Ask The Pilot

  • Thread starter Thread starter NM
  • Start date Start date
  • Featured
Sorry, jb747.
I have been watching too many aeroplane landing/touchdown youtube videos, and on the landing sequence, there is the countdown, 500/400/300/200/50 and then what sounds like ret(a)^d, when the plane tyres touches the ground.
Maybe QF don't do this.
Its that recorder voice, not the pilots voice.
If that makes any more sense.
 
Sorry, jb747.
I have been watching too many aeroplane landing/touchdown youtube videos, and on the landing sequence, there is the countdown, 500/400/300/200/50 and then what sounds like ret(a)^d, when the plane tyres touches the ground.
Maybe QF don't do this.
Its that recorder voice, not the pilots voice.
If that makes any more sense.
I thought it was just the way Airbus insults pilots!
 
Turn business expenses into Business Class! Process $10,000 through pay.com.au to score 20,000 bonus PayRewards Points and join 30k+ savvy business owners enjoying these benefits:

- Pay suppliers who don’t take Amex
- Max out credit card rewards—even on government payments
- Earn & Transfer PayRewards Points to 8+ top airline & hotel partners

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Sorry, jb747.
I have been watching too many aeroplane landing/touchdown youtube videos, and on the landing sequence, there is the countdown, 500/400/300/200/50 and then what sounds like ret(a)^d, when the plane tyres touches the ground.
Maybe QF don't do this.
Its that recorder voice, not the pilots voice.
If that makes any more sense.
The 737 annunciates it to me on the primary flight display every time the thrust levers come back to idle for the descent. 🫣
 
Sorry, jb747.
I have been watching too many aeroplane landing/touchdown youtube videos, and on the landing sequence, there is the countdown, 500/400/300/200/50 and then what sounds like ret(a)^d, when the plane tyres touches the ground.

Its that recorder voice, not the pilots voice.
The altitude callouts are, to some extent, customisable by individual airlines, so they aren't necessarily all the same. The QF calls on the 380 were 1000, 500, hundred above, minima, 100, 50, 40, 30, 20, retard.

The "hundred above", and "minima" calls move depending upon what you have set in the FMGS (FMC) and might overwrite one of the others.

The "retard" call is telling you that it wants the thrust levers moved out of the CLB (or MCT) detent and pulled back to idle. On 99% of manually flown approaches, the levers were closed before that call was made, which had the effect of cancelling it. On automatic landings, the levers were left in CLB until the aircraft asked for them to be moved. The aircraft inertia was such, that closing the levers at the 40' call was almost always right.

Whilst you could manually control the thrust, almost all landings, whether automatic or manual, were flown with the autothrust engaged. If you get to the flare, and it's still in, then it will attempt to maintain the speed, so as you flare it will be adding power. But, as you flare, you actually want the aircraft to be decelerating, so adding power (unless you're trying to catch some gusts) is not what you want. "Retard" is the reminder that you need to move the levers.


I thought it was just the way Airbus insults pilots!
Well, if you let it go off, then perhaps that's appropriate.
 
"Retard" is the reminder that you need to move the levers.
Any idea of the origin of the word ‘retard’ in this context? Presumably something like ‘retard (slow) the speed’ but I wonder why it wouldn’t be something like ‘levers’?

Or lost in Franglais?
 
Any idea of the origin of the word ‘retard’ in this context? Presumably something like ‘retard (slow) the speed’ but I wonder why it wouldn’t be something like ‘levers’?

Or lost in Franglais?
IMHO The use of Retard is a much more specific absolute universal term than decrease/reduce/slow/levers etc?
 
Whilst retard can mean to reduce the speed, it also means to pull something back, which is exactly the outcome you want. You aren't directly reducing the speed, but you are pulling the thrust levers back...i.e. retarding them. And it gives the Boeing pilots a something to feel superior about.
 
JB are there any aircraft you would like to fly that you didn’t get an option to, that your curious self might be interesting in?

A350-1000?
747-8?
A340?
 
JB are there any aircraft you would like to fly that you didn’t get an option to, that your curious self might be interesting in?

A350-1000?
747-8?
A340?
The F-4 would have been interesting. But, I'm not really interested in any of the airliners that I didn't fly. I managed a nice haul as it was. The 767-400 perhaps.
No. I was a knuck at heart.
tardus is latin for Slow - I wonder what Dr. Who thinks about that :)
Good job it's a Tardis then.
 
Last edited:
What’s VATSIM? This is DCS on one of the multiplayer servers.

Ok, I see what VATSIM is. So, no. DCS is a sim where you find interesting people and try to kill them.

Yeah it just runs over the top of MSFS2020, Prepar3d or Xplane. There's quite a few current and ex-RAAF pilots on there (although outnumbered by wannabe-RAAFies).
 
Yeah it just runs over the top of MSFS2020, Prepar3d or Xplane. There's quite a few current and ex-RAAF pilots on there (although outnumbered by wannabe-RAAFies).
You wouldn't like the ATC aspects of DCS. There isn't any. Simultaneous use of any runway for take and landing, in both directions, is the norm. Whilst some of the players are quite deadly, most are somewhat restricted in their flying ability. They're okay once they get airborne, but there's no guarantee they'll be successful at getting off the runway. And many never have to worry about landing, as they'll be shot down before that becomes an issue.
 
You wouldn't like the ATC aspects of DCS. There isn't any. Simultaneous use of any runway for take and landing, in both directions, is the norm. Whilst some of the players are quite deadly, most are somewhat restricted in their flying ability. They're okay once they get airborne, but there's no guarantee they'll be successful at getting off the runway. And many never have to worry about landing, as they'll be shot down before that becomes an issue.

VATSIM is OK for ATC - more for airliners, though occasionally I see YMES/YWLM active.

Trouble with VATSIM ATC is they take it far too seriously, and have exams etc for controllers, so no real current controller would ever consider doing it - so most are hobbyists / wannabes. Still, far more realistic than the AI ATC.

ATC in the US is very good, I think they have a lot of real retired controllers on there, you can definitely tell when you get a real one.

Personally I'd rather stick a fork in my eye than do ATC for fun.
 

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.

Currently Active Users

Back
Top