Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

JB I had a flash back to military aircraft, do you know if the tower still does the "Buckshot 23 cleared to land, check wheels" with the pilot then in the acknowledgement pushing a button on the radio that will beep confirming the wheels are down and locked.

I don't know if they do, and I can't even think of anyone to ask. But, it was a very simple procedure, and I'm sure it saved a lot of paint over the years. Thinking back on it, we did it in the Macchi, but not the A-4.

What's the background to why they do that?

The history I can't help you with at all. Perhaps Straitman might recall.

And did you every find yourself cleared to land and delaying the pushing of the button in order to complete the wheels check?

No. The Macchi was a pretty clean little aircraft, and if you delayed the gear at all, you'd soon find yourself high. In the A-4 we never retracted the gear if we were doing circuits, and it was extended as soon as the speed allowed on an arrival.

This might be appropriate reading....QAM - The Last Landing of Mirage A3-16

 

[Captain Halliday]

JB I had a flash back to military aircraft, do you know if the tower still does the "Buckshot 23 cleared to land, check wheels" with the pilot then in the acknowledgement pushing a button on the radio that will beep confirming the wheels are down and locked.

What's the background to why they do that?

And did you every find yourself cleared to land and delaying the pushing of the button in order to complete the wheels check?

Alby

I’m not a pilot but I can confirm that in DRW, which is a Defence operated tower, they were doing this as recently as July.

When I lived there I’d frequently hear the tower clear defence aircraft in that manner. Never civilian aircraft.

However, the readback wasn’t a beep. It was always, “cleared to land RWY11. Three green. (callsign)”.

Someone with ATC background may be able to answer the why.

 

[por930]

JB, with the recent Low Fuel landing of the United 787 in Sydney, do you think it was a "simple" miscalculation of the required fuel for the conditions by all concerned? as other aircraft that night managed to get across the ocean from the US without low fuel problems. Though one other aircraft on the US-Australia run did divert, reason unknown.

Do dispatch keep track of quantities of fuel in the aircraft after each flight, and provide a recommendation of added fuel for a given flight, or do they simply recommend the amount of fuel for the trip, and you work out what fuel the aircraft currently has in the tanks, to determine the total loaded fuel? But, in the end, the trip fuel quantities stops with the captain...

As for the Mayday Fuel call providing a quicker arrival, and the resultant emergency declared, city streets closed. There was no disaster, so overkill. But, if there was a disaster, all heroes for the safety actions. Hindsight is wonderful.

Hope you op went ok.

 

[straitman]

JB I had a flash back to military aircraft, do you know if the tower still does the "Buckshot 23 cleared to land, check wheels" with the pilot then in the acknowledgement pushing a button on the radio that will beep confirming the wheels are down and locked.

What's the background to why they do that?

And did you every find yourself cleared to land and delaying the pushing of the button in order to complete the wheels check?

Alby

I don't know if they do, and I can't even think of anyone to ask. But, it was a very simple procedure, and I'm sure it saved a lot of paint over the years. Thinking back on it, we did it in the Macchi, but not the A-4.



The history I can't help you with at all. Perhaps Straitman might recall.



No. The Macchi was a pretty clean little aircraft, and if you delayed the gear at all, you'd soon find yourself high. In the A-4 we never retracted the gear if we were doing circuits, and it was extended as soon as the speed allowed on an arrival.

This might be appropriate reading....QAM - The Last Landing of Mirage A3-16

I have no idea of the history associated with this.

For the last few months I have been working on the grounds school subjects and exams for the new PC-21 trainer (replacing the PC-9) and can conform that the press button system is in place on the PC-21. It is (still)a standard military system and removes another possibility from the error chain.

The first picture here is of a 2FTS PC-21 over East Sale and the second, third and fourth ones of CFS/Roulette aircraft.

 

[jb747]

I’m not a pilot but I can confirm that in DRW, which is a Defence operated tower, they were doing this as recently as July.

When I lived there I’d frequently hear the tower clear defence aircraft in that manner. Never civilian aircraft.

However, the readback wasn’t a beep. It was always, “cleared to land RWY11. Three green. (callsign)”.

Ah, I think you misunderstood. The RAAF response was, as you say, ‘clear to land, three greens’, but in addition that would be followed by a generated tone (beep). As the pilot gave the above response, he’d press a button on the control column that would generate and transmit the tone, as long as the gear was showing down. So, effectively, it gave the controller an aural way of checking the actual coughpit settings.

The Mirage used it, as did the Macchi (and as Bill has said the PC21, so I’d assume it continued through the PC9). I don’t think it was used on any of the US built aircraft (I might have a chance to check that in a week or so). In the case of both the Macchi and Mirage, there were gear up landings when the aircraft were operating at places that didn’t check the tone.

 

[jb747]

JB, with the recent Low Fuel landing of the United 787 in Sydney, do you think it was a "simple" miscalculation of the required fuel for the conditions by all concerned? as other aircraft that night managed to get across the ocean from the US without low fuel problems. Though one other aircraft on the US-Australia run did divert, reason unknown.

