Ask The Pilot

[straitman]

An aircraft is a series of juggling acts, with various factors competing for control.

Wow jb747,

You just killed a whole bunch of spiders in my brain :!:

(That's all stuff that I knew about once upon a time.)

 

[Hvr]

Wow jb747,

You just killed a whole bunch of spiders in my brain :!:

And he did it on the web.

 

[andmiz]

The temperature can be adjusted. There are a number of zones, and then sensors throughout the zone. It's pretty well impossible to get an even temperature though, as ambient heating and cooling differs all around the cabin. The areas near doors will always be cold, no matter how high the temperature is set.

But, if the question is "Are the temperatures adjusted up to put people to sleep?", then the answer is no. It's basically set at 24ºC, and might be adjusted by about 2ºC in response to requests. That's as far as it would be taken though, as the results will be uneven.

Modern aircraft will however automatically vary the temperature within a range to compensate for the increase in humidity and decrease in passenger activity, within a preset range, regardless of what has been manually set. It'll occur during the early part of flight, and during descent the compensation is again removed.

 

[Boris spatsky]

A question that was probably answered somewhere in the past, but something that I wondered about today - how soon before takeoff do pilots need to board an aircraft? Is it much less on smaller aircraft (say 737 vs A380), or is it pretty much the same? Has it been reduced in modern times by improvements in systems and so forth?

In short haul, we rarely get the aircraft before 40mins before ETD. Normally about 30 mins. We start boarding 20 mins before, so cabin crew get about 10 minutes to check the catering and cabin before boarding commences. Up the front we need about 20 minutes to do everything comfortably including doing the walkaround, getting ATC clearance, setting up the FMS, checking the fuel load, briefing the departure and getting and checking the load sheet. It can be done in about 15 minutes but that is tight.

 

[N860CR]

The best turn around I did at domestic was 16 minutes from shutdown to startup... That said, we ferried the plane in empty and departed back to Sydney with relative urgency (i.e.: it was Friday night and we all wanted to go home). 25-30 minutes would be the usual for domestic.

There's no real time pressure at long haul (in my operation anyway) as they're all one sector days. I usually aim to arrive at the airport 2 hours prior and get to the plane at least 1 hour prior

 

[Skyring]

You are safe from MANPADs once above about FL200. Airliners do not have anywhere near the performance to get out of the envelope of real SAMs.

It's a relatively short flight, and whilst you don't say what the aircraft is, I'd expect the most efficient altitude to be in the very high 30s...so no higher than usual.

Thanks. Athens to Doha on a B773 at 41 000 feet. A beautiful clear day, so it was a fabulous view of that corner of the world. A schoolboy dream come true, to be honest.

 

[Melburnian1]

One contributor in the QF delays/ cancellations thread discussed how QF27 from SYD to SCL had allegedly been delayed because of inoperable IFE on Friday: 'the company' (QF) apparently wanted the flight to depart; the captain said 'no' according to our AFF member on the spot. Another contributor noted that for the return flight (QF28) ex SCL, the IFE worked as it should.

Not a question solely directed at QF, but do our tech crew contributors perceive across the international airline industry (RPT flights, whether domestic or international) that it is only very occasionally if at all that there is pressure from management representatives (whether in operations centres or elsewhere) to depart but the captain notes something needs fixing and delays the flight in opposition to what the airline wants, or is this somewhat commonplace?

Is there a perception that the 'difference of opinion' might be more pronounced with LCCs such as Indonesia's Lion Air that have a reputation for unpunctuality (and perhaps also for safety breaches) than with so-called 'legacy' airlines, or do you have the impression that the frequency of such disagreements does not vary across established and low cost airlines? 'By 'disagreement' I do not necessarily mean that anger shows its head: it may be quite genteel discussion across the communication devices, given that the captain is in charge of the aircraft and other staff should respect this.

