Ask The Pilot

[Major]

ZQN is an interesting location for Aircraft Ops. Last month just before departure for BNE the Captain announced that the FO would be flying the sector. He would do the takeoff and then handover to the FO.

Is the Captain required to perform all takeoffs and landings at ZQN ?

 

[welltravelled]

There are restrictions on ops in/out of Queenstown, however they may vary between operators.
I never flew in/out of there when on the Boeing but I do recall doing a briefing package for it and there may have been the captain only restriction.
Similarly, we had/have these restrictions on 30 metre strips like Sunshine Coast etc, not sure if still in place as my current type cannot operate into them!
Last airline had no such restrictions!

 

[Boris spatsky]

Yep, we have captain only landings at a number of ports (short/narrow/terrain).

 

[por930]

Yep, we have captain only landings/takeoffs at a number of ports (short/narrow/terrain).

Appreciate the requirement for captain only landings, but, when do you as first officer's get to experience these landings/takeoffs, otherwise how do you ever attain the "real" experience. When you eventually become a captain, does this rank magically give you the ability. I guess it is presumed by the time you qualify as a captain you will have the better experience as a pilot to carry out such procedures.

In this case, when you become a captain, do you initially fly with a check captain to these ports with short/narrow or terrain issues for a period of time?

 

[jb747]

How does this current LA hotel compare the the last one?

There are a number of LA hotels. The last one used regularly by the pilots was good. The cabin crew use the Anaheim, and a number of hotels in Costa Mesa. The CM places are all perfectly ok, without being flash, and would be good choices.

 

[jb747]

JB What do you mean? Do they take leave from QF and rock up to do some casual part time work elsewhere?? So they can earn a bit of dosh on the side??Is this legal? How would they manage it?

They take 3-5 year contracts with other airlines. It's ok with the company, especially at a time when they've been trying to reduce the number of pilots.

 

[jb747]

Appreciate the requirement for captain only landings, but, when do you as first officer's get to experience these landings/takeoffs, otherwise how do you ever attain the "real" experience. When you eventually become a captain, does this rank magically give you the ability. I guess it is presumed by the time you qualify as a captain you will have the better experience as a pilot to carry out such procedures.

In this case, when you become a captain, do you initially fly with a check captain to these ports with short/narrow or terrain issues for a period of time?

Again it will vary with airlines, but in many cases they may include these places during the command training. Others may remain restricted, even amongst the captains. For instance, the old Hong Kong was mandatory during the period I did my command training, although there were no restrictions on FOs operating there normally.

 

[Awesom Andy]

For instance, the old Hong Kong was mandatory during the period I did my command training, although there were no restrictions on FOs operating there normally.

For this type of cases, would restrictions only apply to specific approaches or would they be for the whole airport (regardless of whether some approaches may not have the same level of difficulty)?

 

[ABC1]

There are a number of LA hotels. The last one used regularly by the pilots was good. The cabin crew use the Anaheim, and a number of hotels in Costa Mesa. The CM places are all perfectly ok, without being flash, and would be good choices.

The Crowne Plaza at Redondo use to be a good one.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

There are a number of LA hotels. The last one used regularly by the pilots was good. The cabin crew use the Anaheim, and a number of hotels in Costa Mesa. The CM places are all perfectly ok, without being flash, and would be good choices.

I spend 3-4 nights every 6-8 weeks and the Hilton Orange County and regularly run into the cabin crew off QF17/18. The company I work for is based in Costa Mesa. Apart from renovations of their hotel foyer last year it is relatively quiet during the day and night. The hotel seems to be flexible in keeping the restaurant / facilities open for the QF18 crew returning to the hotel after their JFK-LAX sector which has them arriving into the hotel anytime between 11:00pm-2:00am depending on the delays in JFK. Emirates crew also stay at this hotel....

 

[jb747]

For this type of cases, would restrictions only apply to specific approaches or would they be for the whole airport (regardless of whether some approaches may not have the same level of difficulty)?

There were no company restrictions on the FOs operating any of the approaches, but the 747 captains very rarely gave away one of the IGS approaches. Conversely, the 767 guys flew there so often that everybody got to do that particular approach on a regular basis.

Restrictions are at the whim of the company/fleet manager, so there can be just about any variation you care to think of. For a while recently, the approach over Essendon onto 34 at Tullamarine was banned for the 747 and 380, even though both had been doing them for years. It's not a good approach to be flying after a long sector, and the ban was a reaction to another airline's incident during one. That has since been rescinded, but most of the time the crews won't accept it anyway. Manila has no restrictions for operation by the 747/330, whilst the 380 can be landed by either captain or FO, but must be taxied by the captain (though it only goes there after ferry flights to Lufthansa Technik).

 

[Dmac6345]

There were no company restrictions on the FOs operating any of the approaches, but the 747 captains very rarely gave away one of the IGS approaches. Conversely, the 767 guys flew there so often that everybody got to do that particular approach on a regular basis.

Restrictions are at the whim of the company/fleet manager, so there can be just about any variation you care to think of. For a while recently, the approach over Essendon onto 34 at Tullamarine was banned for the 747 and 380, even though both had been doing them for years. It's not a good approach to be flying after a long sector, and the ban was a reaction to another airline's incident during one. That has since been rescinded, but most of the time the crews won't accept it anyway. Manila has no restrictions for operation by the 747/330, whilst the 380 can be landed by either captain or FO, but must be taxied by the captain (though it only goes there after ferry flights to Lufthansa Technik).

The approach over Essendon onto 34 is fantastic. Throw a little bit of fog into the mix on an A380 and I loved it. Heading out of Melbourne so often I have noticed that most of the inbound aircraft to Rwy 34 make that r/h turn almost over the City. Is it safer than doing a low r/h turn approach?

