Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

An Airbus question, can a pilot change which law the plane flys in manually? Or are all law changes done automatically?

If a pilot can change from normal law into alternate law for what ever reason can the pilot change back into normal law or will the rest of the flight be done in alternate law and the only way to get the plane back into normal law is by an engineer "flicking a switch" on the ground?

Changes of law are caused as a system response to failures. So, the only way that I could force a change, is by failing/turning off systems. Two ADRs off would drop it to alternate II, and three off would give you direct. Generally, once the aircraft system degrades, you're stuck with the result for the rest of the flight.

I've heard, but I can't confirm, that the RAAF A330s have a switch that allows an immediate reversion to direct.

 

[harvyk]

If due to a system failure (one that doesn't involve engine surges \ shutdown \ fire or control surfaces failing) the pilot needed to revert to flying the plane manually, what's the likelihood of pax picking up that the plane is now under manual control? eg would the flight become more bumpy (or smoother) than normal? Or would pax never know...

Obviously if it's a major system which has failed which shutsdown engines or stop control surfaces from working it would be a different story.

 

[drron]

Sounds like Professor Russell Strong - there's a photo in the story...

But he's a Queenslander.

 

[jb747]

If due to a system failure (one that doesn't involve engine surges \ shutdown \ fire or control surfaces failing) the pilot needed to revert to flying the plane manually, what's the likelihood of pax picking up that the plane is now under manual control? eg would the flight become more bumpy (or smoother) than normal? Or would pax never know...

Obviously if it's a major system which has failed which shutsdown engines or stop control surfaces from working it would be a different story.

Realistically...the passengers could be unaware of quite vast failures....The work load can change very dramatically in the coughpit, with no effect upon the cabin (and within reason, that's exactly what you would want to happen). When I had the aircraft revert to alternate law, there were no clues for the passengers that it was flown manually for 5 hours, [with the greatest deviation from altitude being about 50',and I'll admit that I was the culprit, the FO and SO did a better job]. I've shut down an engine in a 767, and nobody noticed. On the other hand, fairly benign failures at night, often show sparks...which in the mind of the viewer become fire and people become concerned well beyond what is warranted. Quite simply...jet engines, when running, are always on fire...

Control surfaces...well, depending upon just what aircraft, and how it plays out, even the pilots might not notice. In QF30, half of all roll control was lost, but I wasn't aware of that .....

 

[QF WP]

But he's a Queenslander.

Whoops, how could I mix up Brisbane with Adelaide

Might be one of the surgeons from Royal Adelaide Hospital, or Dr Robert Padbury (who operated on Derryn Hinch) - audio of him in the attached link, so perhaps his voice might trigger a memory jb747?

 

[jb747]

Whoops, how could I mix up Brisbane with Adelaide

Might be one of the surgeons from Royal Adelaide Hospital, or Dr Robert Padbury (who operated on Derryn Hinch) - audio of him in the attached link, so perhaps his voice might trigger a memory jb747?

Doesn't really matter. I guess the point was that passengers general are more than likely to be much more interesting than celebrities. In wandering around the aircraft you meet a very diverse range of people. As more than a few TV shows have said over the years, they all have their own stories.

 

[jb747]

I'm operating QF9 to Singapore tomorrow (9th), the 31 to London (Sat midnight), 32 out of London on Tuesday, and 32 from Singapore on Friday the 16th.

 

[Flashback]

I'm operating QF9 to Singapore tomorrow (9th), the 31 to London (Sat midnight), 32 out of London on Tuesday, and 32 from Singapore on Friday the 16th.

I'm doing a few trips via SIN in November.. will have to check with you closer to the date

 

[harvyk]

Doesn't really matter. I guess the point was that passengers general are more than likely to be much more interesting than celebrities. In wandering around the aircraft you meet a very diverse range of people. As more than a few TV shows have said over the years, they all have their own stories.

