Ask The Pilot

[RSD]

We can. But not everywhere. Neither can Europe.

Dubai turned into complete chaos every time the fog appeared, and it had little to do with the ability of aircraft to land.



Of course, if we could miraculously build a bunch of airports with equally long, wide spaced, parallel runways, in reasonably level areas, not near any hills, which are not surrounded by NIMBYS, and for which the policians haven't imposed arbitrary restrictions, then we might be part way to solving any issues. Of course they'd all have to be so far from the city they're supporting that you'd be better off driving, but that's Oz.

JB - what seemed to be the cause of the chaos in Dubai when the fog happens there? I've been caught in it before.

Would DFW be a good example of the sort of major airports we really need here?

 

[jb747]

You wont need to worry about fog. Any fog will be blown away by storms later today

Summer fog in Melbourne. Certainly happens, but it's an early morning event, that disappeared pretty quickly once the sun came up. I don't think I'd loose too much sleep about it.

JB - what seemed to be the cause of the chaos in Dubai when the fog happens there? I've been caught in it before.

Everything had to slow down. Spacing between aircraft on finals had to increase, otherwise the aircraft in front will affect the ILS beam for the following aircraft. So, where Dubai generally had the absolute minimum spacing between aircraft, it was roughly double in fog. Crossing the runways often came with a long wait, as they couldn't sneak you into the gaps between arriving aircraft.

Would DFW be a good example of the sort of major airports we really need here?

I don't know that we need that sort of complexity. Seven runways. I get confused just thinking about.

Preferably, I'd want wide spaced parallels. At least one of each to be over 3,500m, and none less than 2,500m. Terminals to be located to avoid any need to cross active runways. No reliance on use of downwind runways at all. The number of runways, and direction to be decided by the prevailing winds, not by the passing of political wind.

 

[Quickstatus]

@jb747
theoretical...

Has anyone thought about a hexagonal runway - 6 sided or variant - even circular , use whichever side gives the least crosswind?

 

[justinbrett]

@jb747
theoretical...

Has anyone thought about a hexagonal runway - 6 sided or variant - even circular , use whichever side gives the least crosswind?

 

[Quickstatus]

How would approach navigational systems be integrated - obviously not possible for every degree heading of a circle?. But maybe for a hexagon?. Runway markings?

 

[justinbrett]

How would approach navigational systems be integrated - obviously not possible for every degree heading of a circle?. But maybe for a hexagon?. Runway markings?

I can't see it as a serious proposition.

Real life examples close to this include DFW/ORD with multiple sets of parallels including sets for crosswind (but missing the third orientation so excessive crosswind is still possible); or DEN which has runway sets at 90 degree angles.

I would think they would have to be maintained as separate distinct runways with normal runway markings and approach procedures. There's no benefit having them connected as a hexagon, quite the contrary, it would be better if the six sides didn't intersect.

But then you have to ask yourself how often, with the current runway configuration, are crosswind limits exceeded, and is it worth the huge expense and ongoing complexity in having an extra runway? There are heaps of busy airports around the world with parallel runways in a single orientation.

 

[Quickstatus]

I can't see it as a serious proposition

Yeah thats why it was a theoretical/ academic question.

 

[jb747]

Yeah thats why it was a theoretical/ academic question.

It must have been the 1st of April when they came up with that one. Enough people have trouble keeping the aircraft on straight runways. Mind you, you could solve the entire problem by just paving over a 4km square. Use any direction you like then. Don't worry about the ATC issues, you could just use the big sky theory. I wonder how much 16 square km of concrete would cost?

 

[justinbrett]

It must have been the 1st of April when they came up with that one. Enough people have trouble keeping the aircraft on straight runways. Mind you, you could solve the entire problem by just paving over a 4km square. Use any direction you like then. Don't worry about the ATC issues, you could just use the big sky theory. I wonder how much 16 square km of concrete would cost?

Nah, just build an A380 with VTOL and do away with runways altogether .

 

[AviatorInsight]

Finally got the chance to fly the MAX last night (8IC). Here are my thoughts in no particular order.

- Loved the new plane smell. Never had that before.
- The start up took well over 5 mins to get both engines going. This was interesting seeing as the aircraft had arrived from PER 2hrs earlier. It’ll take a lot longer if it was a 30min turn. This will no doubt annoy ATC as we start clogging up aprons and taxiways waiting to get them started.
- The system annunciator panel on the glareshield actually works on the first go without me having to bash it a few times to get the recall to work! Won’t be long before it behaves like every other 737 though. It is the thing I hate the most about the 737.
- Being 3T heavier than an NG I noticed it took longer than normal to reach cruise altitude, and we were light with only 90 pax.
- Very good on fuel. Although it took longer we spent 1.5T to reach cruise whereas the NG I flew the previous sector took 2.1T.
- It is much quieter up the front. Almost could take my headset off in the cruise.
- The screens themselves are very big, however I felt everything was written in smaller font with the primary instruments compacted somewhat. The terrain and weather radar on my side as pilot monitoring was great when there was weather around (see photo from last night) however the Capt had to keep on looking over as he had the engine instruments and this compacted his navigation display.
- The spoilers finally work and aren’t just painted on!
- Love the little gear lever.
- Took a bit of getting used to as things now dynamically move with who is PF and PM. Things like the flap indicator are now digital so will not always be in the same spot and I caught myself searching for it a couple of times. It is now a fair way over on the Capt side for taxi and take off.
- All of the aircraft details are now on the screen beside the primary flight display. No more setting of the flight number on the control column. Again I caught myself looking at the column whenever I had a response to ATC.
- Flies beautifully and is just like the sim.

