Ask The Pilot

[Boris spatsky]

A question I have, right now here in CBR there is a pretty big rubbish fire (the firies are still going at it after a couple of days) nearby to the airport. I was wondering if such an event might be shown on a NOTAM (eg smoke hazard), so I did a google search for YSCB NOTAM's. The one official source I found was the US's FAA. Do you guys use the FAA for all NOTAMs, or does CASA / other countries run their own NOTAM's services?

Also when I found the NOTAM for YSCB it listed out certain waypoints / sids / stars which where unavailable but no reasons why. Do NOTAMs ever list reasons why certain things might be unavailable, or is simply a case of this star is unavailable end of story.

Thanks

1) I flew into CBR the day the fire started. First we knew of it was when we received the ATIS. The smoke was pretty bad and obscured the final approach course somewhat. NOTAMs are generally for predictable events - otherwise it goes on the ATIS or ATC issue a hazard alert

2) Our domestic MET and NOTAM package normally runs to 25 plus pages which is required to be read prior to flight. The consequence of a NOTAM is critical; the reason behind it is normally irrelevant to us

3) the FAA are merely reproducing the NOTAMs as issued by CASA. They do not issue NOTAMs for civil airports/airspace in Australia. It is much like Jeppesen approach charts; whilst they are published in America, they are simply produced from data provided by the host nation aviation authority

 

[Melburnian1]

jb747, now that the oldest QF A388 is about to turn seven, which of the airframes have you flown the most (and how many sectors) and which the least? VH-OQA was inoperable for 536 days so might that be the latter?

While the plane that you have each trip is 'random', over time number of sectors flown should in theory approach the 'Tattslotto effect' of each plane being flown by pilot X a similar number of times, but maybe (say) 66 months of flying (given some months there is recreation or other leave) is insufficient to reach such a point:

https://tatts.com/tattersalls/results/number-frequencies

And in July 2014 you said that you did not have a favourite in the fleet that you command. Is this still true, and for our other flight deck contributors such as Boris Spatsky and A330 driver (great names), do you have a plane that you like ahead of all the others in the type(s) that you fly?

 

[Boris spatsky]

And you said that you did not have a favourite in the fleet that you command. Is this still true, and for our other flight deck contributors such as Boris Spatsky and A330 driver (great names), do you have a plane that you like ahead of all the others in the type(s) that you fly?

I have one i dislike immensely because the flightdeck seat seems to be impossible to set up to my liking. I always feel too far from the controls or far too cramped.

Otherwise, they come and go. I generally dislike ones that are unserviceable (especially with recurring gremlins that can't seem to ever be fixed entirely), and i generally like ones that work most of the time!

 

[jb747]

jb747, now that the oldest QF A388 is about to turn seven, which of the airframes have you flown the most (and how many sectors) and which the least? VH-OQA was inoperable for 536 days so might that be the latter?

Most sectors (and hours) is OQB (39 sectors/393 hours). Least is almost a dead heat between OQL and OQK...both with 159 hours. 16 and 14 sectors. OQA is about half way down the list at (23/222).

While the plane that you have each trip is 'random', over time number of sectors flown should in theory approach the 'Tattslotto effect' of each plane being flown by pilot X a similar number of times, but maybe (say) 66 months of flying (given some months there is recreation or other leave) is insufficient to reach such a point:

It hasn't reached that point on any of the aircraft that I've flown. I think the sample needs to be a lot bigger.

And in July 2014 you said that you did not have a favourite in the fleet that you command. Is this still true, and for our other flight deck contributors such as Boris Spatsky and A330 driver (great names), do you have a plane that you like ahead of all the others in the type(s) that you fly?

The FBW tends to make all of the aircraft feel exactly the same. To be honest, I barely know which one I'm on. There's only a couple of small bits of info at the start of the flight that are related to the registration.

Previous types have had much more of a signature feel to them. The 747 ERs were all quite nice. 767-300s were all nicer than the -200s. There was one -200 that I did dislike..but it's now a soda can.

I don't recall the Macchis differing much, but I never flew them after their 'life of type extension'...which I'm told ruined them. The CT4 fleet contained a few that the students had been a bit too enthusiastic with, so for that reason, when I was doing the display flying, I used the same couple of aircraft as much as possible. Among the A4Gs, there was one that was the hangar queen...and on those occasions that she came out, she was also markedly slower than the others.

 

[RailFlyer]

Hi jb. Theoretically if you could fly through the exact same moderate turbulence at the same speed in both a A380 and a fighter jet would there be any difference in amount of turbulence felt in each by the pilot? What if you doubled the speed in the fighter? Does it then become somewhat of a bullet and just shrug off little bumps etc?