If you knew a friend was on the plane, and assuming no one was in the seat next to them (and obviously you're on break with the relief pilots flying) are you permitted to sit next to them and talk for a couple of hours, or is the most you can do is simply say hello and then proceed to the rest area?

 

[rechoboam]

Realistically...the passengers could be unaware of quite vast failures....The work load can change very dramatically in the coughpit, with no effect upon the cabin (and within reason, that's exactly what you would want to happen). When I had the aircraft revert to alternate law, there were no clues for the passengers that it was flown manually for 5 hours, [with the greatest deviation from altitude being about 50',and I'll admit that I was the culprit, the FO and SO did a better job]. I've shut down an engine in a 767, and nobody noticed. On the other hand, fairly benign failures at night, often show sparks...which in the mind of the viewer become fire and people become concerned well beyond what is warranted. Quite simply...jet engines, when running, are always on fire...

Control surfaces...well, depending upon just what aircraft, and how it plays out, even the pilots might not notice. In QF30, half of all roll control was lost, but I wasn't aware of that .....

If there was a complete failure of autopilot on departure from say MEL and you had to manually control yoke/joystick for 14 hours to LAX would you return to MEL?

Second question- we hit RIVET the other night and were presumably given vectors to take 16L at YSSY. Would the crew have intercepted an ILS there or manually flown? And in the 738 can you autoland in Australia?

 

[jb747]

If you knew a friend was on the plane, and assuming no one was in the seat next to them (and obviously you're on break with the relief pilots flying) are you permitted to sit next to them and talk for a couple of hours, or is the most you can do is simply say hello and then proceed to the rest area?

It would be rude to sit with anybody for a couple of hours. Even more than a few minutes is likely to annoy people nearby. But, if there's an empty seat I'll quite often sit in whilst talking to people..gets a bit hard on the legs squatting down everywhere.

 

[jb747]

If there was a complete failure of autopilot on departure from say MEL and you had to manually control yoke/joystick for 14 hours to LAX would you return to MEL?

There are multiple autopilots, so to lose all of them implies a more severe failure sequence. Flight within RVSM airspace (reduced vertical separation) is not allowed without an autopilot. ATC may not even allow you to fly in such airspace after a failure.

Manually flying for 14 hours. No way. I did it a year or so back for 5 hours, and at the end of that the three of us were quite knackered. It isn't like flying a light aircraft at low level. Tiny attitude changes, that you can barely see on the PFD will give a couple of hundred fpm rate of climb/descent. The concentration required just wears you out... Flying at low level is much easier.

Second question- we hit RIVET the other night and were presumably given vectors to take 16L at YSSY. Would the crew have intercepted an ILS there or manually flown? And in the 738 can you autoland in Australia?

The country now has a couple of decent category ILS approaches. But, you don't need that for a runway to allow autoland. You can do that to most ILS runways, but the drawback is that that weather has to be Cat I or better.

There is a STAR from RIVET. The aircraft would have been radar vectored from the end of the STAR to the ILS. Most likely the autopilot would have been engaged until established on the ILS. In my operation, if we are going to manually land, we normally manually fly from about 1,000 feet. But, if the weather is poor the A/P can remain engaged down to a couple of hundred. I'd be a bit surprised if many 738 landings were automatic.

 

[awilcockson]

the 31 to London (Sat midnight)

Oh damn, so close, I'm on QF9 leaving an hour earlier, otherwise I would have come and said hello (and maybe even summoned the courage to ask for a look in the coughpit)

 

[harvyk]

How much time is spent looking out the windows during an IFR flight compared to looking at instruments?
Is looking out of the window even useful during cruise when flying at night?

And

The standard checklists (for normal flying) which are followed, are they simply mental checklists or paper based checklists or a combination of both?

How detailed are the checklist, for example are they simply "FMC - set weights, fuel and v speeds" or are they more step by step, eg "On the FMC Press index, now press takeoff (L4), now type in take off weight and press L3, now enter in min fuel and press L4 etc..."

