Ask The Pilot

[mikenz]

Thanks AV. Are there any aerodynamic penalties for the wifi?

 

[jb747]

Do 737 coughpits differ at all? They’ve been around a fair while so I was wondering if all are the same or if they have any slight variations within an airline.

How generic do you want make the question? There is a vast difference between 737 in the early models, to the NG, and then the MAX. There’s a series of images here, to give you an idea.

Boeing 737 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is also a lot of similarity, which is how Boeing has managed to keep the same endorsement.

 

[jb747]

Are commercial aircraft sat phones built in? or are they a mobile device?

Built in. You access them via the radio control panel, as you would any other radio.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Thanks AV. Are there any aerodynamic penalties for the wifi?

If there are any I don’t know about it. We only need to apply the weight penalty.

 

[bablong]

Hi all. I am curious about a fog diversion that I have just experienced. Yesterday, I was on board QF583 Sydney to Perth when around about an hour and a half out of Perth, we turned and headed to Adelaide (see image). The reason provided by the Captain was that unexpected fog meant that we would not be able to land in Perth. He also mentioned that the amount of full on board was an issue. Because it was unexpected, they didn't load sufficient reserves for holding, I presume. He was not specific on that point as I remember it (heads a bit foggy as the trip ended up taking 14 hours in all).

So we headed off to Adelaide and landed. As it happens, a medical emergency occurred on board that had to be attended to while on descent into Adelaide. Once that had run its course, the Captain advised us that although he had hoped we could do a "splash and dash" (my words, not his), this was not possible in Adelaide because of the curfew. He also noted that even if we could do the splash and dash, crew would exceed their hours. In the end, we ended up staying on the plane from when we landed (about 1.30am SA time) until 4am. We were told that because the terminal had closed, it was better to stay on the plane. Fair enough.

Interestingly, instead of flying in a new crew to carry on QF583, they ended up flying in a new A330-200 which ended up leaving Adelaide at about 9.45am I think. I managed to score a seat on the regular 6.10am flight (thanks P1) so got home a few hours earlier.

So, my queries are:

1. I thought Perth was Cat III certified for autoland- can the A330-200 use this or even with Cat III do you still need to carry more fuel for holding/alternate?
2. While flying back to Adelaide, and while at Adelaide, I logged onto FR24 and there were plenty of planes able to land at Perth of all different sizes and varieties. Why not us? Was it the fuel thing again?
3. If the fuel thing, why did our crew have a different set of weather predictions than the other crews that managed to land (and had left their points of departures both before and after us)?
4. I would have thought it would have been better for us to land at Melbourne because it doesn't have a curfew - we could have done the splash and dash and set off again. I assume that the fuel reserves would not have got us that far otherwise they would have used it?

Any comments/clarification would appease my curiosity so thanks in advance.

Please note that my questions are only curiosity based and are not in any way trying to have a go at Qantas. Nature happens and is not always predictable. I get it. Safety is paramount.

I'd also like it to be noted that Qantas handled the whole thing exceptionally well especially given there was a medical issue involved. Cudos to them. The Captain regularly kept everyone informed as did the CSM and the local airport manager at Adelaide. Plenty of water and we were allowed to spend $20 at Muffin Break. The CMS also did very well to calm what I thought was a very unreasonable, pretentious man complaining.

 

[mannej]

You'd find that the best place to ask the question is the Ask the Pilot thread

 

[bablong]

You'd find that the best place to ask the question is the Ask the Pilot thread

Good point. Not sure how to move it there or delete this thread

 

[Franky]

Hi all. I am curious about a fog diversion that I have just experienced. Yesterday, I was on board QF583 Sydney to Perth when around about an hour and a half out of Perth, we turned and headed to Adelaide (see image). The reason provided by the Captain was that unexpected fog meant that we would not be able to land in Perth. He also mentioned that the amount of full on board was an issue. Because it was unexpected, they didn't load sufficient reserves for holding, I presume. He was not specific on that point as I remember it (heads a bit foggy as the trip ended up taking 14 hours in all).

So we headed off to Adelaide and landed. As it happens, a medical emergency occurred on board that had to be attended to while on descent into Adelaide. Once that had run its course, the Captain advised us that although he had hoped we could do a "splash and dash" (my words, not his), this was not possible in Adelaide because of the curfew. He also noted that even if we could do the splash and dash, crew would exceed their hours. In the end, we ended up staying on the plane from when we landed (about 1.30am SA time) until 4am. We were told that because the terminal had closed, it was better to stay on the plane. Fair enough.