As best I can glean, the weather at Sydney was not a huge issue. It's certainly not wonderful, but is above the alternate criteria (i.e. the point at which you have to carry an alternate).
METAR YSSY 041930Z 17025G35KT 8000 -RA FEW015 SCT025 14/14
Q1019 TEMPO 1930/2230 4000 RA BKN008 FM1930 MOD
TURB BLW 5000FT=

The FMC would have been showing quite accurate arrival fuel figures for the entire flight, so there isn't really room for miscalculation. They look to have been held a bit lower than they might have wanted, but only in the order of 2,000' or so. Nevertheless, over a long night, that will eat up the variable fuel.

The NOTAMs for the arrival included a requirement for 20 minutes of ATC holding. That is never updated after departure, and you never find out the real state of play until you actually arrive. My bet is that they had perfectly adequate fuel for the planned arrival, plus that 20 minutes of holding, but that Sydney ATC actually wanted them to hold for longer. When they said they couldn't they were basically 'dared' to declare an emergency, so they did.

This is not helped by a change that was made by Airservices a year or two ago, in which they changed the ATC holding time to 'advisory hold'. Any fool would understand that to a company, advisory hold means you don't actually need it.

I haven't operated to Sydney in quite a while now, so I don't keep up with the goings on, but I did note that QF12 was planned with an additional 43 minutes of holding, on top of everything else. Basically they didn't trust Sydney.

The road closures, etc, was a total overreaction, but was forced by the fact that they don't differentiate a mayday when the aircraft is falling apart, to one in which you'll be landing with one kilo less than the mandated requirement....and of course that only applied if he was actually held. As he wasn't, he had plenty of fuel. Nanny state.

Do dispatch keep track of quantities of fuel in the aircraft after each flight, and provide a recommendation of added fuel for a given flight, or do they simply recommend the amount of fuel for the trip, and you work out what fuel the aircraft currently has in the tanks, to determine the total loaded fuel? But, in the end, the trip fuel quantities stops with the captain...

I don't know what other companies do. I'm not interested in anything they have to say after departure, and only marginally beforehand.

Hope you op went ok.

Op went fine. Can't play football yet, but in another week or so....

 

[straitman]

Ah, I think you misunderstood. The RAAF response was, as you say, ‘clear to land, three greens’, but in addition that would be followed by a generated tone (beep). As the pilot gave the above response, he’d press a button on the control column that would generate and transmit the tone, as long as the gear was showing down. So, effectively, it gave the controller an aural way of checking the actual coughpit settings.

The Mirage used it, as did the Macchi (and as Bill has said the PC21, so I’d assume it continued through the PC9). I don’t think it was used on any of the US built aircraft (I might have a chance to check that in a week or so). In the case of both the Macchi and Mirage, there were gear up landings when the aircraft were operating at places that didn’t check the tone.

I just confirmed from an F-111 pilot friend, Mal Hurman, that the the 'Pig' also used this system.

As a side line Mal had the misfortune to have to eject out of a Mirage at Butterworth when the surrounding area was full of insurgents. (A story for another time and place)

For anyone who has not read the link that jb747 posted above in post #12902 should do so as it a pretty good indicator of how an simple situation can go pear shaped really quickly.

 

[por930]

Had to post this. Celebrating 60 Years of Transatlantic Jet Service...The flight decks of that era were very military looking. Obviously you needed to be airmen(not meant as a sexist comment) in those days.

Celebrating 60 Years of Transatlantic Jet Service – Flightradar24 Blog

 

[WheelieBagWanderer]

Hi JB.

Hope you're on the mend soon.

Just wondering what your opinion is of this LH A380 Go Around? Doesn't "look" that windy but there was a noticeable bank before the GA was initiated. Traffic on the runway? Or problem with the approach do you think? Whatever it is, an awesome sound when those engines spool up!

 

[jb747]

Had to post this. Celebrating 60 Years of Transatlantic Jet Service...The flight decks of that era were very military looking. Obviously you needed to be airmen(not meant as a sexist comment) in those days.

If you mean the flight deck is very complex, then that's really the mark of the era, more than anything military. Modern flight decks look much less complex, simply because so much is hidden from the casual glance. Dig into the various display options, and much of that complexity can be found.

The most military aspect of coughpits, and flight, is that there is a very definite rank structure. Committee meetings are not held before decisions are made.

With regard to females in the flight deck...they stopped being a novelty (unless you happen to be in HR) about 30 years ago. The girls had no hurdles that the blokes didn't also face, and the ones that we did see deserved to be there. Now that we seem to be in an era of quotas, the standards become much more 'flexible', for want of a better term. Historically, the women in the coughpit were as good as anyone, but it remains to be seen whether that will be the case in the future.

 

[jb747]

Just wondering what your opinion is of this LH A380 Go Around? Doesn't "look" that windy but there was a noticeable bank before the GA was initiated. Traffic on the runway? Or problem with the approach do you think? Whatever it is, an awesome sound when those engines spool up!