 

[jb747]

How much time is spent looking out the windows during an IFR flight compared to looking at instruments?
Is looking out of the window even useful during cruise when flying at night?

Eyes glazed over, staring at the middle distance. It's not even that useful by day. Great way to send yourself to sleep though.

The standard checklists (for normal flying) which are followed, are they simply mental checklists or paper based checklists or a combination of both?

How detailed are the checklist, for example are they simply "FMC - set weights, fuel and v speeds" or are they more step by step, eg "On the FMC Press index, now press takeoff (L4), now type in take off weight and press L3, now enter in min fuel and press L4 etc..."

The standard stuff is all done from memory. Initial actions of some of the emergency checklists are also memory items.

 

[rechoboam]

There are multiple autopilots, so to lose all of them implies a more severe failure sequence. Flight within RVSM airspace (reduced vertical separation) is not allowed without an autopilot. ATC may not even allow you to fly in such airspace after a failure.

Manually flying for 14 hours. No way. I did it a year or so back for 5 hours, and at the end of that the three of us were quite knackered. It isn't like flying a light aircraft at low level. Tiny attitude changes, that you can barely see on the PFD will give a couple of hundred fpm rate of climb/descent. The concentration required just wears you out... Flying at low level is much easier.


The country now has a couple of decent category ILS approaches....

There is a STAR from RIVET. The aircraft would have been radar vectored from the end of the STAR to the ILS. Most likely the autopilot would have been engaged until established on the ILS.

Only a couple of decent approaches? Doesn't YMML alone have a couple?

And on my simulators when autopilot is disengaged the aircraft tends to jolt. In real life how do you ensure a smooth transition? I was trying to detect when the pilot took over but it was obviously impossible to tell.

 

[jb747]

Only a couple of decent approaches? Doesn't YMML alone have a couple?

No. As far as navigation aids are concerned, Australia is very much third world.

Melbourne has only just acquired a CAT II/III approach to 16. None of the other cities have better than CAT I. I guess fog doesn't happen here.

And on my simulators when autopilot is disengaged the aircraft tends to jolt. In real life how do you ensure a smooth transition? I was trying to detect when the pilot took over but it was obviously impossible to tell.

They don't jolt.

 

[markis10]

Sydney will never get a Cat III approach owing to the terrain in the case of 34 and the industrial area/road under the flight path for 16, it also does not have the real estate for holding points to standard Cat III requirements under ILS operations.

 

[harvyk]

Only a couple of decent approaches? Doesn't YMML alone have a couple?

And on my simulators when autopilot is disengaged the aircraft tends to jolt. In real life how do you ensure a smooth transition? I was trying to detect when the pilot took over but it was obviously impossible to tell.

The simulators simply switch from numbers generated by autopilot to numbers generated by the joystick completely ignoring physics... (I'm building my own simulator right now, programming code to handle autopilot is quite difficult to do it smoothly...)

 

[jb747]

Sydney will never get a Cat III approach owing to the terrain in the case of 34 and the industrial area/road under the flight path for 16, it also does not have the real estate for holding points to standard Cat III requirements under ILS operations.

Perhaps, though there is sufficient room for Cat III lighting on the approach...just not Cat II. Holding points aren't as much of a problem if you only allow arrivals.

I think the real issue is one of desire. These aids cost money, and nobody is interested in paying for them. Certainly the owners of the airports aren't...they obviously think there's more money in car parking. On top of that, I suspect that about 10 years ago, they listened to somebody peddling the idea that ILS would be superceded by GPS based approaches. And whilst they now exist, and some aircraft (A380) can do them, they aren't approved to anywhere near the levels (Sydney had one with a minima of 2000') required to be useful. Basically, I think the Australian authorities (whoever actually looks after the aids) have procrastinated in the hope that the need would go away. In the meantime the expense and inconvenience has been something that was someone else's problem.