Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

I have noticed a few posts about you not recommending people join the aviation industry as it isn't what it used to be. Could you possibly expand on this a bit please? what made you want to be a pilot and what do you think is required to inspire young ones ( like me, although i like my current job to head down this very substantial career path?

When I was a youngster I lived right in the middle of a triangle of three airfields..Avalon (whilst the Mirages were being built and test flown), Pt Cook, and Laverton (when it was very active will all RAAF types)... I was lucky enough to be able to do what that little kid wanted.

The aviation industry is being hit by an effect that basically makes it a simple commodity. Airlines that I consider to be outright cough are being lumped in with ones that genuinely consider safety, simply by passengers who have this strange belief that a) all airlines are safe and b) any flight to anywhere shouldn't cost any more than the cab ride to the airport. If people are not prepared to pay for safety, then it will be removed, by the 'businessmen' who run the airlines. Generally they will tell you that they are safe, and 'following world's best practice', when in reality they are stripping to the bone, and playing the odds on any accident happening before they get their bonus. A safety culture is something that grows over many years, but which can be destroyed, almost in moments, by ignorant management.

From the pilots' side of the coin part of that is the continued downgrading of the job. Basically, if you call them bus drivers for long enough, you can then treat them as such, and then pay them the same way. Overall, management works on the simple principle that if you are not management, then whatever skill you have is simply trivia, and can be outsourced to the cheapest source.

Taking a longer view, the industry itself in under attack, particularly in Europe, by taxes that have hit the absurd level. My take is that in the slightly long term, aircraft will mostly be smaller than they are now, and will operate point to point. The economics of this only work if they are totally premium class, so I actually expect economy class to virtually disappear. Say hello again to the 1950s-1960. Very large aircraft are in their last generation. Of course I could be wrong, but given the price sensitivity of the bottom of the market, and the unremitting addition of costs to the basic fare (from all sorts of sources), I can't see how it can survive. So...don't join a dying industry....

And from a pilots perspective what would you tell the people (whoever they are) if they were about to design and build a brand new airport ?

Keep party politics out of it. In Australia, it is not possible to build a new airport. End of story. Sydney will never get another. At Melbourne, Avalon could be further developed, though it's miles from anywhere that will give it economy of scale...the best option there is simply to build the extra runways that were always on the Tullamarine master plan, though I expect local councils have already filled the areas under their paths with housing.

So...as a first requirement, if you want a new airport, you'll need to ensure the government is being run by the Singaporeans.

Don't build stupid short runways.

Have a look at the winds...and then don't build at 90 degrees to the prevailing wind.

DO NOT HAVE A CURFEW.

Oh, and contract the Singaporean customs people for the job.

Have multiple roads accessing the terminals, and then don't lump them into one place (Sydney and Melbourne are wonderful examples of how not to do this). Have decent, FREE, internal (not bus) transport between terminals (automated underground).

 

[reductionist]

JB, thanks for posting those videos to YouTube. I watched them all last night.

 

[markis10]

Nice video showing the view of the coughpit for an A320

http://nycaviation.com/2012/01/video-ridiculously-great-coughpit-footage-aboard-an-airbus-a320/

 

[spudseamus]

jb747 thought provoking post!! thank you again! a lot in there to digest

 

[harvyk]

Taking a longer view, the industry itself in under attack, particularly in Europe, by taxes that have hit the absurd level. My take is that in the slightly long term, aircraft will mostly be smaller than they are now, and will operate point to point. The economics of this only work if they are totally premium class, so I actually expect economy class to virtually disappear. Say hello again to the 1950s-1960. Very large aircraft are in their last generation. Of course I could be wrong, but given the price sensitivity of the bottom of the market, and the unremitting addition of costs to the basic fare (from all sorts of sources), I can't see how it can survive. So...don't join a dying industry....

I disagree, I expect that in the longer term, class as we know it will disappear. We will instead see every component come for a price. For example a base fare will be a "Y" seat only. From there you add on the extra's you want, want extra seat pitch, that'll be an extra $200 (that will get you a "J" seat, but without "J" service), want a private suite (think "F" class seat) Want meals of a "Y" level, that'll be an extra $50, go the "J" level, that'll be an extra $100.

I think pay on board will disappear (with very limited exception) for example, a drink package might cost $15, if 50% of the aircraft chose the drinks option, they will load enough drinks for those 50% to have drinks (and base it on how many drinks each person is likely to drink over the course of the flight), but not one extra can of drink beyond that. (The idea is that everything that is loaded on board is used)

I don't see this as the domain of the LCC's either, I expect we'll see full service airlines go down this path as well.