Interestingly, instead of flying in a new crew to carry on QF583, they ended up flying in a new A330-200 which ended up leaving Adelaide at about 9.45am I think. I managed to score a seat on the regular 6.10am flight (thanks P1) so got home a few hours earlier.

So, my queries are:

1. I thought Perth was Cat III certified for autoland- can the A330-200 use this or even with Cat III do you still need to carry more fuel for holding/alternate?
2. While flying back to Adelaide, and while at Adelaide, I logged onto FR24 and there were plenty of planes able to land at Perth of all different sizes and varieties. Why not us? Was it the fuel thing again?
3. If the fuel thing, why did our crew have a different set of weather predictions than the other crews that managed to land (and had left their points of departures both before and after us)?
4. I would have thought it would have been better for us to land at Melbourne because it doesn't have a curfew - we could have done the splash and dash and set off again. I assume that the fuel reserves would not have got us that far otherwise they would have used it?

Any comments/clarification would appease my curiosity so thanks in advance.

Please note that my questions are only curiosity based and are not in any way trying to have a go at Qantas. Nature happens and is not always predictable. I get it. Safety is paramount.

I'd also like it to be noted that Qantas handled the whole thing exceptionally well especially given there was a medical issue involved. Cudos to them. The Captain regularly kept everyone informed as did the CSM and the local airport manager at Adelaide. Plenty of water and we were allowed to spend $20 at Muffin Break. The CMS also did very well to calm what I thought was a very unreasonable, pretentious man complaining.

Looks like the vagaries of flying got you. I had to collect my wife from PER last night coming in on QF719 from CBR. It left 33 minutes late, and arrived at 2208 in lieu of the scheduled 2135, so flying around the same time as you. There was a little bit of fog around on my trip out to the airport, but I could clearly see her flight and another on descent as I did so. Good to see your positive comments given the flack QF cop on a regular basis, though that said, once at the terminal, there was no gate available and they had to wait for stairs on the tarmac to be provided, and as she said, they had 5 hours notice they were coming.

 

[RooFlyer]

Good point. Not sure how to move it there or delete this thread

You could either just note that you've asked a question in another thread, and post a link to here, or just copy your text & re-post it over there. Or a friendly moderator might move it for you. @straitman seems to be active today

 

[Saab34]

Virgin are putting in new Split Scimitar winglets on the 737 fleet. Is new training of any sort required with these or just notification of the weight penalty..

With those who fail command upgrade courses, is there a connection between this and overall flying experience ( cadet vs ex GA) and age etc...(young vs old...again obviously some older guys and girls more stick time..). I’d imagine the person with half dozen previous jobs over the young cadet (young in JQ and VA) with no previous history might fair better?

 

[jb747]

So we headed off to Adelaide and landed. As it happens, a medical emergency occurred on board that had to be attended to while on descent into Adelaide. Once that had run its course, the Captain advised us that although he had hoped we could do a "splash and dash" (my words, not his), this was not possible in Adelaide because of the curfew. He also noted that even if we could do the splash and dash, crew would exceed their hours.

The hours limitations are CASA rules, and cannot be ‘fiddled’. Once they came into play, you weren’t going anywhere. The mix of weather, curfews, and hours limitations makes for some interesting calculations at times, especially on long haul operations.

Interestingly, instead of flying in a new crew to carry on QF583, they ended up flying in a new A330-200 which ended up leaving Adelaide at about 9.45am I think. I managed to score a seat on the regular 6.10am flight (thanks P1) so got home a few hours earlier.

It’s pretty much impossible to work out what is going on, just by looking at one crew and aircraft in isolation. The new crew may have been at the end of a stint, or the start. Paxing them there may not have been possible, and it could well be quicker and cheaper to use another aircraft. The duties that they did the next day will come into it too.

1. I thought Perth was Cat III certified for autoland- can the A330-200 use this or even with Cat III do you still need to carry more fuel for holding/alternate?

If an airport has fog on the forecast, it makes no difference what category the ILS is....you will still need fuel to hold until the fog clears, or fuel to divert. If the fog appears on the met data after your decision point, then you can declare an emergency and still continue (as long as you don’t have any alternative airports that you could go to), and the existence of the Cat II/III ILS means that you’re unlikely to have any problem landing.

