Ask The Pilot

  • Thread starter Thread starter NM
  • Start date Start date
  • Featured
Without being a lawyer, I think that the only reason .02 would be mentioned in any laws at all would be because of the difficulty of measuring 0.0, given that even some foods can give a small reading. It should be zero in a coughpit, and that's what the company rules say. As for a hangover...well that is the same as being sick, and you have no place in a coughpit.


Until recently, my limit before conducting rail safety work here in Sydney was 0.02. This figure recently changed by law to 0.00. If I am on my way to work, my limit is 0.00 because of this fact even though my legal driving limit is 0.05. It remains at 0.00 until I sign off duty.


On the roads, L & P platers (in NSW at least) are also restricted to 0.00 while heavy vehicle drivers are 0.02.

I wholeheartedly agree with jb747 that people with hangovers have no place in a coughpit.

If anyone is in doubt, it's better not to go to work rather than risk an incident.

Appearances are also important in relation to the original question on this topic. No one can expect a long haul pilot or cabin crew to go for a flight without eating, drinking or going to the loo. However it would be out of place (and probably not allowed by company policy) to have an alcoholic drink if you are in uniform even if you've landed safely at the destination.

I know for me that I rarely drink alcohol either unless I've got a string of days off. I can probably count on 1 hand the amount of days I've had alcohol this year & I've been on leave all year.
 
ACI is generally quite a reasonable show. The recent 9 show was so appalling as to defy description.
 
It's not a hobby.

I don't expect you to comment in the specific context of your colleague's business but, more generally, do QF/airlines take a proactive interest in the amount of private/non-duty flying a pilot plans to do? Are your 900 hours/yr of available flying expected to completely at the disposal of Qantas if they see fit to use them?

EDIT: Actually, jb747, I think you can ignore that, I now understand a recent clarification to the fatigue laws specifically excluded recreational flying.
 
Last edited:
I don't expect you to comment in the specific context of your colleague's business but, more generally, do QF/airlines take a proactive interest in the amount of private/non-duty flying a pilot plans to do? Are your 900 hours/yr of available flying expected to completely at the disposal of Qantas if they see fit to use them?

EDIT: Actually, jb747, I think you can ignore that, I now understand a recent clarification to the fatigue laws specifically excluded recreational flying.

The various limits still include any flying, so the 900 hours etc all come into play. QF (rightly) assumes that they own all of your 900 hours, and if you want to do any other flying, you simply ask for permission, and will be granted X hours. Works perfectly well.

In this case though, he employs others, so wouldn't do much flying himself.
 
Did any pilots see the letter to the editor in the 'Fin' today from a Jacquie Lambie, who was elected from Tasmania to the Senate in the last (6th) spot? She is from the Palmer United Party. Perhaps someone who subscribes to Financial Review - business, finance and investment news | afr.com can post the letter to the editor if it is retrievable.

She said that taxi drivers display their ID in a taxi so pilots should do so (I think she said either 'before' or 'during' the flight). Her point was that she wanted time to scrutinise pilots' backgrounds.

This struck me as a stupid suggestion. There does not seem to be any credible suggestion that Australian or foreign pilots en masse suffer mental illnesses: in fact, were I to hazard a guess, most would be very level headed individuals, (hopefully) pretty good in a crisis. We know that one AFF pilot contributor fulfils that expectation!

Since travelling by RPT planes is safer than crossing a busy road, I don't think any of us need to examine pilots' backgrounds, apart from the impracticality of such a requirement, as rosters change at short notice or pilots are sick and have to be relieved.

What do the pilots think?
 
Turn business expenses into Business Class! Process $10,000 through pay.com.au to score 20,000 bonus PayRewards Points and join 30k+ savvy business owners enjoying these benefits:

- Pay suppliers who don’t take Amex
- Max out credit card rewards—even on government payments
- Earn & Transfer PayRewards Points to 8+ top airline & hotel partners

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Our industry is regulated far more than the taxi industry. Let the regulator and company determine whether i am qualified and trained to operate the aircraft rather than the travelling public who would have no idea.

If i put my licence up, she wouldn't be able to decode the majority of it anyway.

Furthermore, I am not sure what purpose it would serve if any? Oh, and she could then see my address and DOB which she has no business in seeing.
 
I don't know if this has been addressed previously but how often do QF pilots undergo psychological testing?

Is it more/less or roughly the same of the other major carriers?
 
