Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

On the Flightradar24 site I've noticed that on a few occasions the U.S. leg (LAX-JFK) of QF11 is being flown by an A380. Is this true? I thought that this route was exclusively flown on the 747. Perhaps it's an error on their end.

Again, thanks for all of the info!

11 & 12 is almost always an A380.

 

[jb747]

I actually forgot to mention that. One thing that was done as part of the training was a takeoff run and then abort with canopy open and someone standing on the wing. :shock::shock::shock::shock:

"Send Bloggs, he's expendable..."

 

[RAM]

Perhaps amazing...but some of the cabin crew have probably never even set foot in the coughpit. 99 times out of a hundred, if a seat is offered, it won't be taken up.

Or perhaps its because they:

• know who's flying; or
• would prefer not to know what really happens - just in case!

 

[RAM]

The performance figures often give answers of well over 600 tonnes. Apparently the wing was designed for the (at this stage) stillborn -900 model, so yes, you could do a stretch without changing the wing.

I could not find the transcript of an Airbus call about it that I sat in on a few years back (said they could stretch the plane 2x the proposed 900 length added without changing the wing size or support) but this article from AusBT is worth a read.

Supersizing the superjumbo: Airbus says 1,000 seat A380 due 2020 - Australian Business Traveller

Makes you wonder what the additional fuel burn would be compared to if the A380-800 had not been designed as a 'one size' fits all.

 

[RooFlyer]

In the recent Indonesian volcanic ash episode, we saw some airlines resuming flying whilst others kept their flights grounded (OK - I'm relying on media reports :-| ).

I'd never mind an airline I planned to fly on taking a conservative approach and I assume the difference in approach (so to speak) was due to differing internal risk assessment protocols.

Would this be right, or other reason(s), such as their National license/regulator requirements (eg CASA etc for Virgin / Jetstar)?

Do some airlines have better in-house or contract abilities to assess the particular volcanic ash issue occurring at the time, compared to maybe smaller ones which might apply more generic 'models' (meaning to me, coarser safety margins)? I've looked from time to time at the Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre bulletins and published models and they often do have pretty wide included error margins (not a criticism, just an observation).

 

[jb747]

In the recent Indonesian volcanic ash episode, we saw some airlines resuming flying whilst others kept their flights grounded (OK - I'm relying on media reports :-| ).

I'd never mind an airline I planned to fly on taking a conservative approach and I assume the difference in approach (so to speak) was due to differing internal risk assessment protocols.

Would this be right, or other reason(s), such as their National license/regulator requirements (eg CASA etc for Virgin / Jetstar)?

Do some airlines have better in-house or contract abilities to assess the particular volcanic ash issue occurring at the time, compared to maybe smaller ones which might apply more generic 'models' (meaning to me, coarser safety margins)? I've looked from time to time at the Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre bulletins and published models and they often do have pretty wide included error margins (not a criticism, just an observation).

Without having access to their operational control systems, it's very hard to make an assessment of just how real any airline's risk assessment program is. Looking at the examples of the last couple of years though, it always seems to me that the ones who are first to fly and last to stop are those that strike me as not having a strong operational imperative.

Of course any "risk assessment" system is always a bit of a laughing matter to the pilots. What it really means is that "we'll do the assessment, and you take the risk". MBA double talk...

There are a couple of reasons that the Indonesian airlines might have been able to operate a bit longer than others. Mainly they are not flying from far away, so they don't need to be making their go/no go calls 10 hours out (look at the ANZ flight that returned to Auckland from near Alice Springs). They can also fit many more of these shorter flights in during the hours of daylight. Operations at night are not something I'd be contemplating.

For Australian operators, Darwin isn't much of a choice, because it has very limited facilities at this time of year (peak season), and all other flights are a substantial duration.

Airlines that have seen the effects of the dust first hand are also much more likely to keep away. Strident calls to operate in the dust simply smack of ignorance of the effects.

 

[sjd]

Was thinking back to some spectacular flying above a lightning storm on an evening CNS to BNE flight a couple of years ago and I thought that you pilots must see stuff like this all the time. What is the most striking or unusual weather you have experienced or seen outside your coughpit window?

 

[knasty]

In relation to go around, if F/O is flying and calls a go around but the Captain thinks landing is possible will the Captain ever take the controls, or is it a case of if either calls go around it is done? Thanks.

 

[flychrisfly]

Do the tails of big jets swing left when taxiing right or is there sufficient forward motion or a small enough maximum turn angle for this not to happen? Cheers

 

[A100]

Jb, what do you think of this video showing a 747 takeoff on a short runway. Presumably there is little (no) margin for error given he's rotating at close to the threshold of the runway.

http://youtu.be/eu91oZ2_Vag

 

[Fruitcake]

In relation to go around, if F/O is flying and calls a go around but the Captain thinks landing is possible will the Captain ever take the controls, or is it a case of if either calls go around it is done? Thanks.

