Ask The Pilot

[andmiz]

Any thoughts on why HOU, or just to make things a little different and add a couple of procedures

We use IAH/KIAH (Houston) for GLS approach training (similar to an ILS but GNSS based with an additional ground transmitter).

 

[andmiz]

A hypothetical question, if you arrived at the runway end and switched control to the flight management computer would the FMC be capable of a full auto takeoff and climb to assigned flight level ?

Nope. The FMC is able to laterally and vertically navigate via the departure route once airborne and throughout the arrival procedure, but the takeoff and instrument approach are completely different systems and the FMC is not capable of landing the aircraft. Automatic landings are capable through ILS approaches or GLS approaches, but both need to be setup by the crew and closely monitored for potential failure or error throughout. The aircraft can't also change configuration automatically (flaps, slats, gear etc), so for a while at least, we've still got a job.

The easiest analogy is the FMC is like your car's GPS and can steer to your destination for you, but the parallel parking function (ie autoland) is a separate system again. There is no launch assist.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Are SIMs done at the nadir of circadian rhythms?

Doing a current endorsement onto the B737 and majority of my sims, ie, 14/16 of them are 3am wake ups for 4am brifieing followed by a 4hr session at 5am. Luckily, I had gentlemen's hours for Origin so I could stay up and watch it, and my sim check will be a 9am start, but will be 5hrs in the sim not 4.

 

[juddles]

Quick general "curious but not important" question:

I tend to spend too much time sitting in airports gazing at aircraft. I have noticed that (in my perception) aircraft with engines under the wings have the axis of the engine roughly parallel to the aircraft fuselage, whereas the tail engined types seem to have a marked angle - ie their engines "point down" quite significantly. My only understanding of this could be that in the tail-engined types part of the thrust vector is being used directly to provide upwards force. If this is correct, why dont the wing-engined types do the same?

 

[AviatorInsight]

The other night however there appeared to be a constant stream of arrivals on 25 (when we crossed it there were three aircraft visible on approach), a regular contribution of arrivals and departures on 16R and then we taxied down and departed from 16L so all three runways in use. Is that common? Must be quite a workout for the ATC chaps.

Yes, if the winds aren't that strong that a departure can be made from 16L/R, then this minimises the delays and is fairly common during peak hour periods.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Quick general "curious but not important" question:

I tend to spend too much time sitting in airports gazing at aircraft. I have noticed that (in my perception) aircraft with engines under the wings have the axis of the engine roughly parallel to the aircraft fuselage, whereas the tail engined types seem to have a marked angle - ie their engines "point down" quite significantly. My only understanding of this could be that in the tail-engined types part of the thrust vector is being used directly to provide upwards force. If this is correct, why dont the wing-engined types do the same?

Are you sure they point down? Depends which way you look at it, but my observation is that they're (intakes) are slightly tilted upward, but a great question!

From my understanding (and this is taking me back), is that the airflow that comes over the top of the wing starts to angle downward. The engines are placed right in this airflow and are tilted upward (downward?) slightly so the inlets are parallel with the wind.

On wing mounted engines they're displaced slightly inwards not tilted up/down, into the airflow around the wing. The B777 I think has this? If you look at a photo of it from underneath you might be able to see it? Unless of course I've been staring at the picture for so long that my eyes are starting to deceive me!

 

[donovan301]

Are you sure they point down? Depends which way you look at it, but my observation is that they're (intakes) are slightly tilted upward, but a great question!

From my understanding (and this is taking me back), is that the airflow that comes over the top of the wing starts to angle downward. The engines are placed right in this airflow and are tilted upward (downward?) slightly so the inlets are parallel with the wind.

On wing mounted engines they're displaced slightly inwards not tilted up/down, into the airflow around the wing. The B777 I think has this? If you look at a photo of it from underneath you might be able to see it? Unless of course I've been staring at the picture for so long that my eyes are starting to deceive me!

Both interesting points...and no your eyes do not deceive....or maybe I spend too much time too?

My questions in relation to this would be...

...Whence a craft is in flight, and under normal thrust flying power, are the engines in the same position?

Or In Take off, are the position of the engines angle and profile straightened and level under Full Take off Thrust?

Is the angle related to the torque of the engine?

Does the outward angle & or Tilted angle... aid takeoff thrust benefit?

I base my thoughts of angle on a late 1970 Datsun 180B my brother owned...with a very heavily breathed upon motor (aka Absolute mental $$$ investment for more POWER)

When ready of a high intensity launch he would always turn a little to the left, and have slight pressure on the brake pedal ( brakes being rear favoured, draggin the front down)

This was due to the fact, that without doing the afore mentioned, the car before(almost) going forward, would lift (rise) abruptly and in the same instance Pull Heavily to the Right to the drivers side.
I believe the term of the day was Torque Steer.

Non the less,A VERY Exhilarating experience.

But Physics non the less.

i wonder if the analogy is accurate ?

Um, any Boy (Man) Racer Pilots care to comment?

 

[Boris spatsky]

Was CLB 2 ever utilised? Or is it a rare occurence that it would be selected?
Thanks!

