Ask The Pilot

[Ansett]

HLO = Hand Luggage Only No checked Luggage

 

[jb747]

HLO = Hand Luggage Only No checked Luggage

I've seen people attempt to bring washing machines on as hand luggage.

 

[petercr]

This begs the question of where the heck did they expect to put it in the cabin? (and it would have probably cost more in excess luggage charges than it would be worth)

 

[jb747]

This begs the question of where the heck did they expect to put it in the cabin? (and what did they

I have no idea what they actually thought would happen. I presume they thought it would go to the hold, and they would avoid having to pay excess. The departure/arrival pair was notorious for similar hand luggage.

As far as I know it's still where I told the staff to place it....

 

[mjt57]

I've seen people attempt to bring washing machines on as hand luggage.

Probably mentioned it before. Cathay Pacific, HKG - Manilla. Locals bringing on anything that could be carried, basically. One guy had a canoe of all things...

This was back in 1981, mind you...

 

[Quickstatus]

A rough rule of thumb (that works for the 767/747/380), is that any additional fuel will be totally burnt in 24 hours. So, stick an extra 1,000 kgs on, and on a 15 hour flight, 625kgs will disappear, just to carry that additional weight.

So, assuming the same rough relationship on a smaller aircraft, on a 90 minute flight, if every passenger carried 2kgs less, and you've got 150 passengers, then potentially you'd save 150*2 kgs * (1.5/24) = 18.75 kgs of fuel. At .7 kgs/litre, that's 26.7 litres. On an individual flight, it's trivia, but on a fleet of aircraft, with reasonable usage, it turns into millions over a year.

Other things come into play too. On the 94, you are almost always up against the maximum structural weight at take off. So, it doesn't matter what the requirements are at the other end, you can't accommodate them by putting more fuel on. The choices are then between taking load off (and replacing it with fuel), or living with what you have, and planning for a diversion, whilst hoping the weather improves enough to make it unnecessary.

Hi JB747

So 484 passengers on QF94 or QF8 carried 2 kg less would save 650 kg fuel. How much extra time would this give a 94 in 1) cruise, 2) holding pattern over destination?

Does QF8 necessarily carry less freight to accomodate more fuel than QF94?

How much fuel did your aircraft burn on your last east bound transpacific flight? I have been told that flying is more fuel efficient on a per passenger km basis than a 4x4 going up the Hume or pacific Highway.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

JB747 - took the QF17 service on 17/5 from SYD to LAX. We arrived nearly 45 minutes early courtesy of some strong tailwinds over the Pacific which had our ground speed up over 1200 km/h with a flight time of around 12hr 15min. We landed on 25L and held on the taxiway between 25L and 25R for a few minutes. Normally the taxi from 25L to gates at TBIT is relatively short. However this time we taxied over to the remote stand over the other side of the field which are closer to 24L/06R. One of the pilots came on the PA and apologised for the company using the remote stand and the bus to immigration. I also noticed that QF95 from Melbourne also came into a remote stand about 20 minutes after our arrival. A couple of questions for you:
- Are early arrivals into airports such as LAX more of a pain than a bonus for the company from an operational perspective (i.e. the planned arrival gate is currently occupied so have to use a remote stand with potentially additional costs)
- Are you made aware of the gate you will use for the arrival (via ACARS) prior to landing or do you wait until your on the ground to contact the company and get the gate details?
- On taxiing up to the remote stand the engines were shutdown short of the stand and we were towed to the stand. Is this because the remote stands are not set up for visual guidance for multiple aircraft types?
- If you are departing from a remote stand do you add additional time to potentials delays in departure due to passengers having to be bussed to the stand?


Thanks in advance.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

JB - I have a 14 year old son who is passionate about flying. He is currently in Year 9 and in his spare time works odd jobs and saves his money to do flying lessons at Bankstown. He currently has 12 hrs and looking to do his first solo by the time he turns 15. He is currently looking to continue his studies and flying in GA and like thousands of other kids in a similar situation will then try to enter the airlines via GA. I've suggested to him that he should take a look at the services (Air Force, Navy, Army, etc) and look to build experience this way then potentially look to move across to the airlines later on. I've also suggested he should look at developing another skill (Finance, IT, etc) that he could fall back if the airline industry tanked.

Without getting into a GA vs Services discussion do you have any recommendations / thoughts on what environment would provide the more relevant / higher quality learning experience and what experience would be more relevant to airlines in the next 10-15 years. I was reading in the US media earlier today where they said the forecast demand for qualified pilots will outstrip supply in 10 years time...

Thanks in advance.

 

[clazman]

For what it is worth, we have Aviation as a year 11 and 12 course in WA, part of the course is access to reduced flying lesson costs.