2. While flying back to Adelaide, and while at Adelaide, I logged onto FR24 and there were plenty of planes able to land at Perth of all different sizes and varieties. Why not us? Was it the fuel thing again?

Some of those flights may have come from closer to Perth, and so might have had later forecasts, that happened to include the fog. Most likely though, is that your captain went with the company flight plan, and didn’t add any extra fuel...and got bitten. I expect that most of the other aircraft were flown by pilots/companies that don’t trust Perth’s weather. I never did.

3. If the fuel thing, why did our crew have a different set of weather predictions than the other crews that managed to land (and had left their points of departures both before and after us)?

The weather forecast did not include fog until quite some time after your aircraft’s flight plan would have been run. Aircraft from Adelaide, for instance, would have had fog on their forecasts though, as they would have been issued later. Mostly though, I expect that the aircraft did not have fog on their weather, but were simply flown by people who don’t trust Perth forecasts, and so put on the fuel over and above the plan.

4. I would have thought it would have been better for us to land at Melbourne because it doesn't have a curfew - we could have done the splash and dash and set off again. I assume that the fuel reserves would not have got us that far otherwise they would have used it?

You mention crew hours originally. Going back to Melbourne would probably have run you into them immediately, with no chance of returning. As it was very late at night, I doubt that there would have been a standby crew, though you may have been able to grab a crew at the end of another flight....if their hours allowed (which isnt’ all that likely).

So, as I see this:
1. The crew had already done a number of sectors that day, so by the end of the planned flight to Perth, they wouldn’t have had a vast number of hours remaining on allowed duty/flight times.
2. The weather forecasts, and TTFs did not require any allowance for fog. It appeared on the TTFs well into the flight.
3. The company plan would not have had any allowance for fog, as the forecasts did not require it.
4. The alternate choices for a large aircraft in WA are extremely limited. Kalgoorlie, can be used but only has parking for a couple of aircraft. It’s not really a safe choice. Learmonth is a long way off, and you’ll be stuck there. So, realistically, you need to carry Adelaide, or Melbourne. That’s a lot of fuel.
5. Most likely the captain carried the flight planned fuel, or perhaps a little more. But, east coast is unlikely.
6. The splash and dash idea might have worked, but any medical involvement will blow the timing out.
7. The inflexibility of Australian curfews is .....

Many, many, moons ago....I was sitting in a favourite hotel bar in Perth, with about 5 other 767 crews. In wandered yet another crew, this time a little more harried looking than usual. Turned out that it was the captain’s first trip in command. Being a good company lad, he’d left Sydney with ‘flight planned fuel’. Somewhere around Adelaide, he’d gotten a new weather, and now Perth had requirements that he couldn’t meet. So, divert into Adelaide, which was actually open. Gets fuel, this time taking what the company offered plus lots more..... Flies to Perth. Goes around off the first approach, holds for an hour, and then gets in on the second attempt. Before having a well deserved beer, he then quizzed all of the captains in the bar on their arrival fuel. The lowest had arrived with fuel to hold for two hours, whilst a couple had the entire east coast. Nobody had anywhere near the company plan.

 

[jb747]

If there are any I don’t know about it. We only need to apply the weight penalty.

Often very small drag penalties are allowed for by slight increases in cruise weights. The penalty is so small that it would be rounded out in most calculations, but by using weight, especially if multiple penalties are being applied, it won’t totally disappear.

 

[jb747]

Virgin are putting in new Split Scimitar winglets on the 737 fleet. Is new training of any sort required with these or just notification of the weight penalty..

There won’t be any training...other than looking out a window and seeing them. The basic weight of the aircraft will change (and they’re all different anyway). The performance numbers should all change, and I guess VB will have fun comparing the achieved results with Boeing claims.

With those who fail command upgrade courses, is there a connection between this and overall flying experience ( cadet vs ex GA) and age etc...(young vs old...again obviously some older guys and girls more stick time..). I’d imagine the person with half dozen previous jobs over the young cadet (young in JQ and VA) with no previous history might fair better?

Within QF command training doesn't come up until 20 plus years, so by that point nobody is inexperienced. People miss out with all sorts of backgrounds, though the reasons will vary. During the period when short timers were able to attempt the course, the ex military had a good (but not unblemished) record. People from regional airlines did well. There's no doubt that there is a sweet spot age wise though...which I'd place at late thirties to late 40s.