 

[jb747]

Hi jb. Theoretically if you could fly through the exact same moderate turbulence at the same speed in both a A380 and a fighter jet would there be any difference in amount of turbulence felt in each by the pilot?

The ride is affected by a lot of things. The wing loading (weight per square foot). Efficiency of the wing design. Sweep. Rigidity of the wing structure. Presence of any turbulence reduction systems in the flight controls.

Some fighters have very high wing loadings, and pretty inefficient wing designs (they are optimised for high speed flight), and so I'd expect they would be less affected...but they are extremely rigid structures, and so would transfer all of the jolts to the fuselage. On the other hand, whilst still being very rigid, aircraft like the F15/F18 have efficient wing shapes, and their loadings are about the same as an airliner. Their pilots don't have passengers to consider either. Upshot is that it would vary.

What if you doubled the speed in the fighter? Does it then become somewhat of a bullet and just shrug off little bumps etc?

In the A380 there is a very limited range of speeds available for flight in turbulence. Basically the normal cruise, to about - 15 knots. If you double the speed of your fighter, I guess you'd end up both magnifying the effect of the bumps ('cos lift is related to speed squared), and their frequency. So it would be more than twice as bad.

Actually a bullet doesn't shrug off all of the bumps....they help explain why you miss.

 

[Ansett]

Hi JB

Wondering if you will be doing QF9 MEL-LHR on the 2nd September?

 

[jb747]

Hi JB

Wondering if you will be doing QF9 MEL-LHR on the 2nd September?

Not rostered yet. Won't be until around August 14th.

 

[Ansett]

Not rostered yet. Won't be until around August 14th.

Thanks jb hope to say hi if you indeed end up flying us over.

 

[raleyoz]

Hi AFF pilots
i have several questions that i would love to know, as i have NO pilot experience

1. considering a full flight from SYD to LAX, max load, i would like to know at cruising altitude how hard the engines are working, if take off could be considered 100%, what percentage would the engines be working to stay up in the air and meet the 14 hour schedule

2. when coming into land, are we under power or effectively gliding our way down?

3. assuming you are flying a 777 and 1 engine is out, coming into land , can you use the reverse thrust, and if you can, will it pull towards the one side?

4. when coming into landing and lets say stormy conditions, is the coughpit a:cool, calm and collected. b:Tense and underpressure, cilots yelling and cough going everywhere ( sort of like my car with my 4 daughters)

5.when coming into land at 5 am into Adelaide the other morning , which i thought was outside curfew (obviously not), can the ATC , advise on the landing request to pilots , such as use reverse thrusting to minimum, try and keep the noise down, long roll out etc.

Questions from the back seat, and a very tired mind

Thanks in advance
Raleyoz

 

[waimate01]

Travelled QF129 SYD-PVG last week with a scheduled 9:30 departure. At 9:00 the customs people walked off while we still had 30 people not yet on the plane. We ended up pushing back 60 minutes late, and everybody managed to come along to Shanghai that day.

My question is, how is the decision made to wait? What are the parameters, and who makes the decision?

I was surprised the carrier was so willing to accommodate tardy passengers (who really should have been well through customs by then anyway). Presumably cost-minimisation is a main factor, but I would have thought having an unproductive aircraft for an hour tying up a gate would be significant, and conversely the airline would have no obligation to compensate those who would have missed it.

 

[jb747]

1. considering a full flight from SYD to LAX, max load, i would like to know at cruising altitude how hard the engines are working, if take off could be considered 100%, what percentage would the engines be working to stay up in the air and meet the 14 hour schedule .

Take off thrust is calculated every time. The A380 could use as little as 67% of the possible thrust, right up to 100%. It will vary with weight, temperature, and wind (specifically the headwind component). So, your suggested take off out of Sydney would probably be at around the 90% level.

In the cruise, that power figure would initially be about 85%. The engines are making a lot less thrust at altitude, but it's still 85% of the possible. As the aircraft burns off fuel and becomes lighter, a series of step climbs will happen, but that 85% will be the initial power figure at each level.

2. when coming into land, are we under power or effectively gliding our way down?

From the start of the descent, the power will be at idle. On the approach, with landing gear and flap out, it will be (about) 23%.

3. assuming you are flying a 777 and 1 engine is out, coming into land , can you use the reverse thrust, and if you can, will it pull towards the one side?

Even though it has four engines, the A380, only has reverse on the inners.

You use whatever reverse is available. There will be a slight pull to one side, but it is very easily countered.

