Qantas or other airlines?

 

[jb747]

JB, interesting article in the paper today about the C17 Globemaster.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

They interviewed a pilot whose father is one of your colleagues.

Now, this guy must have all the ratings and quals to command a 4 engined jet. How would that look with regards to selection should he or others of similar experience go if applying for a job with Qantas or other airlines?

Historically the RAAF guys have no trouble getting into any of the airlines, though Cathay was always their airline of choice. From what rumours I've heard, the military no longer bother with QF as they are not interested in Jetstar, and mainline hasn't recruited for years.

 

[Ansett]

Hi JB

So could this mean that in the future Pilots may not be as skilled as the current Pilots, given that QF Mainline are not recruiting and I presume nor are they training many new pilots? Will this lead to a shortage of pilots and a possible lowering of standards and an icrease in risk associated with that?

 

[jb747]

So could this mean that in the future Pilots may not be as skilled as the current Pilots, given that QF Mainline are not recruiting and I presume nor are they training many new pilots? Will this lead to a shortage of pilots and a possible lowering of standards and an icrease in risk associated with that?

I think that's a bit of a leap.

The biggest issue that I see with pilot training and recruitment has been covered previously, and that's the widespread employment of zero (and minimal) hour FOs for low cost jet operations. Couple that with operations that are almost entirely automated and you're setting up scenarios in which events like Asiana are quite understandable.

These same airlines talk up their FOs and their training, but they are very cheap to hire (in many cases literally being indentured), and don't have that nasty habit of qualified and experienced people of pushing back. Equally, they can't hire the well qualified ex-military because they are so unattractive. A shiny new aircraft, and pretty hostie does not an airline make....

 

[Mwenenzi]

...Now, this guy must have all the ratings and quals to command a 4 engined jet. How would that look with regards to selection should he or others of similar experience go if applying for a job with Qantas or other airlines?

A few days ago I noticed in the newspaper Emirates were advertising for pilots. In the add the 2 guys in the pilots seats did not have any grey hair. If they were old enough to hold a car drivers licence is matter of opinion

When the pilot is younger than the aircraft I get worried. Happened to me in Argentina when a passenger in an old 737-100 (or 737-200)