In the 737 we use CLB-2 almost everytime unless we are heavy. Sometimes we manually select CLB-1 or CLB if terrain or ATC height restrictions are significant.

 

[jb747]

Are SIMs done at the nadir of circadian rhythms?

The sims operate 24 hours per day. Generally licence renewals happen between about 0600 and midnight, with the really nasty slots reserved for conversion courses (where they'll do a bunch of them, and effectively be in night shift).

 

[flychrisfly]

Sim time again.
...
A couple of new systems have been activated (soft go around, which has been in the aircraft for about a year, and 'brake to vacate', which will be activated soon).
...
Some time left at the end, so we have a look at the brake to vacate system, but this will be the subject of its own sim in a few months. Basically it allows you to pick a target taxiway, and the aircraft will automatically brake to stop at that point. It brakes later, and harder, than we do, so it will take a bit of getting used to. It results in less time on the runway, and cooler brakes.

I had asked a question about Brake to Vacate aaaaaages ago and from memory the short answer was that QF's A380 fleet did not have that feature (while EK's did). So my question is: why now?

Was it pilot requests or is more of a fleet management and assessment, or was it mandated by some airports?

Is it just a software upgrade?

Also, if this new feature (or any new feature for that matter) is enabled on the plane, are you restricted from using it before being trained on it/ would you be penalised for using it before being trained on it?

Thanks.

 

[mjt57]

Hi JB.

Today my wife booked her flights to NY. She's on the 93 (yours) and the 11. When I looked the flights up I saw that the 11 originates out of Sydney on an A380. But her leg of the trip is on a B744.

This begs the question, or questions: does this particular aircraft to little else but shuttle between LAX and JFK? And if so, do Aussies or US crews operate it?

 

[coriander]

Hi JB.

Today my wife booked her flights to NY. She's on the 93 (yours) and the 11. When I looked the flights up I saw that the 11 originates out of Sydney on an A380. But her leg of the trip is on a B744.
does this particular aircraft to little else but shuttle between LAX and JFK? And if so, do Aussies or US crews operate it?

QF11 SYD-LAX on A380 becomes B744 (from BNE QF15) to JFK.
Return QF12 is 744 JFK-LAX then A380 to SYD. That 744 then flies to BNE as QF16.

 

[mjt57]

QF11 SYD-LAX on A380 becomes B744 (from BNE QF15) to JFK.
Return QF12 is 744 JFK-LAX then A380 to SYD. That 744 then flies to BNE as QF16.

Ok, thanks, Coriander...

 

[jb747]

Both interesting points...and no your eyes do not deceive....or maybe I spend too much time too?

My questions in relation to this would be...

...Whence a craft is in flight, and under normal thrust flying power, are the engines in the same position?

The geometry of the wing certainly changes in flight, but to be honest, pilots really don't care...as long as they don't fall off.

Discussion of wing flexing came up on Pilots' Course, but more in relation to the advantages of different planforms. It's one of the reasons that forward swept wings are so rare.

Torque is an issue in piston engined aircraft, but not turbines.

 

[jb747]

I had asked a question about Brake to Vacate aaaaaages ago and from memory the short answer was that QF's A380 fleet did not have that feature (while EK's did). So my question is: why now?

Airports are becoming more and more critical with regard to runway occupancy times. I've never seen any numbers, but apparently BTV gives a much more consistent and faster time from landing to vacating. It should also alleviate the tendency to get one side's brakes side hotter than the other.

Was it pilot requests or is more of a fleet management and assessment, or was it mandated by some airports?

I think the push has come from Dubai and London airports.

Is it just a software upgrade?

Mostly software. The coughpit switch is different. And, of course, sending an envelope with millions of dollars to AB.

Also, if this new feature (or any new feature for that matter) is enabled on the plane, are you restricted from using it before being trained on it/ would you be penalised for using it before being trained on it?

There will be a requirement to have done the sim exercise before being allowed to use it. It may dribble into service as the exercise is done, or alternatively, they may wait until everyone has done the training and declare it active on a set date. The training package hasn't been released yet, so I don't know what's planned.

 

[Quickstatus]

Torque is an issue in piston engined aircraft, but not turbines.

Is this because the diameter of the turbine fan is relatively a lot smaller than a piston?.

Are there any significant gyroscopic effects from a propellor? Turbines?
What about the Harriers which hover?

 

[jb747]

Are there any significant gyroscopic effects from a propellor?

Substantial. I've never flown them, but if I recall correctly gyroscopic effects could come into play when picking up the tailwheel on the warbirds.

What about the Harriers which hover?

I've got some friends who flew them, so I'll ask.

 

[Quickstatus]

Substantial. I've never flown them, but if I recall correctly gyroscopic effects could come into play when picking up the tailwheel on the warbirds.

Thanks, along which axis?

 

[jb747]

Thanks, along which axis?

It would have to be yaw.

 

[jb747]

What about the Harriers which hover?

Feedback from a bloke who flew them is that it was minimal, and if it even existed at all was masked by various other effects. The engine spools rotated in different directions to reduce the effect. He's an ex test pilot, and commented that it was well thought out for the day.