Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

I'm sure this has been asked before, but how to you manage breaks with a 2 man crew on a 7 hour flights. Do you just informally zone out when nothing is going on for a few minutes until the radio chirps or something beeps? Or do you have periods where you hand over all responsibilities to the other pilot and go for a walk to the back of the plane or read something for a few minutes? Can't believe it is possible to concentrate (safely) without a break for 7 hours at a time, day after day, without going mad. I struggle to do 30mins work without checking to see if there is anything new on the internet which I must read for 5 mins!

What breaks?

You can stand up and stretch your legs in some coughpits. These days you need a cabin crew member to come up if you need to go to the toilet, so you certainly can't go wandering about talking to cabin crew/passengers.

Controlled rest is allowed for short periods (in the order of 20 minutes) but normally only happens at night.

Basically though, on a 7 hour flight, if you aren't in the toilet, you're in your seat.

 

[jb747]

If you choose the 'controlled rest', do you stay on the flight deck or find a seat outside, assuming you have no rest areas in the flight deck area? If on the flight deck, wouldn't the PF give you a shake?

You stay in your seat. And the PF will give you a shake, if he hasn't joined you in nodding off. For that reason, I'm not a fan of controlled rest.

Does the modern flight decks have an attention monitor? By this I mean, every 30 minutes or so, a radio used, or some control on the flight deck has to be 'changed', or a warning sound starts, eventually becoming a whoop whoop etc.

Some do. Just about anything will cancel it, so although I've tried in the past to set it off, I've never been successful.

 

[jb747]

Are there no women on the flight deck?

Well, there's female pilots if that's what you're asking. They aren't a big percentage of the pilot group though.

 

[JessicaTam]

Well, there's female pilots if that's what you're asking. They aren't a big percentage of the pilot group though.

I was just wondering (slightly tongue in cheek) as the language in this thread seems very male centric.

 

[por930]

I was just wondering (slightly tongue in cheek) as the language in this thread seems very male centric.

I thought the questions and replies were all related to what happens behind the flight deck door and explain what procedures are in place etc. I didn't consider any of the questions and answers were slanted one way or another.

 

[JessicaTam]

I thought the questions and replies were all related to what happens behind the flight deck door and explain what procedures are in place etc. I didn't consider any of the questions and answers were slanted one way or another.

Recently there have been a number of Q&A referring to '2 man' crews and the like.

 

[anat0l]

Recently there have been a number of Q&A referring to '2 man' crews and the like.

An inadvertent but very inset holdover from the progression to generally gender-inclusive language, viz. '2 person crews' or '2 member crews'.

 

[por930]

Recently there have been a number of Q&A referring to '2 man' crews and the like.

Ummm, for us old sods(oops persons) it is a bit difficult to think of the phrase when 'man' is included to think that it actually means a male, but rather a title. Police man, tradesman etc.. My speech and written expression tends to come from my upbringing and era from the 50's and 60's. That said, I agree with you and well put by anat01, we need to move on to a gender-inclusive language.

 

[Dale Eastham]

The toughest gig is when you have really young kids - the strain on the spouse is unrelenting and i don't know how they do it. We get to go to work and have fun (most days!) and they don't. I don't know how they do it.

Amen to this - it'd drive me nuts im certain.

Thanks to you Boris & to JB for the insight

 

[RooFlyer]

Would any of our pilots like to fly this airplane, after its been fixed?

 

[Boris spatsky]

You would be amazed at how much of the airframe is replaced during the life of an aircraft during deep maintenance and overhaul. If BA fix it and deem it airworthy, i'd fly it.

 

[Himeno]

You would be amazed at how much of the airframe is replaced during the life of an aircraft during deep maintenance and overhaul. If BA fix it and deem it airworthy, i'd fly it.

By the time an aircraft is around 20 years old and having its 4th or 5th D Check, how much of the original brand new airframe would still be around?

 

[jb747]

Recently there have been a number of Q&A referring to '2 man' crews and the like.

Well, I'm old and grey...so that's my excuse. I'm happy to call them two pilot if you like, though PC terms like two person won't cut it with me. Having read some recent accident reports, perhaps it's appropriate to leave out the word "pilot".

 

[jb747]

Would any of our pilots like to fly this airplane, after its been fixed?

Any repair to this aircraft will be done by Boeing, so I'd be quite happy to fly it. Having said that, I'm not convinced of the accuracy of the report about it being repaired. As Delta has just purchased a 777 airframe for under $10 million US, I'd be very surprised it any repair is economic.