If i remember correctly I paid $30 per hour in 1985 and was about 50% of the standard rate

 

[sydstar]

Apologies if this one has been asked before...

Was on a QF 738 into MEL the other day and the CSM advised that all electronic devices had to be completely turned off (not flight mode) at the request of the captain as they were doing an auto land into MEL. It was mentioned that an auto land has to be undertaken after every (X) sectors?

Are the mechanics of an auto land as simple as it really sounds to the layman? Is there any risk that a flight mode device could interfere or is it more of a general CASA/QF precaution?

 

[Mogul]

JB - I have a 14 year old son who is passionate about flying. He is currently in Year 9 and in his spare time works odd jobs and saves his money to do flying lessons at Bankstown. He currently has 12 hrs and looking to do his first solo by the time he turns 15. He is currently looking to continue his studies and flying in GA and like thousands of other kids in a similar situation will then try to enter the airlines via GA. I've suggested to him that he should take a look at the services (Air Force, Navy, Army, etc) and look to build experience this way then potentially look to move across to the airlines later on. I've also suggested he should look at developing another skill (Finance, IT, etc) that he could fall back if the airline industry tanked.

Without getting into a GA vs Services discussion do you have any recommendations / thoughts on what environment would provide the more relevant / higher quality learning experience and what experience would be more relevant to airlines in the next 10-15 years. I was reading in the US media earlier today where they said the forecast demand for qualified pilots will outstrip supply in 10 years time...

Thanks in advance.

Have a look at the Airforce Cadets.

 

[Flashback]

For what it is worth, we have Aviation as a year 11 and 12 course in WA, part of the course is access to reduced flying lesson costs.

If i remember correctly I paid $30 per hour in 1985 and was about 50% of the standard rate

Home - Kent Street Senior High School ?

 

[alieninperth]

just going OT for a minute. holy s**t, that cough***g awesome. Am I too old to re-enrol in high school

Now back on topic. What are the collective thoughts on the near miss and aborted landing at BHX recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUMmqp7Ts0&feature=player_embedded (EK777 aborts landing at 200ft following small aircraft incursion/take off).

 

[por930]

just going OT for a minute. holy s**t, that cough***g awesome. Am I too old to re-enrol in high school

Now back on topic. What are the collective thoughts on the near miss and aborted landing at BHX recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUMmqp7Ts0&feature=player_embedded (EK777 aborts landing at 200ft following small aircraft incursion/take off).

OOPS......I don't think it would be an incursion, but more the tower got it wrong for estimating the approach speed of the 777 and the timing of the aircraft lining up and taking off.

 

[jb747]

- Are early arrivals into airports such as LAX more of a pain than a bonus for the company from an operational perspective (i.e. the planned arrival gate is currently occupied so have to use a remote stand with potentially additional costs)

Early arrivals can be as much of a pain as late ones. Some places use pre allocated slots to control aircraft movement, and arrive too early and you could easily end up circling until your planned ETA. Even worse, if said holding then forces a diversion. Australia is guilty of this.

Beyond that though, gates may not be available. Even when on time you often have to wait for someone to leave your gate. At LAX, there are limitations imposed by customs/immigration, who are not available at all before 6am, so arrive before that, and you won't even be allowed to open the doors. They also impose limits on how many of our aircraft can be processed at once, which is another reason you may not be allowed to disembark for quite some while.

- Are you made aware of the gate you will use for the arrival (via ACARS) prior to landing or do you wait until your on the ground to contact the company and get the gate details?

Generally we find out on ACARs before landing. In many places though, we will also call at around top of descent, to see if anything has changed. In London, when you flick over to ground (ATC), you may also be advised of a change.

- On taxiing up to the remote stand the engines were shutdown short of the stand and we were towed to the stand. Is this because the remote stands are not set up for visual guidance for multiple aircraft types?

If there's no guidance, you can be marshalled in most places. Tow-ins normally happen if jet blast will be an issue, or if there is a tight turn involved.

- If you are departing from a remote stand do you add additional time to potentials delays in departure due to passengers having to be bussed to the stand?

You'll be late. The crew will turn up one hour before the planned departure time, and passengers can't really be 'brought forward'. In any event, even the company is unlikely to know what stand will be used until about 90 minutes before departure. Many times I've arrived at 'my' gate, and had to wait for the preceding aircraft to leave.

 

[jb747]

So 484 passengers on QF94 or QF8 carried 2 kg less would save 650 kg fuel. How much extra time would this give a 94 in 1) cruise, 2) holding pattern over destination?