All in all a good bit of kit. There are some subtle differences on the overhead panel but that’s more to do with the system rather than showing valve position on the NG. There is also no APU exhaust temp gauge anymore.

All of this will take a bit of getting used to but there is absolutely no more that Boeing can shove into this aircraft. The FMCs on the MAX 10s will be replaced with touchscreens. Not sure I like that idea given that there will be fingerprints all over it.

I’ve got another scheduled flight next Friday from PER to SYD so will get more of a chance to check it out in daylight this time and spend a bit more time getting to know it.

And for anyone wondering, yes they fixed MCAS. The trim system worked a treat.

 

[Brissy1]

over 5 mins to get both engines going. This was interesting seeing as the aircraft had arrived from PER 2hrs earlier. It’ll take a lot longer if it was a 30min turn

Use more choke.
Seriously though, why longer on a short turnaround?

 

[Quickstatus]

All in all a good bit of kit.

...but... isnt it grandfathered technology?. New aircraft coul never be designed in this way.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

Some interesting tracking for a couple of QF MEL-SYD (even numbered flight numbers) and SYD-MEL (odd numbered flight numbers) flights last evening (13/12). QF498 had an interesting approach into Sydney crossing the coast just north of Batemans Bay with a hold off the coast between Nowra and Kiama and a 360 off the coast of Thirroul and landed 5 minutes before the 11:00pm curfew....Would this tracking be caused by significant weather on the normal SYD-MEL-SYD route of something else?

 

[747sp]

Hi JB . I think Qantas has flown 1 stop on the 747 and/or A380 to London via Singapore, Bangkok, Dubai , Mumbai and Hong Kong from Sydney and Melbourne. I can't remember if the A380 went via Darwin
My questions are
Via which city was the most efficient with fuel use for the whole journey?
With the different routes were any more challenging than the others and did you have a favourite?

 

[AviatorInsight]

Some interesting tracking for a couple of QF MEL-SYD (even numbered flight numbers) and SYD-MEL (odd numbered flight numbers) flights last evening (13/12). Would this tracking be caused by significant weather on the normal SYD-MEL-SYD route of something else?

Last night saw some big storms closing in on SYD. We made it out just in time from SYD to MEL. We got vectored off the departure track to accomodate aircraft coming in from MEL doing exactly what those photos show to avoid the storms.

 

[Brissy1]

Some interesting tracking for a couple of QF MEL-SYD (even numbered flight numbers) and SYD-MEL (odd numbered flight numbers) flights last evening (13/12). QF498 had an interesting approach into approach into Sydney crossing the coast just north of Batemans Bay with a hold off the coast between Nowra and Kiama and a 360 off the coast of Thirroul and landed 5 minutes before the 11:00pm curfew....Would this tracking be caused by significant weather on the normal SYD-MEL-SYD route of something else?

Interesting qf498 did holding patterns soon after takeoff

 

[AviatorInsight]

...but... isnt it grandfathered technology?. New aircraft coul never be designed in this way.

Yes that’s true, but they’ve also mixed fly by wire into the flights control system (namely the speedbrakes) and added modifiers to the spoilers on landing just to name a few. There is no doubt it is still a 737.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

Interesting qf498 did holding patterns soon after takeoff

QF498 was MEL-SYD so the holding you see was on the approach to Sydney. FR24 didn't pick up anything out of MEL.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Use more choke.
Seriously though, why longer on a short turnaround?

The rotor shafts for the N1 (The big fan you can see at the front of the engine) and the N2 are subject to thermal build up after the engine is shut down and will bow. To straighten it out again, CFM have introduced an extended motoring to straighten it out again before fuel is introduced.

Even if we were to try and put fuel in ourselves the engine control computer will not introduce the fuel until the motoring is completed and all internal tests are complete. Only then will the start sequence continue.

So in answer to your question, the hotter the engine is, the more time it’ll take to straighten it out.

 

[mjt57]

You wont need to worry about fog. Any fog will be blown away by storms later today

Yeah, it was a good run into MEL. Landed at 1543, one mimute behind schedule. Kudos to the VA folks up the front.

You know, it took 3 and a half hrs to go PER-MEL. Waited 40 mins for the luggage to arrive including a 25m delay when the belt tripped and noone to reset it (and no announcements), then a 2 and a half hour drive home. A bit over 4 hrs in transit AFTER landing. I live about 160km east of Melbourne.