You don't see A380s doing visual circuits too often. I wonder if this is a bit of training, and not a line operation. The aircraft looks to be pretty much under control in pitch, but rather less so in roll. Wing down, like that, approaching the flare isn't a good look. You don't need much bank to be nearing pod scrape territory.

 

[albatross710]

This might be appropriate reading....QAM - The Last Landing of Mirage A3-16

Thanks jb747, Captain Halliday, straitman for the replies. Certainly enjoyed reading the Mirage article.

 

[glasszon]

How difficult are the semi-annual simulator sessions for pilots? Just read the news in NZ that a 777 captain crashed the plane in simulator which ultimately led to the medical certificate not being renewed (and cost his job), is crashing the plane in simulator rare and considered a serious event?

Air New Zealand must pay $20,000 to pilot following flight simulator saga: Employment Relations Authority

 

[QF WP]

JB, with the recent Low Fuel landing of the United 787 in Sydney, do you think it was a "simple" miscalculation of the required fuel for the conditions by all concerned? as other aircraft that night managed to get across the ocean from the US without low fuel problems. Though one other aircraft on the US-Australia run did divert, reason unknown.

Do dispatch keep track of quantities of fuel in the aircraft after each flight, and provide a recommendation of added fuel for a given flight, or do they simply recommend the amount of fuel for the trip, and you work out what fuel the aircraft currently has in the tanks, to determine the total loaded fuel? But, in the end, the trip fuel quantities stops with the captain...

As for the Mayday Fuel call providing a quicker arrival, and the resultant emergency declared, city streets closed. There was no disaster, so overkill. But, if there was a disaster, all heroes for the safety actions. Hindsight is wonderful.

Hope you op went ok.

For those interested, the ATC conversation for that incident is here:

.

Albeit this is the shortened version (the long version is here with video:

)

 

[Boca68]

For those interested, the ATC conversation for that incident is here:

.

Albeit this is the shortened version (the long version is here with video:

)

Thanks QF WP.

Interesting stuff! For the pilots, what does ATC mean when the say, e.g. "contact director 125.5" ?

 

[jb747]

Interesting stuff! For the pilots, what does ATC mean when the say, e.g. "contact director 125.5" ?

That's just a change of control and their frequency. Sydney director handles from about 6,000' down until the aircraft contact the tower.

 

[jb747]

For those interested, the ATC conversation for that incident is here:

It doesn't include the interesting parts. You need the conversation prior to the mayday declaration to get a picture of what was happening.

 

[AviatorInsight]

How difficult are the semi-annual simulator sessions for pilots? Just read the news in NZ that a 777 captain crashed the plane in simulator which ultimately led to the medical certificate not being renewed (and cost his job), is crashing the plane in simulator rare and considered a serious event?

Air New Zealand must pay $20,000 to pilot following flight simulator saga: Employment Relations Authority

Not that hard really. They're designed to assess our decision making and handling skills with certain focus items for that time of the cyclic. The problem with this story is that there had been a period of time in which Air NZ was monitoring this pilot. This incident with the simulator was just the last straw for the airline to pull him from operations until he is investigated further. I don't know more into the situation but a pilot won't be pulled off line because of crashing the simulator just once.

I have learnt valuable lessons in the simulator during training exercises (the same exercise repeated with different weather conditions) and have crashed. But during my check sim on a line orientated exercise, I have never crashed the sim. I have seen pilots almost crash the sim during a check, but it usually involves a repeat with a certain standard to be performed. If there's more than 2 repeats it's a fail.

 

[jb747]

How difficult are the semi-annual simulator sessions for pilots? Just read the news in NZ that a 777 captain crashed the plane in simulator which ultimately led to the medical certificate not being renewed (and cost his job), is crashing the plane in simulator rare and considered a serious event?

Like all media stories, there is more to it.

Whilst I have never crashed, or even seen, the simulator crashed, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It also doesn't mean that it's necessarily a terrible thing. It's all about context. If you were given a quadruple engine failure, and ended up short of the runway, then that would constitute a good attempt. Screwing up a standard instrument approach would be something else entirely.

Within training, it's all about history. If a pilot has a history of occasionally crashing the bat cave, or of doing unusual things, then he's outside of the normal envelope. He needs to to be watched more closely, and generally that tends to be a spiral. Watch closely, and you see even more things not to like.

The payment of $20k is relatively trivial, so the court would seem to have agreed with a detail, but not with him being in the air.

Sim failures happen, but I have no idea of the incidence. But, do it once, and there is no issue as long as you fix the problem on the next look. Do it twice, and you have too much attention. Do it thrice, and you won't be around.

In this case, the sim failures seem to have morphed into medical issues, so there is much more at play.

 

[glasszon]

Thanks to both AviatorInsight and jb747, that makes a lot of sense, I also found the actual case and it matches with what you guys said.
https://www.employment.govt.nz/assets/elawpdf/2018/2018-NZERA-Auckland-305.pdf