Ask The Pilot

[AviatorInsight]

Gentlemen. Thoughts? Looks uncomfortable.

I reckon it’s a good save by the Captain. Looks uncomfortable but it definitely could have been worse. There was no real flare happening.

Don’t Easyjet still do circuit training somewhere in France in the actual aircraft? The Captain seems to be looking over a lot at the FO. This is what makes me think it could be a training flight...could be wrong though.

 

[jb747]

I reckon it’s a good save by the Captain. Looks uncomfortable but it definitely could have been worse. There was no real flare happening.

Don’t Easyjet still do circuit training somewhere in France in the actual aircraft? The Captain seems to be looking over a lot at the FO. This is what makes me think it could be a training flight...could be wrong though.

I wondered about the possibility of training, simply because line captains aren’t normally mentally geared to that sort of response on the thrust levers. Basically he’s almost expecting something to happen.

In an Airbus, the aircraft will cancel out any of the pitch changes that are induced by power changes. Mostly, anyway. In, say, a 767 the act of changing the power results in a strong pitch couple, so you will always need some sort of control input to counter this with any thrust lever movement. This becomes second nature. But, in an AB, this thrust couple is cancelled by the FBW, as long as it’s in normal law. And there lies the rub, because as it approaches the flare (100’), it isn’t in normal law, but is in landing law, and now it no longer cancels the thrust/pitch couple. So, reduce the power, and it will pitch down unless you counter it.

 

[Aus ATC]

Looking at a different aircraft, the 767.... QF had three different types of these, the P&W 200s, the RR 300s and the GE 300s. All three had different flare techniques. The power was reduced in the GEs much earlier than in the RRs. It was generally best to complete the flare in the RRs before you reduced the power at all, which was a technique that would give you a monstrous float if you did in in a GE. Conversely, using the GE technique on an RR was a guaranteed way of planting it.

Given these differences, as a pilot what cues did you have, or need, to remember which version you were flying on any particular day? Seems the variations would require quite different handling - I assume it was a common type endorsement.

 

[Kerrodt]

This video is doing the rounds at the moment. Apparently an Indonesian registered aircraft landing at Bhutan Airport - which is said to be a very treacherous approach. But this effort does seem to be a bit extreme. Any, printable, comments?

Cockpit Video: Worst Boeing 737 Landing Ever?!

Check out this coughpit video footage of a cargo Boeing 737 landing in Paro, Bhutan. I can't believe how the pilots are flying the plane.

onemileatatime.com

What astounds me is that in the longer version of the video it is clear that the person in the RHS seat is holding a mobile phone throughout and filming the whole thing - on what basis would this be ever allowable?

 

[jb747]

Given these differences, as a pilot what cues did you have, or need, to remember which version you were flying on any particular day? Seems the variations would require quite different handling - I assume it was a common type endorsement.

When I did my conversion on to the 767, the only simulator was for the -200, and the first actual aircraft that I flew was a -300. The 300 was much nicer to fly, with greater tail volume (area of the tail multiplied by the moment arm) giving much better feel, especially in the flare. They did have a common endorsement, and though they differed in many ways, they were much closer together than other aircraft with common endorsements. The one that surprises me, is the common endorsement A330 and A350. Yes, Airbus make things behave in similar ways, but the systems, which is a big part of flying any aircraft, are quite different.

Day to day, we all worked out our own way of handling the different models. One that comes to mind is a quote from one of the other pilots re the RR landing technique... "when I'm finished with the wings, I'm finished with the engines". Some of us just accepted that the -200s couldn't be landed smoothly.....

 

[jb747]

What astounds me is that in the longer version of the video it is clear that the person in the RHS seat is holding a mobile phone throughout and filming the whole thing - on what basis would this be ever allowable?

There is sometimes a difference between what is allowed, and what happens. And perhaps he's an even worse pilot than the bloke doing the flying, so it's best that he's not interested in the controls.

 

[Saab34]

There is a old Jetstar incident with a mobile phone being used on approach into Singapore which resulted in a unstable approach. I can’t recall if they were fired however it didn’t go down well apparently.

AV might be able to answer however I would assume mobiles are turned off from push to top of climb? And top of climb to engines off? Is it on the checklist or just expected by company?

 

[Quickstatus]

There is a old Jetstar incident with a mobile phone

 

[Quickstatus]

Please and thank you:

Q: Squawk codes. I understand there are universal codes 7500,7600, 7700

When ATC issues an aircraft a squawk code, is this generated randomly?
And what is the mechanism that prevents 2 different aircraft having the same squawk code?

What does a pilot do when an ATC issues a "IDENT" request and what does the ATC see on their screen?

 

[AviatorInsight]

AV might be able to answer however I would assume mobiles are turned off from push to top of climb? And top of climb to engines off? Is it on the checklist or just expected by company?

It’s not on the checklist but it’s expected to have phones off/flight mode.