 

[Saab34]

Within QF command training doesn't come up until 20 plus years, so by that point nobody is inexperienced. People miss out with all sorts of backgrounds, though the reasons will vary. During the period when short timers were able to attempt the course, the ex military had a good (but not unblemished) record. People from regional airlines did well. There's no doubt that there is a sweet spot age wise though...which I'd place at late thirties to late 40s.

Thanks. I noticed JQ are now starting command courses for the initial bunch of cadets who went online in 2013. Most of the are only late 20s. Total time varies 4-6 thousand hours.

 

[bablong]

The hours limitations are CASA rules, and cannot be ‘fiddled’. Once they came into play, you weren’t going anywhere. The mix of weather, curfews, and hours limitations makes for some interesting calculations at times, especially on long haul operations.



It’s pretty much impossible to work out what is going on, just by looking at one crew and aircraft in isolation. The new crew may have been at the end of a stint, or the start. Paxing them there may not have been possible, and it could well be quicker and cheaper to use another aircraft. The duties that they did the next day will come into it too.



If an airport has fog on the forecast, it makes no difference what category the ILS is....you will still need fuel to hold until the fog clears, or fuel to divert. If the fog appears on the met data after your decision point, then you can declare an emergency and still continue (as long as you don’t have any alternative airports that you could go to), and the existence of the Cat II/III ILS means that you’re unlikely to have any problem landing.



Some of those flights may have come from closer to Perth, and so might have had later forecasts, that happened to include the fog. Most likely though, is that your captain went with the company flight plan, and didn’t add any extra fuel...and got bitten. I expect that most of the other aircraft were flown by pilots/companies that don’t trust Perth’s weather. I never did.



The weather forecast did not include fog until quite some time after your aircraft’s flight plan would have been run. Aircraft from Adelaide, for instance, would have had fog on their forecasts though, as they would have been issued later. Mostly though, I expect that the aircraft did not have fog on their weather, but were simply flown by people who don’t trust Perth forecasts, and so put on the fuel over and above the plan.



You mention crew hours originally. Going back to Melbourne would probably have run you into them immediately, with no chance of returning. As it was very late at night, I doubt that there would have been a standby crew, though you may have been able to grab a crew at the end of another flight....if their hours allowed (which isnt’ all that likely).

So, as I see this:
1. The crew had already done a number of sectors that day, so by the end of the planned flight to Perth, they wouldn’t have had a vast number of hours remaining on allowed duty/flight times.
2. The weather forecasts, and TTFs did not require any allowance for fog. It appeared on the TTFs well into the flight.
3. The company plan would not have had any allowance for fog, as the forecasts did not require it.
4. The alternate choices for a large aircraft in WA are extremely limited. Kalgoorlie, can be used but only has parking for a couple of aircraft. It’s not really a safe choice. Learmonth is a long way off, and you’ll be stuck there. So, realistically, you need to carry Adelaide, or Melbourne. That’s a lot of fuel.
5. Most likely the captain carried the flight planned fuel, or perhaps a little more. But, east coast is unlikely.
6. The splash and dash idea might have worked, but any medical involvement will blow the timing out.
7. The inflexibility of Australian curfews is .....

Many, many, moons ago....I was sitting in a favourite hotel bar in Perth, with about 5 other 767 crews. In wandered yet another crew, this time a little more harried looking than usual. Turned out that it was the captain’s first trip in command. Being a good company lad, he’d left Sydney with ‘flight planned fuel’. Somewhere around Adelaide, he’d gotten a new weather, and now Perth had requirements that he couldn’t meet. So, divert into Adelaide, which was actually open. Gets fuel, this time taking what the company offered plus lots more..... Flies to Perth. Goes around off the first approach, holds for an hour, and then gets in on the second attempt. Before having a well deserved beer, he then quizzed all of the captains in the bar on their arrival fuel. The lowest had arrived with fuel to hold for two hours, whilst a couple had the entire east coast. Nobody had anywhere near the company plan.

Thanks JB.

 

[747sp]

On Friday I noticed in sydney that all the fights landed on the east west runway ,when I was watching, but a few took off still on the north south runway. I was wondering if the landing or the takeoff is harder in a cross wind?

 

[AviatorInsight]

Friday night’s landing from HBA was definitely tricky landing on 25. The mechanical turbulence from the surrounding buildings makes it hard even when it’s blowing straight down the strip. Add the wind in for our arrival (30kts crosswind) and I was working the controls. So I’d say that landing is not necessarily harder, just requires a different set of skills compared to taking off.