 

[jb747]

One contributor in the QF delays/ cancellations thread discussed how QF27 from SYD to SCL had allegedly been delayed because of inoperable IFE on Friday: 'the company' (QF) apparently wanted the flight to depart; the captain said 'no' according to our AFF member on the spot. Another contributor noted that for the return flight (QF28) ex SCL, the IFE worked as it should.

Not a question solely directed at QF, but do our tech crew contributors perceive across the international airline industry (RPT flights, whether domestic or international) that it is only very occasionally if at all that there is pressure from management representatives (whether in operations centres or elsewhere) to depart but the captain notes something needs fixing and delays the flight in opposition to what the airline wants, or is this somewhat commonplace?

Is there a perception that the 'difference of opinion' might be more pronounced with LCCs such as Indonesia's Lion Air that have a reputation for unpunctuality (and perhaps also for safety breaches) than with so-called 'legacy' airlines, or do you have the impression that the frequency of such disagreements does not vary across established and low cost airlines? 'By 'disagreement' I do not necessarily mean that anger shows its head: it may be quite genteel discussion across the communication devices, given that the captain is in charge of the aircraft and other staff should respect this.

We can only speak for what we've seen in our own operations. I don't have anything to do with LCC crew, either here or overseas, so I don't know anything about their relationships with their management.

I personally don't have any issues dealing with my company over unserviceable items. There is always a balance to any decision. I have on occasions rejected aircraft, and at other times not. All depends on the circumstances of the day.

 

[jb747]

Sim time again.

I've been on leave, so the sim serves to get the head back on the right way before going flying. Planned to be two sessions, separated by a couple of days. Second session had to be cancelled 'cos the sim broke down (losing at least a couple of days of work). Not sure when it will be rescheduled, but I'd expect it to be in about two weeks, when I get back from London.

The first session was run at Nadi. Interesting place in that the runway is only available for us to take off to the south, or land to the north. Plus there's some high terrain to be wary of.

Session started with some manual flying. No flight director or autopilot; some general manipulation, and then manual ILS approach and landing.

Next up, a take off at quite a heavy (but not maximum) weight. Cargo smoke alarm during clean up, followed pretty well immediately by a call from the cabin to the effect that part of the floor is very hot. FO takes care of the ECAMs and checklists as best he can. Whilst he's doing that I stop cleaning up the aircraft, and set it up to join the ILS out of a 180º procedure turn. Overweight landing (though we managed to dump a fair bit of weight). Not quite as tidy as I'd have liked, but senior check said it was by far the quickest return of that exercise that he'd seen. (BTW, he's a member on here, so with a bit of luck might contribute to this thread at times).

Next up, another take off, this time running into birds at about 50', and losing two engines on the same side. The A380, is quite amazing in its ability to climb away in these circumstances. It can't always do so, but way better than the 747. Eventually get it clean and get some altitude, then dump most of the fuel and return for a two engine out landing.

Next up was a double hydraulics failure. The A380 only has two hydraulic systems (747 has 4), but, perhaps surprisingly, this isn't a huge event. Most of the flight controls remain available via electrically operated actuators....basically mini self contained pumps and hydraulic systems. Biggest losses are the ability to retract the gear and the trailing edge flaps. Approach speed jumps up by about 30 knots (167 compared to around 135 normally). For this exercise, FO flew the aircraft, so that I could practice running the ECAMS.

Next up we had some 'human error events'. These were quite fun. Some I've seen before, but others were new. Basically, the FO gave the wrong selections and it just had to be fixed. Some, like pulling the flaps to zero, when the gear is mean to be selected up, would have killed you in older aircraft, but in the 380 this tripped one of the safety systems, and the flap retraction was stopped automatically once the angle of attack hit a limit. Selecting ALT when told to select APP is an easy fix. Another involved a mode change that caused the aircraft to apply way to much power whilst on approach...to which the fix is simply flying manually. Fun, but best seen in the sim.