Same thing with the iPads (electronic flight bag). Before pushback we need to make sure it’s in flight mode too.

 

[Aus ATC]

Please and thank you:

Q: Squawk codes. I understand there are universal codes 7500,7600, 7700

When ATC issues an aircraft a squawk code, is this generated randomly?
And what is the mechanism that prevents 2 different aircraft having the same squawk code?

What does a pilot do when an ATC issues a "IDENT" request and what does the ATC see on their screen?

There is also a new emergency code 7400 for RPAS Loss of Link.

The squawk (SSR) code is generated by the ATC system from a number of pre-configured groups of codes. One code per flight leg. For example there are "international" code groups and "domestic" code groups assigned to each country in the ICAO Asia-Pacific Air Navigation Plan. The idea is to avoid adjacent countries (with shared radar coverage - not an issue here in Australia) using the same codes, and to allow international flights to keep the same assigned code for the whole flight (as far as practicable).

Within Australia, each Flight Information Region (Brisbane and Melbourne) have different code groups. And the system can only assign a discrete code if it is "available" - all this prevents (or aims to) the same code in use by 2 aircraft. But it still sometimes happens (but rarely).

An instruction to "SQUAWK IDENT" will have the pilot push a button on the transponder. It generates a specific reply (along with the normal SSR or Mode S replies). In the ATC system it displays a change in symbol - which will vary by ATC system. In our system the track symbol will flash blue for around 18 seconds.

 

[jb747]

I recall taxiing out in KL once, and the ground controller gave us a code that included the digit '8'. We queried him, but he stuck with it, so we just modded it to a zero, and sorted it out with the radar controller.

 

[Quickstatus]

the digit '8

What's the significance of that?

 

[AviatorInsight]

What's the significance of that?

Because it’s part of the Octal numbering system which includes the numbers 0-7 only. The numbers 8 and 9 aren’t even on the transponder for us to enter.

 

[Quickstatus]

Octal numbering system

Why Octal? - anything to do with the computing 8 bit?

 

[AviatorInsight]

Why Octal? - anything to do with the computing 8 bit?

From my research this is what I found:

internally it's actually a 12-bit binary number and octal works really well since can be used as a "shortcut" for entering groups of three binary digits at a time (000 - 111, which is 0-7 in octal).

Today it wouldn't be a problem to enter the ID as a decimal number (between 0 and 4095), but when the transponder was invented, decades before the arrival of inexpensive programmable chips, a reliable converter was a costly device.

 

[Aus ATC]

Wikipedia is your friend - check any references to Mode A for context around SSR Codes.

Secondary surveillance radar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Mode A (SSR) replies for identity comprise 12 bits (actually 4 x 3 bits) hence the 4 octal digits.

 

[Saab34]

JB
I see QF are doing LAX-LAX circuits every couple of months on these idle A380s.

Are these QF pilots? I assume Management?

Or American based A380 rated contract pilots etc..?

 

[mjt57]

Last night "Sully" was on the box. Watching it, some of the scenes from the public enquiry bit of the movie had me asking "why did they do that?"

For example, during the sims in the A320 each of the pilots were operating the thrust levers and pulled them back to idle or whatever it's called as each landed without power. Why would they have done that?

The APU - Sully (Hanks) started it shortly after the bird strike. Would this have happened during the real event? How long does the APU run for following the departure process?

 

[AviatorInsight]

Last night "Sully" was on the box. Watching it, some of the scenes from the public enquiry bit of the movie had me asking "why did they do that?"

For example, during the sims in the A320 each of the pilots were operating the thrust levers and pulled them back to idle or whatever it's called as each landed without power. Why would they have done that?

I would just say it would be a force of habit. They never ran the checklist in the simulations. Whereas Sully did. During the checklist it calls for the thrust levers to be at idle.

One thing that gets me (and JB might know this one) is why they “pulled out” the checklis? Does the ECAM not display the checklist in a dual engine failure?

The APU - Sully (Hanks) started it shortly after the bird strike. Would this have happened during the real event? How long does the APU run for following the departure process?

I would definitely do the same. Even during a single engine failure, I associate the Pan call with starting the APU. Of course I’m not sure of the Airbus electrical system, but it’ll take a minute to get started and then when we run the checklist we don’t need to wait for it to start up, so we can just keep running the checklist and not have to break up the flow.

When you lose both engine generators and you’re on battery power, you lose a lot of systems. The checklist will eventually call for the APU to be started as a backup generator and provide full electric function to all systems.

After engine start the APU comes off. The only time we leave the APU on is when we’re doing EDTO flights, because we don’t have APU on demand. We also leave it on, because should the APU not start before EDTO entry point (where 3 sources of generators are needed) then we would either need to turn back, divert, or find a non EDTO route to continue. The 777 did have APU on demand and so we never needed to turn it on prior to EDTO entry.