We're already seeing this with airlines like AirNZ (historically a full service airline), who offer pricing packages for various levels of food \ space and extra's for it's TT services.

 

[The Rok]

I think Ryanair is going to buy Qantas and take over the world.

 

[spudseamus]

I think Ryanair is going to buy Qantas and take over the world.

ROFLMAO!!!! ohhh i needed dat!!

 

[anat0l]

jb747 once again thanks for your opinions. It is really refreshing to hear it from someone who is "in the game". (Yes, customers are important, but we always hear about that and never from the other end).

Just some responses (and you can respond to this as well) - Mods, if you need to duplicate and/or split off these posts, feel free. tl;dr version - my views below.

The aviation industry is being hit by an effect that basically makes it a simple commodity. Airlines that I consider to be outright cough are being lumped in with ones that genuinely consider safety, simply by passengers who have this strange belief that a) all airlines are safe and b) any flight to anywhere shouldn't cost any more than the cab ride to the airport. If people are not prepared to pay for safety, then it will be removed, by the 'businessmen' who run the airlines. Generally they will tell you that they are safe, and 'following world's best practice', when in reality they are stripping to the bone, and playing the odds on any accident happening before they get their bonus. A safety culture is something that grows over many years, but which can be destroyed, almost in moments, by ignorant management.

This is interesting, but agreeably so.

The odd thing is that I believe that safety is not really taken seriously by the public, even in this country. Ask someone on the street, "Is safety important to you when you fly?" and they'll 99.99% say 'yes', but they will likely not pay more for it, nor will they be swayed by precedent. The only marked examples I can think of that are exceptions are airlines like GA and the ones on the EU banned list (which are more avoided out of stigma more than actual consideration of safety). Shareholders, who pretty much dictate a company's direction more than its customers, are very much guilty of the same irreverence. (This isn't just airlines - shareholders of mining companies are much the same)

This is not helped by the fact that, on average, there are less fatal incidents happening now compared to decades ago, so there's this perception that flying is near-bulletproof safe. In a sense, it is, but it takes a considered effort to ensure it stays that way. Risk engineering and management is an odd creature. Also, non-fatal incidents aren't typically well documented, and whilst some are "normal", others are human related faults.

From the pilots' side of the coin part of that is the continued downgrading of the job. Basically, if you call them bus drivers for long enough, you can then treat them as such, and then pay them the same way. Overall, management works on the simple principle that if you are not management, then whatever skill you have is simply trivia, and can be outsourced to the cheapest source.

Please let there not be pilots replaced by robots any time soon......

Apart from that, I'm not liking this kind of view. I'm not sure about being paid more (except for CPI), but certainly the amount paid should be commensurate to the work done or expected, which means that you either not pay more or not increase work load factors (i.e. not more work, pressing limits, shorting staff numbers and contingency, etc.).

The irony of all this is that management is very easy to make cheaper - just fire them! No, seriously... (but what can you ask for with a lacklustre shareholder participation culture...)

Taking a longer view, the industry itself in under attack, particularly in Europe, by taxes that have hit the absurd level. My take is that in the slightly long term, aircraft will mostly be smaller than they are now, and will operate point to point. The economics of this only work if they are totally premium class, so I actually expect economy class to virtually disappear. Say hello again to the 1950s-1960. Very large aircraft are in their last generation. Of course I could be wrong, but given the price sensitivity of the bottom of the market, and the unremitting addition of costs to the basic fare (from all sorts of sources), I can't see how it can survive. So...don't join a dying industry....

It's a shame that the conclusion has come to what you've said. I beg to think that if a rational person intending to be a pilot were to read this and reconsider, what kind of pilots are we going to expect in the future and should I be afraid (literally, not just in my head, but of my physical well-being).

As for the comment about travel class evolution, I don't see it that way. I see more of the same LCC aircraft being wheeled out now, perhaps not bigger but basically if a similar plane can be sourced at similar costs but it will carry more seats, then that will be the new de facto shorthaul travel. It's all about capacity, as I see it, but people want frequency.