I was 'lucky!' enough to fly out of Sydney in the middle of the severe storms yesterday. My flight was JQ1 to MEL, and whilst we pushed back at 1310, we weren't airborne until 1423.


My question comes from what the captain told us just prior to takeoff - he said that ATC switched runways '5 times' in 40 minutes. What I'd like insight into is how the pilots handle rapidly changing weather (and runway) conditions. Are you constantly updating the wind speeds and directions into the flight management system as they are provided by ATC?


Also, once we lifted off we experienced some moderate to heavy turbulence. I saw from our track and the weather overlay on Flightaware that we essentially flew a narrow path between 2 storm cells. In situations like this, especially on departure or arrival in congested airspace, what options are open to the flight crew to avoid or circumnavigate the storm cells?

Anyway, I quite enjoy a bit of turbulence but there were a few around me who'd unfortunately just eaten lunch on the ground prior to departure.

Thanks as always for this most informative thread!
 
Hello Again JB,

A question on taxiing / breaking if I may...

I believe that an aircraft's brakes are applied on the ground by pressing with both feet on top of the rudder pedals. Regarding this:

1. Do you have to press on both pedals to stop? ie Left pedal is associated with undercarriage on the left-side etc. therefore you have to press both to stop?

2. If you were holding at the entrance to a runway for landing aircraft for 10 minutes or so, do you need to keep your feet on the pedals to stop the aircraft moving forward, or is there a "park brake" or similar as you would find in a car that you can apply when stopped on the tarmac for a longish period?

3. Do you have to adjust the throttles from the taxi setting to a lower setting/idle if you have to stop the aircraft prior to take off? I have listened carefully my last few flights and can't hear a change of pitch. So I'm assuming when stopped on the taxi-way the throttles are kept at the "taxi setting" and the brakes being applied are what's stopping the aircraft from moving forward?

4. After landing do you have to adjust the throttles manually to a taxi setting after turning off the runway, or is this done automatically by the FMC or something similar?

Thanks in advance! And sorry if these induce an eye-roll from you! :)
 
Quick one re the missing MA 777. They think that it ended up off the coast of WA somewhere. Would the A/C have had enough fuel for such a journey given where its original departure and destination was?
 
I am sure no one here knows the fuel on board of that particular flight therefore your question must be speculative

Speaking of which, would an airline know how much fuel was ordered by the captain? I would presume there should be some sort of paper work somewhere? I would think that, at some stage while still on the ground, the captain must have said/wrote something like, I need so much fuel, and then a ground personnel would go and make that happen, taking account of how much fuel is in the tank, and how much fuel need to be put in, etc.
 
I was 'lucky!' enough to fly out of Sydney in the middle of the severe storms yesterday. My flight was JQ1 to MEL, and whilst we pushed back at 1310, we weren't airborne until 1423.


My question comes from what the captain told us just prior to takeoff - he said that ATC switched runways '5 times' in 40 minutes. What I'd like insight into is how the pilots handle rapidly changing weather (and runway) conditions. Are you constantly updating the wind speeds and directions into the flight management system as they are provided by ATC?

On some aircraft, you can get the laptop (or ipad) to calculate multiple runways' performance data simultaneously. So, you might, for instance, select 16R full length and F, as well as 07, and the single run would produce all three data sets. Having said that, you generally just work it out for the one you expect, but as the ATIS or tower advises changes, you enter them into the app and recalculate the data. That then has to be manually entered into the FMC. A change every few minutes is a pain, and has the potential to set people up for using the wrong data set, but when the weather is the way it's been in Sydney over the last few days that's unavoidable.

Yesterday, departing Sydney, we were planning on using the full length of 16R. We don't normally look at the other options, because even if the aircraft can use them, there is no point in using up the engines any more than needed. As we asked for push back, we were told that we'd be unable to go direct to the runway end from our parking bay due to an inspection, and were offered either F, or to be 'processed to access the runway from the other side'. That means mixing the 380 in with the domestics, and would slow everyone down. We looked at F, and found we could accept it, and still get a derate, so we departed from there (at 569 tonnes...the max).


Also, once we lifted off we experienced some moderate to heavy turbulence. I saw from our track and the weather overlay on Flightaware that we essentially flew a narrow path between 2 storm cells. In situations like this, especially on departure or arrival in congested airspace, what options are open to the flight crew to avoid or circumnavigate the storm cells?