Not much. About 4 minutes in the cruise, and a bit under 5 in a holding pattern. Where it would be useful though is if I'm approaching a fuel decision (i.e. continue past Sydney to Melbourne). These figures are black and white, you either have what you require, or you don't. 600kgs that puts you on the good side of the line is nice.

Does QF8 necessarily carry less freight to accomodate more fuel than QF94?

QF94 almost always departs LA right on the max weight. That same limit applies to QF8, but he needs another 10 tonnes of fuel. That weight has to come out of payload, be it passengers or freight, or a mix.

How much fuel did your aircraft burn on your last east bound transpacific flight? I have been told that flying is more fuel efficient on a per passenger km basis than a 4x4 going up the Hume or pacific Highway.

Fuel consumption is roughly the same as a person in a car achieving 4lts/100 kms per passenger. So, given that most cars carry two people (a fact I just made up), that would be the same as getting 8lt/100 km in your car....which would seem a pretty reasonable result.
The bonus is that you are travelling at ten times the speed. That SUV would probably need to be carrying 3 or 4 people to match the consumption.

 

[jb747]

JB - I have a 14 year old son who is passionate about flying. He is currently in Year 9 and in his spare time works odd jobs and saves his money to do flying lessons at Bankstown. He currently has 12 hrs and looking to do his first solo by the time he turns 15. He is currently looking to continue his studies and flying in GA and like thousands of other kids in a similar situation will then try to enter the airlines via GA. I've suggested to him that he should take a look at the services (Air Force, Navy, Army, etc) and look to build experience this way then potentially look to move across to the airlines later on. I've also suggested he should look at developing another skill (Finance, IT, etc) that he could fall back if the airline industry tanked.

Become a banker, and buy an aircraft for fun on the weekend. I can't see the sort of career that I've had being available in a world in which pilots are becoming consumables. I wouldn't recommend it to my son. If he wants to fly, the military is the best training that money can't buy.

Without getting into a GA vs Services discussion do you have any recommendations / thoughts on what environment would provide the more relevant / higher quality learning experience and what experience would be more relevant to airlines in the next 10-15 years. I was reading in the US media earlier today where they said the forecast demand for qualified pilots will outstrip supply in 10 years time...

The shortage has supposedly been coming for many years, and perhaps it might exist in Asia. But, it really seems to be blurb that is fed to people by flying schools that are simply trying to sell their training.

 

[jb747]

Now back on topic. What are the collective thoughts on the near miss and aborted landing at BHX recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUMmqp7Ts0&feature=player_embedded (EK777 aborts landing at 200ft following small aircraft incursion/take off).

Not a near miss at all. Whilst the controller had cut it pretty tight, that's not abnormal. I think he went around too soon. The smaller aircraft was rotating as the 777 started to go around...so, I'd have landed.

 

[Captain Halliday]

Not a near miss at all. Whilst the controller had cut it pretty tight, that's not abnormal. I think he went around too soon. The smaller aircraft was rotating as the 777 started to go around...so, I'd have landed.

Is decision height, or a company rule a factor here? Whilst we can't be sure of his altitude, the 777 must have been getting close to 200ft. Alternatively might EK have a more risk averse procedure for traffic on the runway than other companies?

Also, at what point would the metroliner reach V2? If he had aborted the TO and the 777 continued then surely the 777 wouldn't have had enough runway to stop without needing panel beating? Though only a very slight risk, could it have prompted the go around?

Finally, how late could the 777 have left the go around decision and still maintained visual separation with the metroliner?

 

[jb747]

Is decision height, or a company rule a factor here? Whilst we can't be sure of his altitude, the 777 must have been getting close to 200ft. Alternatively might EK have a more risk averse procedure for traffic on the runway than other companies?

I figured he was a bit above 200', but assume it's that. At the normal descent rate, that's still 17 seconds from touchdown. I doubt that EK nominates an altitude at which they have to go around in this sort of case. Actually, having operated in Dubai many times, if you went around this early, you'd never get a landing in.

Also, at what point would the metroliner reach V2? If he had aborted the TO and the 777 continued then surely the 777 wouldn't have had enough runway to stop without needing panel beating? Though only a very slight risk, could it have prompted the go around?

I think you mean V1. He's into the rotate, so he's well past that, and rather closer to V2. Nevertheless, if he were to suddenly abort, the 777 still has that 17 seconds. He can go around right down to the flare.

Finally, how late could the 777 have left the go around decision and still maintained visual separation with the metroliner?

A lot later....with comfort, another 100 feet. But, he would not have had visual separation with the Metro in any event. With the nose 15-20º up in the air, he would not have been able to see him at all.

ATC are generally masters at juggling this sort of thing. Landing clearances at as low as 100' happen every day, though they are often preceded by a call of 'expect late clearance'.