I don't see Economy disappearing - more the opposite, I see premium class travel under threat. I see First Class as being the realm of what private air travel is today (i.e. really only for the exclusive on specific aircraft, and perhaps only retained by the peak-rich Middle Eastern airlines). Business will be the new top class (before Premium Economy starts getting more space and lie-flat seats moving eventually to fully flat seats ). I see more automation of systems at the airport which isn't bad for the kids today who know how to work an iPhone before they could speak (but be prepared to pay a very hefty "fine" if you turn up at the airport and forgot to print your boarding pass). Frankly, O'Leary, as much of a nutter as he is, may not be off the mark when it comes to negotiating with airports and their landing fees, and the very reflexitive knee-jerks he can enact if they don't like his terms. On one hand, more airlines may have to press with this and force airports (and governments) to take more affirmative action to ensure airports remain open with favourable conditions conducive to a financially-sustainable aviation industry. On the other hand, some airports may just close (again, owner or government intervention) and airlines will be forced to consolidate. In the latter case, job losses will result, but someone, or rather everyone, is not going to care (so an airport loses all its workers and the shops within; so it was the biggest employer in that local area - who cares...)

I see more USA based airlines filing for Chapter 11s, and surviving through artificial means (just like now, and given that the government is not going to allow an America without at least a couple of airlines...) Virtually no where else in the world can a business with admittedly fallible operational principles still continue doing business in the free market.

What really gets me is that airlines (and businesses in general) complain a lot about factors which reflect that the world is changing and yet their argument is, "We can't be subject to this else it'll cost jobs and/or this airline". Well, duh. If you can't survive in the free market, you can't survive and you don't deserve to be in business. Don't expect someone to give you a golden ticket every time something happens that you don't like.

In short, I see the future of aviation as being the legacy airlines clinging onto dear life but still holding in for those that want a slightly more traditional approach to flying. The USA airlines will still be substandard like they usually are, but they'll still give away upgrades, points and awards (of course free of fuel surcharges ). I'm not sure if a thinner shell seat will be created, but I'm sure someone's thinking about it. F will likely disappear. New airlines on the scene will shine for a while because the 'new' factor is cool, before being enveloped into the mainstream pack. And for the love of God I'm hoping the airlines will be able to find a source of fuel which is not fossil fuels!

Keep party politics out of it. In Australia, it is not possible to build a new airport. End of story. Sydney will never get another. At Melbourne, Avalon could be further developed, though it's miles from anywhere that will give it economy of scale...the best option there is simply to build the extra runways that were always on the Tullamarine master plan, though I expect local councils have already filled the areas under their paths with housing.

So...as a first requirement, if you want a new airport, you'll need to ensure the government is being run by the Singaporeans.

Don't build stupid short runways.

Have a look at the winds...and then don't build at 90 degrees to the prevailing wind.

DO NOT HAVE A CURFEW.

Oh, and contract the Singaporean customs people for the job.

Have multiple roads accessing the terminals, and then don't lump them into one place (Sydney and Melbourne are wonderful examples of how not to do this). Have decent, FREE, internal (not bus) transport between terminals (automated underground).

In short, we should get the Singaporeans to recreate a Changi here.

 

[jb747]

We will see what happens with regard to the future. Conjecture will simply fill the forum up.

It's a shame that the conclusion has come to what you've said. I beg to think that if a rational person intending to be a pilot were to read this and reconsider, what kind of pilots are we going to expect in the future and should I be afraid (literally, not just in my head, but of my physical well-being).

It is already happening. Lots of CEOs think it's a great idea to have low hour 'cadets' or pay as you go pilots in the right hand seat, and sadly there are plenty of silly people who think that paying your employer is a sensible thing to do. Jets are not simple or easy to operate, and the modern machines are not the slightest bit safer than the old stuff....if you persist in sticking flight simulator pilots into them. Airbus has probably been the worst offender here, telling management just what they want to hear...i.e. our jet is so easy to fly that you can safely stick minimally qualified people into them. Well, they are anything but, even at the best of times, and when they lose the plot, they do not do so gracefully. AF447 should be a wake up call to a lot of people, but it won't be.

In short, we should get the Singaporeans to recreate a Changi here.

Not at all. In fact most of us would prefer it if they would actually fix the movement areas at Changi. But, the point is that they get things done. Australian politicians don't.

Our customs is almost as unfriendly as the USA. And yet the Singaporeans seem to have no problems nabbing the drug runners. A huge queue, to talk to a really rude American is the reason I don't have the USA in my holiday plans. Australia is little better.

 

[anat0l]

It is already happening. Lots of CEOs think it's a great idea to have low hour 'cadets' or pay as you go pilots in the right hand seat, and sadly there are plenty of silly people who think that paying your employer is a sensible thing to do. Jets are not simple or easy to operate, and the modern machines are not the slightest bit safer than the old stuff....if you persist in sticking flight simulator pilots into them. Airbus has probably been the worst offender here, telling management just what they want to hear...i.e. our jet is so easy to fly that you can safely stick minimally qualified people into them. Well, they are anything but, even at the best of times, and when they lose the plot, they do not do so gracefully. AF447 should be a wake up call to a lot of people, but it won't be.