Your question will be better answered by on of the pilots here with multi crew experience, but in the meantime the accident reports on QF1 in Bangkok and SWA345 at LaGuardia (amongst many others over the years) might be relevant to your interests.

 

[jb747]

Was thinking back to some spectacular flying above a lightning storm on an evening CNS to BNE flight a couple of years ago and I thought that you pilots must see stuff like this all the time. What is the most striking or unusual weather you have experienced or seen outside your coughpit window?

You see lightning a lot..generally from as far away as possible. Probably the thing that most passengers don't expect, is that we get our own personal lightning displays on the windscreen glass. The aircraft carries an enormous static charge, and this sometimes shows up as St Elmo's fire.

There is a picture of it here....St. Elmo's Fire - Large Preview - AirTeamImages.com

 

[jb747]

In relation to go around, if F/O is flying and calls a go around but the Captain thinks landing is possible will the Captain ever take the controls, or is it a case of if either calls go around it is done? Thanks.

Ah...this one comes up every now and then. Generally, if the FO is flying, and initiates a go around, there is only a very small window in which it's even possible to abort the abort. If the conditions are such that a go around is likely, then perhaps the FO shouldn't be flying in the first place.

If the Captain is flying and is called by the FO as being "outside limits", or "minima, no contact", then it's a mandatory go around. If the Captain says "go around", then it's an order, not a suggestion.

It's always the Captain's aircraft, and he is entitled to take it back from the FO at any time he chooses.

 

[jb747]

Do the tails of big jets swing left when taxiing right or is there sufficient forward motion or a small enough maximum turn angle for this not to happen?

Substantially.

The dynamics of taxying a large aircraft require careful thought. For instance we don't normally do turns with the nose gear anywhere near the guidance line, but go well beyond it to try to keep the centre of the aircraft over the line. If you don't the wing gear has a nasty habit of ending up on the green stuff.

A factor that you won't have considered is that when you turn, the wingspan effectively 'grows'. If you turn hard away from something, the opposite wing will move out...12-15 feet. It's caused by the turn cancelling some of the wing sweep.

 

[jb747]

Your question will be better answered by on of the pilots here with multi crew experience, but in the meantime the accident reports on QF1 in Bangkok and SWA345 at LaGuardia (amongst many others over the years) might be relevant to your interests.

And that's the problem with answering a query if you don't happen to be one of the pilots. Whilst mishandled go arounds and changes of control have been implicated in many events over the years, there are times when they are the best choice. But, done properly, they don't result in incident reports, so you never hear about them.

It's like any pilot error event. There's always a chorus demanding pilots be replaced with automation. The problem there is that there are numerous events every day where pilots save the aircraft from the effects of automation...but again, a save is just a normal day, and doesn't result in a report.

 

[mjt57]

JB, that nasty video of MH17 was released today. The tasteless of it aside, in the comments sections many were decrying the airline asking why they were overflying a warzone in the first place.

Is this a valid question? Was MH17 on a normal cleared track? Also, there are comments which point the finger at The Ukraine's ATC service. What were other airlines doing during that period?

 

[Kc4334]

Good evening JB or what ever Timezone your currently in.

Just looking at flightradar24 and I saw that a flight was going from Sydney to Vegas. The flight number was 6031 and I'm pretty sure that means it was a ferry flight but why was it going there in the first place.

Regards

 

[TomVexille]

Good evening JB or what ever Timezone your currently in.

Just looking at flightradar24 and I saw that a flight was going from Sydney to Vegas. The flight number was 6031 and I'm pretty sure that means it was a ferry flight but why was it going there in the first place.

Regards

Actually a Flight Centre charter for their annual staff party (for top staff)

 

[AviationNZ]

Good evening JB or what ever Timezone your currently in.

Just looking at flightradar24 and I saw that a flight was going from Sydney to Vegas. The flight number was 6031 and I'm pretty sure that means it was a ferry flight but why was it going there in the first place.

Regards

Actually a Flight Centre charter for their annual staff party (for top staff)

Same with NZ1954 ex BNE this morning, Flight Centre charter heading to LAS.

 

[jb747]

Just looking at flightradar24 and I saw that a flight was going from Sydney to Vegas. The flight number was 6031 and I'm pretty sure that means it was a ferry flight but why was it going there in the first place.

The 6000 numbers are used for all sort of things. Ferries, charters....anything that can't take a standard number.

As to why. No idea. There are lots of 'odds and sods' flights throughout the year. It's a big company, and I don't follow what goes on outside of my fleet.

Well, as we've heard above...party in Vegas this weekend.