The delayed sim involves an exercise at Amsterdam. VOR approaches with go arounds and landings. There will then be a bunch of low visibility work, which will involve aborts, engine failures and continuing, automatic approaches with landings and go arounds. Then there's some training involving power manipulation during engine out clean ups. Finishes with practice of PRM breakout manoeuvres. Oh, and a depressurisation from the cruise.

 

[Quickstatus]

To what degree are the SIMS a high fidelity facscimile of the real thing?

Do you have the opportunity to watch a replay of yourself and/ or other pilots doing their SIMS (as a learning experience)

 

[jb747]

To what degree are the SIMS a high fidelity facscimile of the real thing?

Extremely high. When you do conversion courses these days, the first time you fly the aircraft, it has passengers on board.

Do you have the opportunity to watch a replay of yourself and/ or other pilots doing their SIMS (as a learning experience)

The system records data and video during the exercises. The video is generally of little value (I haven't seen a replay for years), and all of it is erased at the end of the session.

 

[opusman]

followed pretty well immediately by a call from the cabin to the effect that part of the floor is very hot.

Is that a literal call (voice)? If so, who provides the voice - or is it pre-recorded as part of the sim?

 

[Craigie]

... Oh, and a depressurisation from the cruise.

Let them know you want something you haven't seen before

 

[petercr]

Let them know you want something you haven't seen before

I would have thought that JB would have been one of the co-authors on that part of the book...

 

[jb747]

Is that a literal call (voice)? If so, who provides the voice - or is it pre-recorded as part of the sim?

It's a call on the aircraft (sim) phone system. But the voice at the other end is the senior check, wearing a different hat this time.

 

[jb747]

Let them know you want something you haven't seen before

Whilst it's now modelled on what happened to us, it still throws up some interesting curly problems at times.

Last time I did this, the FO was supposed to do the flying, whilst I took care of the ECAMS. When I popped the mask on, I let it snap shut, and it broke my glasses. The metal in the centre poked me in the bridge of the nose, and I couldn't see the ECAMS well enough to read them. But, I could see the AI. So, I took over and got the FO to do the other jobs. Whilst the senior check was curious about the change, he let it play out. End result was fine, but with a reversal of the tasks. Basically you just have to deal with whatever happens, and though that wasn't on the script, it was dealt with.

 

[Quickstatus]

Have previous aircraft incidences/accidents become SIM scenarios?

 

[jb747]

Interesting items may be partially incorporated into the sessions, or they may be used to change the underlying assumptions. Many times they're not necessarily worth flying, but may form part of the discussion items.

In the case of the depressurisation, historically on the 747-400 (and similar) the assumption had been that the autopilot would remain available, and that damage would be confined to the pressurisation. QF30 didn't fit that. So they randomly started removing the autopilot, and very often toss an engine issue into the mix as well. It's still all about priorities. Aviate, navigate, communicate....in that order.

 

[docjames]

Whilst it's now modelled on what happened to us, it still throws up some interesting curly problems at times.

Last time I did this, the FO was supposed to do the flying, whilst I took care of the ECAMS. When I popped the mask on, I let it snap shut, and it broke my glasses. The metal in the centre poked me in the bridge of the nose, and I couldn't see the ECAMS well enough to read them. But, I could see the AI. So, I took over and got the FO to do the other jobs. Whilst the senior check was curious about the change, he let it play out. End result was fine, but with a reversal of the tasks. Basically you just have to deal with whatever happens, and though that wasn't on the script, it was dealt with.

Do you (routinely) travel with spare glasses? Not suggesting you retrieve them in such a situation, but i mean more routinely (eg. you drop them on the hotel floor in DXB, do you have a spare pair so there's no flight delay)?

 

[Quickstatus]

Do you (routinely) travel with spare glasses? Not suggesting you retrieve them in such a situation, but i mean more routinely (eg. you drop them on the hotel floor in DXB, do you have a spare pair so there's no flight delay)?

Additionally, are you required to wear glasses if you are required to wear gym driving a car?