You simply tell ATC what you want to do. They can't (and won't try anyway) force you to fly through a cell. The crew would have looked at the radar on taxi out, and also lining up, so you can get a heading requirement in, even before you take off. ATC also work out where the weather is, and will modify there procedures to suit. An example of that was arriving in Dubai this morning, where there was substantial storm activity through the whole area. They'd moved their normal airborne holding point to a spot that was less weather affected.
 
A question on taxiing / breaking if I may...

I believe that an aircraft's brakes are applied on the ground by pressing with both feet on top of the rudder pedals. Regarding this:

1. Do you have to press on both pedals to stop? ie Left pedal is associated with undercarriage on the left-side etc. therefore you have to press both to stop?

Left pedal does the left side, and right pedal the right side. That allows for the aircraft to be differentially braked (and so steered) if necessary. It's quite ineffective as a way of taxying a 747/380, but it's the only way in some small aircraft. Whilst I'll normally use both, especially on a runway, if we happen to have one side that's appreciably hotter than the other, then I can just use the other side. They'll heat up quickly too, so you have to be careful. A way to get a smooth stop at the gate is to just use one side...that was especially the case in the 767-200s, which had quite 'grabby' brakes.

2. If you were holding at the entrance to a runway for landing aircraft for 10 minutes or so, do you need to keep your feet on the pedals to stop the aircraft moving forward, or is there a "park brake" or similar as you would find in a car that you can apply when stopped on the tarmac for a longish period?

Park brake.

3. Do you have to adjust the throttles from the taxi setting to a lower setting/idle if you have to stop the aircraft prior to take off? I have listened carefully my last few flights and can't hear a change of pitch. So I'm assuming when stopped on the taxi-way the throttles are kept at the "taxi setting" and the brakes being applied are what's stopping the aircraft from moving forward?

There is no 'taxi' setting. The levers are normally pushed up a bit (5-10%) to get the aircraft moving, and then, as long as the ground is level, you can just continue at idle. You'll need a bit more power in the turns, but you might just use differential power. The big aircraft may need just a small amount above idle when heavy. When we line up, the engines are pushed up enough to ensure you'll get even acceleration (they're sluggish at idle), before being very rapidly pushed to the TOGA (or FLX) gate.

4. After landing do you have to adjust the throttles manually to a taxi setting after turning off the runway, or is this done automatically by the FMC or something similar?

Landing, the levers are pulled to idle somewhere in the flare. They remain there throughout the landing roll. Reverse thrust is a second set of levers, branching of the front face of the main thrust levers. The EECs (the engine electronic controls) will switch to a ground idle setting, once reverse is stowed. That's not a great deal lower than flight idle. There are actually three idle settings. Ground, flight, and approach, with each progressively a few percent higher. It's all about acceleration. Totally transparent (and forgotten) from the crew perspective.
 
Quick one re the missing MA 777. They think that it ended up off the coast of WA somewhere. Would the A/C have had enough fuel for such a journey given where its original departure and destination was?

Yes, the position that they are searching is roughly where I would calculate dry tanks to be.

Notable yesterday that there were many more shipping lights to the south of Indonesia (west of Christmas Island) than usual.
 
Speaking of which, would an airline know how much fuel was ordered by the captain? I would presume there should be some sort of paper work somewhere? I would think that, at some stage while still on the ground, the captain must have said/wrote something like, I need so much fuel, and then a ground personnel would go and make that happen, taking account of how much fuel is in the tank, and how much fuel need to be put in, etc.

Yep, you order the fuel. I don't know the specific system used by Malaysian, but in my case I'm presented with a flight plan that will nominate either the minimum legal fuel load, or occasionally the take off weight limited load. In the first case I adjust the fuel order to suit whatever I want (anywhere from no extra, to quite some tonnes). In the later, it means that either the weather will have to improve at the destination, or that I'm likely to divert. Or I can simply tell load control to remove x tonnes of cargo, and replace it with fuel. Not commercially desirable, and not common either, but it happens every now and then, especially on the ultra long flights.

The company knows exactly what I order....
 
On some aircraft, you can get the laptop (or ipad) to calculate multiple runways' performance data simultaneously. So, you might, for instance, select 16R full length and F, as well as 07, and the single run would produce all three data sets.

F as in taxi-way entry/exit point 'F' ?? (the yellow/black signs?)
 
Back
Top