Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

When you arrive in LA early in the morning, you really don't even know whether you'll be on 06 or 24 until just about top of descent. That makes about 15 minutes difference straight up....

 

[lastrow]

A question on walk around inspections by the pilot. What sort of things are you looking for given the brevity of time? If it is dark this would surely make the job more difficult, do you use a good tourch? How often do you find something of concern?

 

[jb747]

A question on walk around inspections by the pilot. What sort of things are you looking for given the brevity of time? If it is dark this would surely make the job more difficult, do you use a good tourch? How often do you find something of concern?

It’s obviously not a detailed inspection. You are looking at general things, like the condition of flaps and leading edges. Dents that aren’t in the log. Specific things like brake wear indicator pins, removal of covers and gear pins, and function of nav lights. You have a look at the front of the engines (as best you can) looking for nicks on the blades and any tears on the lining. Fluid leaks. Hatches and latches closed and locked.

You don’t find a great deal. Most common items that come to mind are unreported dents, and bird strikes.

 

[AviatorInsight]

A question on walk around inspections by the pilot. What sort of things are you looking for given the brevity of time? If it is dark this would surely make the job more difficult, do you use a good tourch? How often do you find something of concern?

Obviously the smaller the aircraft, the easier it is to pick up things. In addition to the above I’m also looking for scrapes on the outboard underside of the engines (indicator of pod strike), around the cargo and rear doors (where catering trucks are), and the tail skid (to pick up any tail strikes).

I have a fairly good torch I use at night time, but at the major ports it’s not that hard due to the flood lighting on the terminal. I used to remember doing the walk in LAX and sometimes not needing a torch because the flood lights were so bright!

 

[mjt57]

It’s no secret, I’m with VA on the 737 now after being on the 777 so won’t be me taking you to LAX unfortunately.

I'll mention you to the cabin crew. "Hey, I know AviatorInsight and he said that I can have an upgrade to First." What do you think?

As long as your connecting times aren’t ridiculous such as 30mins between flights then you’ll be fine, and yes the number of calls I get from cabin crew asking about a connector’s next flight with a 30min gap and if they’re going to make it makes me wonder sometimes.

I think that we have 2 hours. The stress comes from dealing with US officials when entering via LAX and then finding our way to whichever terminal that it is we depart from (and more officialdom interaction).

 

[AviatorInsight]

I'll mention you to the cabin crew. "Hey, I know AviatorInsight and he said that I can have an upgrade to First." What do you think?

If it works let me know and hopefully I’ll be able to try it in the future myself.

I think that we have 2 hours. The stress comes from dealing with US officials when entering via LAX and then finding our way to whichever terminal that it is we depart from (and more officialdom interaction).

Yep I hear you. Good luck.

 

[RooFlyer]

If a large twin aircraft (lets say A350) had a catastrophic bird strike such as US1549, but say 60-30 seconds from touch-down rather than take-off, what would be the effects on landing performance? Could the descent angle be altered at that point to accommodate degraded braking, if that was the case?

After the US1549 incident, do manufacturers now have 'low altitude' and 'high altitude' checklists for engine failures?

 

[jb747]

If a large twin aircraft (lets say A350) had a catastrophic bird strike such as US1549, but say 60-30 seconds from touch-down rather than take-off, what would be the effects on landing performance? Could the descent angle be altered at that point to accommodate degraded braking, if that was the case?

At about the 60 seconds mark, you’ve seen the result. Very short, and very hard,...the BA 777 in London. Most likely you would not make the runway, so perhaps stopping performance would not be an issue.

30 seconds, you’d probaby get to the runway, but likely to be very hard, as you may not have enough energy to arrest the sink rate.

If you do get to the runway, and get a reasonable flare, then braking performance won’t be an issue. Pressure for a couple of brake applications will be provided by the accumulators.

After the US1549 incident, do manufacturers now have 'low altitude' and 'high altitude' checklists for engine failures?

Checklists are pointless in many situations. At low level you are not going to have enough time to do much of anything. The modern aircraft will attempt restarts by themselves. By the time that’s over, given your time frame, you’ll have reached the ground.

In the US Air case, there were a couple of things that the Captain did that gave him a successful outcome. The first was that he made the decision to go for the river. The runways would have been tempting, but you get one go...if it doesnt’ work out then the outcome is likely to be extremely bad. The second thing was that he started the APU...and that had the effect of keeping normal electrical power available. I doubt that there is any chance of an engine restarting after being snuffed by birds.

 

[lastrow]

Pressure for a couple of brake applications will be provided by the accumulators.

I assume you are talking about energy accumulators. Are these the batteries or some other device?