4. when coming into landing and lets say stormy conditions, is the coughpit a:cool, calm and collected. b:Tense and underpressure, cilots yelling and cough going everywhere ( sort of like my car with my 4 daughters)

I think you would be surprised at how calm it is. Very little is said.

5.when coming into land at 5 am into Adelaide the other morning , which i thought was outside curfew (obviously not), can the ATC , advise on the landing request to pilots , such as use reverse thrusting to minimum, try and keep the noise down, long roll out etc.

Operations in the 'shoulder' periods have their own rules, and generally the use of idle reverse is mandated. ATC would never ask for it, nor anything else...that's the pilots' job.

 

[jb747]

Travelled QF129 SYD-PVG last week with a scheduled 9:30 departure. At 9:00 the customs people walked off while we still had 30 people not yet on the plane. We ended up pushing back 60 minutes late, and everybody managed to come along to Shanghai that day.

My question is, how is the decision made to wait? What are the parameters, and who makes the decision?

Varies a bit depending upon where you are. It will involve IOC (ops control) who are supposed to have the big picture, the airport manager, and the Captain.

I was surprised the carrier was so willing to accommodate tardy passengers (who really should have been well through customs by then anyway). Presumably cost-minimisation is a main factor, but I would have thought having an unproductive aircraft for an hour tying up a gate would be significant, and conversely the airline would have no obligation to compensate those who would have missed it.

They would have had luggage on board, so you've already got about a 30 minute delay to remove that. It's quite possible that the delay would be contained to the one flight, so that will factor into the decision.

There was once a Captain, sadly long gone, who would never wait for passengers who were late by choice (you know who you are). He would have the doors closed, and bridge(s) removed, and then go whenever the luggage was found. If the passenger turned up...he got to watch his aircraft go. Must admit that I've always thought that if we all did that, across the entire industry, it would fix a few issues.

 

[waimate01]

Thanks for your answer, jb.

Also on the same flight, I thought the route was quite curious. We pretty much headed to HKG, then turned 90 degrees right and flew along the coast to PVG. It was almost as though there'd be a problem overflying Taiwan, and really looked like going the long way. Similar deal on the way back, except we stayed north. Is this weather or politics?

 

[raleyoz]

Thanks as well jb

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Travelled QF129 SYD-PVG last week with a scheduled 9:30 departure. At 9:00 the customs people walked off while we still had 30 people not yet on the plane. We ended up pushing back 60 minutes late, and everybody managed to come along to Shanghai that day.

...

I was surprised the carrier was so willing to accommodate tardy passengers (who really should have been well through customs by then anyway).

Qantas routinely offers domestic connections to shanghai, and other cites, with as little as one hour transit in sydney. You know for certain that none of these 'tardy passengers' were domestic connections? with domestic flights that arrived into SYD bang on time?

If I was on an airline sanctioned connection, I'd expect the plane to be held as long as reasonably possible. Cost to the airline is irrelevant from my passenger perspective, as long as I'm moving as quick as I can to make the connection (eg not stopping to buy duty free etc etc)

 

[waimate01]

Qantas routinely offers domestic connections to shanghai, and other cites, with as little as one hour transit in sydney. You know for certain that none of these 'tardy passengers' were domestic connections? with domestic flights that arrived into SYD bang on time?

We were told about half of them were connecting.

 

[opusman]

It certainly wouldn't have looked good for QF if they left 30 pax behind considering the customs strike was announced well in advance.

 

[flychrisfly]

Most sectors (and hours) is OQB (39 sectors/393 hours). Least is almost a dead heat between OQL and OQK...both with 159 hours. 16 and 14 sectors. OQA is about half way down the list at (23/222).

Huh?! 39 sectors in 7 years doesn't sound quite right... that's only 5 and a bit per year!! Even over 1 year it still sounds waaaay too low! I am assuming 1 sector = 1 cycle = 1 takeoff + 1 landing?

 

[Alanslegal]

There was once a Captain, sadly long gone, who would never wait for passengers who were late by choice (you know who you are). He would have the doors closed, and bridge(s) removed, and then go whenever the luggage was found. If the passenger turned up...he got to watch his aircraft go. Must admit that I've always thought that if we all did that, across the entire industry, it would fix a few issues.

I like his style. Yes it might take a while to offload the late passengers luggage (and if they saw it happen - good punishment I say) and causes more work for ground staff etc but late is late. On the plus side, the slight delay and now empty seats due to the offloaded passengers might mean a few other passengers will get a little bonus spare seat next to them, or those in F a little bit more champagne