Taking off in a crosswind is fairly straight forward. You’ll keep it straight with rudder and position the ailerons into wind. This cross control is held until airborne when you relax it and let the aircraft naturally crab into wind. The reverse happens on landing...straight with rudder and aileron into wind just prior to touchdown.

 

[jb747]

On Friday I noticed in sydney that all the fights landed on the east west runway ,when I was watching, but a few took off still on the north south runway. I was wondering if the landing or the takeoff is harder in a cross wind?

The landing is appreciably more difficult than the take-off, though there are some traps in the take-off that might not be all that obvious.

Basically though, when taking off, you are already attached to the ground, and all you're really aiming to do is keep the aircraft straight (with rudder), and wings level (with aileron). That means that the controls are crossed during the take off, with aileron opposite to the rudder. As you become airborne, there is no hurry to uncross the controls, so you'll initially become airborne with a degree of sideslip. You take that out over a few seconds. There is a tendency in gusty conditions to over control during the rotate, in particular, rotating too fast, so that can lead to increased risk of tail strike.

There are actually a couple of techniques used for crosswind landings. Whilst most aircraft are flown with the heading offset to put the track down the runway (so they are crabbing), there are some in which the aircraft is pointed down the runway, and some bank is used to correct the track. Not an airliner technique. The problem with landing (apart from the fact that you might be going about 80 kph sideways), is that when you land you need the drift to have been reduced as much as possible (the Airbus limit is 5º, though Boeing don't limit it). So, just prior to touchdown, you need to use rudder to point the aircraft down the runway. As soon as you do that, you'll start to drift downwind. Depending upon the aircraft, you can counter that with a small amount of bank. But, in very big aircraft, application of bank near the runway imposes the risk of a pod scrape (hitting an engine on the ground), so it has to be done judiciously. You'll hear comments about 'kicking in rudder', which is the sort of comment that marks the user as a non pilot. A sudden application of rudder, will give you a strong rolling secondary effect, in the opposite direction to what you need. The rudder input has to be matched with the roll input, and happens over a few seconds...not suddenly.

When the aircraft is straightened at the end of the flare, the point of rotation is approximately just in front of the main gear. The coughpit is literally moved sideways during the manoeuvre. This means that if you have placed yourself at the normal aiming point, during the flare you'll be displaced appreciably down wind, which is not what you want. So, in large aircraft, you actually aim up to half the runway width on the upwind side, then during the flare you should be displaced to the centreline.

It's possible in some aircraft to land without removing any of the drift. The 747 and 767 could both be landed this way, but the 747 was appreciably smoother about it. It was the normal technique on a wet runway.

The theory is simple enough, but the reality is that crosswinds are rarely smooth, so those really windy days are generally also very gusty. That means that the aircraft is never really in a steady state, with constant changes needed in bank, pitch, and power. The A380 had a little party trick for gusty crosswinds, in that the FBW system would see the changes as sideslip, and it would use rudder automatically to remove any sideslip. The upshot of that was that it tended to smooth out the effects of the lateral gusts.

 

[mjt57]

Within QF command training doesn't come up until 20 plus years, so by that point nobody is inexperienced. People miss out with all sorts of backgrounds, though the reasons will vary. During the period when short timers were able to attempt the course, the ex military had a good (but not unblemished) record. People from regional airlines did well. There's no doubt that there is a sweet spot age wise though...which I'd place at late thirties to late 40s.

How do pilots who may have sat in the left seat of aircraft like the C17 go? Or even the RAAF's VIP fleet? What ages would they be at a minimum?

It must be frustrating for them to have to sit in the jump seat for a long time after being in command, themselves.

 

[jb747]

How do pilots who may have sat in the left seat of aircraft like the C17 go? Or even the RAAF's VIP fleet? What ages would they be at a minimum?

Like everything...they vary. As you'd expect, the ex RAAF people can all fly, but they have virtually zero exposure (even the VIP & C17 people) to the world of airline operations. They could, easily enough, slot into the right hand seat on arrival. When the time comes, not all of them pass command training.

It must be frustrating for them to have to sit in the jump seat for a long time after being in command, themselves.

Well, they don't have to join if they don't want to...and I doubt that it's any more frustrating than it is for the fighter people, and they have a greater percentage of command time.