 

[jb747]

By the time an aircraft is around 20 years old and having its 4th or 5th D Check, how much of the original brand new airframe would still be around?

Most of it would still be around. The structures/skin aren't changed unless there's a reason to do so.

 

[jb747]

Diversion decisions.

Every now and then I read posts in which people comment about how much fuel they think aircraft have, or alternates, or perhaps bemoaning the fact that they ended up diverting, and they subsequently found that the destination wasn't weather affected.

A recent example of how things can play out.

Flying from LA to MEL. On departure Melbourne had no weather requirements, and the maximum fuel possible was carried.

Just after departure, the weather forecast for Sydney was changed to include 60 minutes of holding due possible thunderstorms.

As the night progressed, Melbourne's forecast was changed so that it now included a 30% probability of broken cloud at 200'. This means that it now requires an alternate. Avalon's weather isn't as bad, but is still below the alternate requirement, so it can't be used.

So.....if Melbourne improves to put the cloud at 400' or greater, there's no requirement and you can continue. Or, if Avalon improves, you can continue to Melbourne and use AVV as the alternate.

If Melbourne does not improve, then you will need to divert from the cruise. But, Sydney has a 60 minute holding requirement due TS, and from experience it clogs up badly. So, that has the effect of pushing the diversion point back to about 200 miles out into the Tasman (from Moruya). In this instance, Sydney is a bad choice (because thunderstorms are mentioned). Next choice is Brisbane, which has no weather requirements, but the decision point is quite a long way back up the track (about 2.5 hours).

You can go past the Brisbane decision point as long as you have fuel for Sydney plus the holding requirement. But, actually going to Sydney is very undesirable, so you won't do so (go past the BNE decision point) unless the company met people think that the MEL forecast will improve. You can't go past the Sydney/Melbourne decision point unless the Melbourne forecast has actually been changed (not just met "think" it will improve).

In this instance, the holding requirement for Melbourne was removed about 3 hours out, so it all became moot. But, if it had still been in place 30 minutes later, Brisbane would have been on the agenda. Sydney's thunderstorms actually arrived, and the required 60 minutes of holding would have been inadequate. If the diversion to Brisbane had happened, on the ground you'd find that Melbourne was actually ok, and Sydney was terrible.

 

[opusman]

If Melbourne does not improve, then you will need to divert from the cruise. But, Sydney has a 60 minute holding requirement due TS, and from experience it clogs up badly. So, that has the effect of pushing the diversion point back to about 200 miles out into the Tasman (from Moruya). In this instance, Sydney is a bad choice (because thunderstorms are mentioned). Next choice is Brisbane, which has no weather requirements, but the decision point is quite a long way back up the track (about 2.5 hours).

Is CBR ever considered, or can't that handle a 380 at all, even for a diversion?

 

[Himeno]

Is CBR ever considered, or can't that handle a 380 at all, even for a diversion?

The CBR airfield can handle 777s and 747s no problem. The airport claims it can take an A380, but I don't think one has ever landed there.
I don't think the terminal can handle anything bigger then a A330 or 767.

The bigger problem with CBR, as far as a diverting international flight, would be customs related, as was shown by the UA 777 diversion a few months ago.

 

[Mattg]

I notice that this article claims that due to an ADS-B fault, all Boeing 787 aircraft flying in Australian airspace are now required to fly below 29,000 feet. Would this be true? I ask as I notice that there are currently numerous 787s flying at higher altitudes than this over Australia.

If the article is indeed correct, I'm wondering why such restrictions would be necessary?

In Australia, the restrictions are much stronger. Airservices Australia has mandated all Dreamliner aircraft fly below 29,000 feet while in Australian airspace. Because of the ADS-B software glitch, pilots flying the Dreamliner must treat their aircraft as if it does not have an ADS-B transponder installed. Additional “blacklist” restrictions have been put in place at three major Australian airports, including Sydney Airport (SYD).

 

[Himeno]

I notice that this article claims that due to an ADS-B fault, all Boeing 787 aircraft flying in Australian airspace are now required to fly below 29,000 feet. Would this be true? I ask as I notice that there are currently numerous 787s flying at higher altitudes than this over Australia.

If the article is indeed correct, I'm wondering why such restrictions would be necessary?

http://www.icao.int/APAC/Meetings/2...09_AUS AI.4 - Boeing 787 ADS-B Deficiency.pdf