Interesting you mention AF447. As you said, it probably didn't shake anyone up. AF certainly is doing a good PR job covering up any trace that it was their fault.

Reminds me of a quote from The Simpsons:

Air Force pilot as a Tour guide: At this point in time, I would like to direct your attention to the particular air vehicle next to which I am currently standing. The Harrier Jet is one of our more dollar-intensive ordnance delivery vectors......And, although it looks complicated it is so well-designed, even a child could fly it.
Lisa: Can I fly it?
Guide: Of course you can not.

But, the point is that they get things done. Australian politicians don't.

Let's see. Singapore Changi airport owned by Government of Singapore (or Temasek Holdings). Sydney Airport is owned by SACL (mostly MAp) and Melbourne Airport is owned by APAC Ltd. Although the former is in a worse case, neither is owned by the government, which of course was the objective in the first place (our government, in their wisdom, saw a double whammy in selling off the airports because (a) they needed the money, and (b) a private enterprise could do a better job than it (the government) could).

Australian politicians really couldn't do much to strongly influence airport development now if they tried, notwithstanding your point. Even if they could the bureaucratic and tendering corruption that would result would blow out any reasonable cost estimate by a decent factor.

Our customs is almost as unfriendly as the USA. And yet the Singaporeans seem to have no problems nabbing the drug runners. A huge queue, to talk to a really rude American is the reason I don't have the USA in my holiday plans. Australia is little better.

Well, Singapore has a very easy approach to drug running: we will catch you and then you die. If it were my life on the line, I know I wouldn't be trying to run drugs. An Australian has already found out the hard way, and shame on Australia for trying to bail him out of the country. At the very least, you're either looking at death or a few whacks of the cane.

Our customs isn't unfriendly I think - but perhaps they could redesign our incoming passenger form a bit. For some reason, people really don't understand that we are really serious if we ask them, "Do you have food?"

Passport control is certainly easier here than in the USA, but I guess we might be heading that way soon, too. (Japan does take fingerprints but they still process foreign passengers a lot faster than Australia or USA).

 

[simongr]

Our customs isn't unfriendly I think - but perhaps they could redesign our incoming passenger form a bit. For some reason, people really don't understand that we are really serious if we ask them, "Do you have food?"

Passport control is certainly easier here than in the USA, but I guess we might be heading that way soon, too. (Japan does take fingerprints but they still process foreign passengers a lot faster than Australia or USA).

I just think that people genuinely don't understand the quarantine rules - either the reason for them or the active policing that we have here. I have found the Customs guys here fine and the queues not too bad - but quarantine is always the killer

If you think processing is slow here or in the US then try Saudi...

 

[rechoboam]

When I was a youngster I lived right in the middle of a triangle of three airfields..Avalon (whilst the Mirages were being built and test flown), Pt Cook, and Laverton (when it was very active will all RAAF types)... I was lucky enough to be able to do what that little kid wanted.

The aviation industry is being hit by an effect that basically makes it a simple commodity. Airlines that I consider to be outright cough are being lumped in with ones that genuinely consider safety, simply by passengers who have this strange belief that a) all airlines are safe and b) any flight to anywhere shouldn't cost any more than the cab ride to the airport. If people are not prepared to pay for safety, then it will be removed, by the 'businessmen' who run the airlines. Generally they will tell you that they are safe, and 'following world's best practice', when in reality they are stripping to the bone, and playing the odds on any accident happening before they get their bonus. A safety culture is something that grows over many years, but which can be destroyed, almost in moments, by ignorant management.

From the pilots' side of the coin part of that is the continued downgrading of the job. Basically, if you call them bus drivers for long enough, you can then treat them as such, and then pay them the same way. Overall, management works on the simple principle that if you are not management, then whatever skill you have is simply trivia, and can be outsourced to the cheapest source.

Taking a longer view, the industry itself in under attack, particularly in Europe, by taxes that have hit the absurd level. My take is that in the slightly long term, aircraft will mostly be smaller than they are now, and will operate point to point. The economics of this only work if they are totally premium class, so I actually expect economy class to virtually disappear. Say hello again to the 1950s-1960. Very large aircraft are in their last generation. Of course I could be wrong, but given the price sensitivity of the bottom of the market, and the unremitting addition of costs to the basic fare (from all sorts of sources), I can't see how it can survive. So...don't join a dying industry....