 

[jb747]

I assume you are talking about energy accumulators. Are these the batteries or some other device?

Hydraulic accumulator - Wikipedia

 

[opusman]

How does a water landing (such as in the US Air case) work? Presumably the procedure is very different from a normal ground landing - do you just flare as much as possible and hope for the best?

 

[Quickstatus]

When you arrive in LA early in the morning, you really don't even know whether you'll be on 06 or 24 until just about top of descent. That makes about 15 minutes difference straight up....

I’ve only ever come in on 24 once in the recent times (total 10?) Into LAX. I’ve never paid attention to the time difference.
Which one is +0:15

 

[lastrow]

Thanks jb. The devices in a modern aircraft are mind boggling . The accumulators used seem to be the hydraulic type, is there more than one? Is the accumulator used to perform routine functions or only on standby?
In the case of landing gear retraction assistance from the energy stored in the accumulator used to augment the aircraft hydraulics in lifting what must be a very heavy weight would make a lot of sense.
Incidentally one design for an electric vehicle uses energy stored in a high mass flywheel for motion.

 

[serfty]

I’ve only ever come in on 24 once in the recent times (total 10?) Into LAX. I’ve never paid attention to the time difference.
Which one is +0:15

Unusual IME; by far the majority for me is 24 for landing.

24 would represent the plus fifteen as the aeroplane has to fly inland before turning around before coming into land, while 06 generally means landing strait in from the Pacific.

Once or twice I reckon I have been able to discern increased enthusiasm in the trans pacific pre landing announcement from the coughpit if 06 is expected.

Most recent 06 was QF15 last year when landing was ~5:30am with a 20 minute wait at the gate until they opened up at 6am.

[disclaimer]

Not A pilot but I have landed at LAX ~100 times.​

[/disclaimer]

 

[Himeno]

Unusual IME; by far the majority for me is 24 for landing.

24 would represent the plus fifteen as the aeroplane has to fly inland before turning around before coming into land, while 06 generally means landing strait in from the Pacific.

Once or twice I reckon I have been able to discern increased enthusiasm in the pre landing announcement if 06 is expected.

I got 06 on my last flight into LAX. Was a little surprised to be coming right in without flying over the city first for 24 like every other QF flight in to LAX I can remember.

 

[jb747]

How does a water landing (such as in the US Air case) work? Presumably the procedure is very different from a normal ground landing - do you just flare as much as possible and hope for the best?

Whilst the movie made a bit of a thing about Sully supposedly calling it a water landing, I wouldn't call it that, as it wasn't a seaplane. It was a ditching. There is very little information around, simply because it's only rarely been done. The training manual calls for a final attitude that is appreciably higher than a normal flare, which means lower speed. The reality is that it is almost impossible to judge height over water, so trying to finesse a flare is unlikely to be a viable option.

As best I can tell from the security cam video of the Hudson ditching, it has gone in with an appreciable angle of attack, basically 'mushing' in. That would imply holding it off until the angle of attack limit, at which point it will simply descend, and you have no further ability to reduce the sink rate.

 

[glasszon]

I recall from air crash investigations that a few accidents happened due to the total loss of hydraulic fluid, is it something that can still happen on a modern plane such as A380 and B787 or are there backup system in place that will allow some control even with the total loss of hydraulic fluid?

 

[harvyk]

How heavy must turbulence be before engineers are called in to check the plane? Is there some sort of sensor that if tripped during turbulence the plane needs to be inspected?

Just wondering as that's the reason I was given in the lounge as to why I've just been bumped to an earlier flight this afternoon.

 

[jb747]

The accumulators used seem to be the hydraulic type, is there more than one? Is the accumulator used to perform routine functions or only on standby?

As I understand it, there will be one per hydraulic system. I think they just sit there, and provide whatever pressure they can, when the system pressure falls due to transient loads. Beyond the fact that they exist, we don't need to know much about them.

In the case of landing gear retraction assistance from the energy stored in the accumulator used to augment the aircraft hydraulics in lifting what must be a very heavy weight would make a lot of sense.

During gear retraction, more than the normal hydraulic pumps may come into play. You could have an engine driven pump operating normally, with and air driven pump coming on line during high loads or after an engine driven pump failure. An accumulator could do very little in this instance.

Incidentally one design for an electric vehicle uses energy stored in a high mass flywheel for motion.

The idea of high mass flywheels isn't very appealing in an aircraft installation!

 

[jb747]

Re LAX 24/25 and 06/07.

Early in the morning, LAX try to use 25 for departure, and 06 for arrivals. If you're looking at a landing before about 0610 local, the chances are that it will be 06. So far this year, it's been about 50:50 for me for 06 vs 24.