 

[jb747]

The approach over Essendon onto 34 is fantastic. Throw a little bit of fog into the mix on an A380 and I loved it. Heading out of Melbourne so often I have noticed that most of the inbound aircraft to Rwy 34 make that r/h turn almost over the City. Is it safer than doing a low r/h turn approach?

Throw some fog into the mix and the only runway that you can use in Melbourne is 16!

The longer approach is much safer, and allows the aircraft to establish themselves on to a GPS based straight in approach. It allows a constant approach angle from 10 miles or so, and in most aircraft can be flown in a similar manner to an ILS. At this stage the minima is no better than a VOR approach, but presumably this will be reduced at some stage (as it has been elsewhere).

The arrival over Essendon places the aircraft high as you pass over the airfield, and requires a greater than usual rate of descent on the base leg. This flies in opposition to the world wide trend towards making approaches with a constant descent angle. It's also only viable with a cloud base of greater than 2,500 feet, and becomes quite limiting if the wind has any easterly component. Whilst a reasonable enough arrival for the domestic blokes to be flying, 'cos they do it day in and out, it's a very poor choice for an international crew who are at the end of a 15 hour sector.

 

[welltravelled]

Command trainees get the opportunity to operate into some of these ports during their upgrade line training, can sprout a few grey hairs for the training captain in the right hand seat!, but generally is ok.
When I did my training captain approval I had to operate in the RHS into/out of Maroochy, having done it many many times in the former life I was familiar with the strip, biggest problem there is the X wind and the visibility when it is pouring rain, no precision approach to get you low enough to see the runway. So with a new trainee, in bad weather and a screaming easterly, these can all increase the workload immensely, as with plenty of other ports, like ZQN, VLA, BNK etc

 

[welltravelled]

I seem to recall a while back reading a NOTAM or CASA publication that the 34 approach from Sheed/ via O/Head Essendon was not available to "non Australian" international operators any longer.
I know we no longer accept it for the B777, have I done it in the 330 but as you correctly state with a quartering East/North Easterly can become challenging.
With all the FDAP recording these days, it isn't worth the angst!

 

[Julesmac]

The approach over Essendon onto 34 is fantastic. Throw a little bit of fog into the mix on an A380 and I loved it. Heading out of Melbourne so often I have noticed that most of the inbound aircraft to Rwy 34 make that r/h turn almost over the City. Is it safer than doing a low r/h turn approach?

I've noticed that some days later in the week, and in the mornings,aircraft seem to fly low over the city from the SE suburbs (I live in East Malvern) and do a low (it appears from the ground) sweep to the right over the city. One day we happened to be driving in on the SE freeway and had a heart stopping moment when one aircraft flew behind the Rialto - this was after 9/11 and it looked as though it was flying right into the building. But that flight path must give a fabulous view of Melbournbe

 

[AVC]

It happened again today (well, I saw it again).
Parramatta. Twin engine, climbing, heading west, wheels still out.
They retracted as I watched it go over.
In case JB (or other airline pilots) isn't familiar, we're about 25km or so from SYD.

Don't wheels normally go up earlier?
Last time I saw it, (Oct 13) the plane was out of sight with gear still down.

 

[Dmac6345]

Throw some fog into the mix and the only runway that you can use in Melbourne is 16!

The longer approach is much safer, and allows the aircraft to establish themselves on to a GPS based straight in approach. It allows a constant approach angle from 10 miles or so, and in most aircraft can be flown in a similar manner to an ILS. At this stage the minima is no better than a VOR approach, but presumably this will be reduced at some stage (as it has been elsewhere).

The arrival over Essendon places the aircraft high as you pass over the airfield, and requires a greater than usual rate of descent on the base leg. This flies in opposition to the world wide trend towards making approaches with a constant descent angle. It's also only viable with a cloud base of greater than 2,500 feet, and becomes quite limiting if the wind has any easterly component. Whilst a reasonable enough arrival for the domestic blokes to be flying, 'cos they do it day in and out, it's a very poor choice for an international crew who are at the end of a 15 hour sector.

Hi JB, it was only a little bit of fog. One morning on 94 we came in on Rwy34 and I was very surprised that I could not see a thing until crossing the threshold (hope that's what it is called) and none of the golf course until wheels on ground.

 

[jb747]

It happened again today (well, I saw it again).
Parramatta. Twin engine, climbing, heading west, wheels still out.
They retracted as I watched it go over.
In case JB (or other airline pilots) isn't familiar, we're about 25km or so from SYD.

Don't wheels normally go up earlier?
Last time I saw it, (Oct 13) the plane was out of sight with gear still down.

The landing gear is normally selected up the instant we have a positive confirmation that we are off the ground and climbing. But there are a couple of times when they'll be left out for a while. The most common is when there is a brake that has been locked out. That means that you won't have retraction braking available on that wheel, so the gear must be left extended for a time (nominated by the maker) before it can be retracted. That's to ensure that you don't retract a still spinning wheel into the bays.

It can be quite restrictive though, as the take off calculations must be done assuming that the gear won't be retracted at all. That means you must work out the engine out performance based on gear down...which will take many tonnes off the max take off weight.

 

[jb747]

Hi JB, it was only a little bit of fog. One morning on 94 we came in on Rwy34 and I was very surprised that I could not see a thing until crossing the threshold (hope that's what it is called) and none of the golf course until wheels on ground.

The only approaches on to 34 require you to be visual by about 500' agl...or just under two miles to run. Presumably the view forward was a bit better than you had.