Keep party politics out of it. In Australia, it is not possible to build a new airport. End of story. Sydney will never get another. At Melbourne, Avalon could be further developed, though it's miles from anywhere that will give it economy of scale...the best option there is simply to build the extra runways that were always on the Tullamarine master plan, though I expect local councils have already filled the areas under their paths with housing.

So...as a first requirement, if you want a new airport, you'll need to ensure the government is being run by the Singaporeans.

Don't build stupid short runways.

Have a look at the winds...and then don't build at 90 degrees to the prevailing wind.

DO NOT HAVE A CURFEW.

Oh, and contract the Singaporean customs people for the job.

Have multiple roads accessing the terminals, and then don't lump them into one place (Sydney and Melbourne are wonderful examples of how not to do this). Have decent, FREE, internal (not bus) transport between terminals (automated underground).

Why would economy disappear? Isnt LCC aviation still profitable? Or do you mean premium carriers wont do economy, and leave it to LCC?

 

[jb747]

Why would economy disappear? Isnt LCC aviation still profitable? Or do you mean premium carriers wont do economy, and leave it to LCC?

Because economy (at least the severely discounted economy) is effectively subsidised by the full fare classes.

Why not simply run something like a 787 and forget discount economy?

Economy of scale will start to disappear, and the LCCs will have to pick up a lot more of the overall costs of aviation. They'll basically end up no longer being LCCs, but they won't have access to the premium classes. When the fuel prices were at their peak a little while back, the older carriers were hurting, but the LCCs were in even more trouble. That will return.

Look again in about 10 years, and see what has happened.

 

[anat0l]

This 'special report' (or rather an executive summary of one) was just released by the IATA:

Special Report - Safety

It seems to print a glowing picture of safety globally though some of the figures (especially the % improvements) seem statistically superficial. It also makes a huge deal of system based improvements (which can be essential to safety but it isn't absolute by any means).

Did you have anything to throw in about this or IATA jb747?

(Mods, again feel free to split off)

 

[smeacs]

Wow Thanks for that reply and discussion, I might come back after considering it for a a bit...

 

[Tortuga]

The aviation industry is being hit by an effect that basically makes it a simple commodity. Airlines that I consider to be outright cough are being lumped in with ones that genuinely consider safety, simply by passengers who have this strange belief that a) all airlines are safe and b) any flight to anywhere shouldn't cost any more than the cab ride to the airport. .

I find it refreshing reading your opinions jb, although they do scare the **** out of me when you talk about the safety standards and training. Can you comment on any specific airlines by name that you consider "safe" or at least safer... I am in living in Argentina, and I really have no idea about the safety standards of airlines operating here and out of South America. I know it has been a while since Aerolineas Argentina had a fatality, however not sure if its due to luck or training. If the pilots are trained like the management and people who run the airports then I'm in trouble. How did you view Air France before the accident?

It is sad because flying brings so many pleasures to our lives and allows us to see how others live on opposite sides of the world.

 

[jb747]

This 'special report' (or rather an executive summary of one) was just released by the IATA:

Special Report - Safety

It seems to print a glowing picture of safety globally though some of the figures (especially the % improvements) seem statistically superficial. It also makes a huge deal of system based improvements (which can be essential to safety but it isn't absolute by any means).

Did you have anything to throw in about this or IATA jb747?

(Mods, again feel free to split off)

...interesting that 3 of the 4 comparisons with the previous year give worse results.

 

[anat0l]

It is sad because flying brings so many pleasures to our lives and allows us to see how others live on opposite sides of the world.

[segue]

It's funny you mention this, because most companies (or corporate personnel) would probably interpret your last clause as the objective of travel, i.e. the ability to connect people, as it were.

In the old days, although flying was certainly faster than a ship to achieve the same goal, because of many things (including the expense) it was a lot more an experience / adventure compared to just any means of getting from A to B. Much of that has been lost (and with it goes some other factors, including some of the cultural declines alluded to here).

 

[el_rooto]

I've been to Quito in the past couple of weeks, and am now in Cuzco. When planes are pressurized to 8,000 feet, what is the process for changing the pressurization to 9,000 or 11,000 ft?Also, why do Dash 8's not have oxygen masks? Is it because they only fly at 25,000 feet?

 

[jb747]

I am in living in Argentina, and I really have no idea about the safety standards of airlines operating here and out of South America. I know it has been a while since Aerolineas Argentina had a fatality, however not sure if its due to luck or training. If the pilots are trained like the management and people who run the airports then I'm in trouble.

I'm sorry, I have no idea about airlines in that part of the world.

How did you view Air France before the accident?

I don't think the accident was a surprise.