Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

My flight was struck by lightning climbing out of OOL a couple of days ago. What inflight procedures are undertaken to ensure that the aircraft remains serviceable and what checks are required after the aircraft lands?

The biggest issue with lightning on ‘classic’ aircraft is the mass underpants replacement for the passengers. The thunder that accompanies it, from zero distance, is very loud.

I’ve been hit numerous times over the years, with the record being seven hits in one flight. I have never seen any damage/effect in flight. Everything keeps working. When the engineers look over the outside, they will find minor damage, for instance a static wick might be missing, or scorch marks on the stainless steel sections on an engine. It was rare for any repair to be required.

But…I’m told that our new generation of ultra lightweight carbon fibre aircraft don’t necessary get away so easily.

 

[Saab34]

But…I’m told that our new generation of ultra lightweight carbon fibre aircraft don’t necessary get away so easily.

Ahh yes. 787 not like lightning. Jetstar has had all sorts of issues on that front over the years, like below

The Aviation Herald

Aviation Herald - News, Incidents and Accidents in Aviation

avherald.com

 

[FrustratedQP]

Thank you to all. Yes JB, very loud bang and flash.

 

[jb747]

Christmas was always one of the great joys of working for an airline. Not only could you almost guarantee that you'd be scheduled for something, if you actually managed to fall through the cracks, invariably somebody would come down with a case of some deadly disease to ensure that your standby wasn't peaceful. Same sort of person who won't queue I guess.

But, I remember many of those trips quite fondly, because, if we had to be away from home, then you may as well have as much fun as possible. But some stand out for the wrong reasons, and one that just occurred to me was a Bonza-esque level of planning. Having flown into Perth on Christmas eve, we were scheduled to fly the 'brown-eye' on Xmas Day. Leaving Perth around midnight, to Melbourne, and then Sydney. It was a truly hated flight. Perth Melbourne wasn't bad, just your standard overnight flight. But, Melbourne-Sydney was a struggle to stay awake. (As an aside, if you fly regularly first thing in the morning, don't think that you'll have fresh crews!). Anyway, we arrived at flight planning, and were handed our flight plan. A fit of laughter ensued as we discovered that it was for a 737. A check of the aircraft parked at the gate revealed that it really was a 73. Sadly, they had a 767 crew, with nary a 737 person to be found. Oops.

 

[Quickstatus]

As an aside, if you fly regularly first thing in the morning, don't think that you'll have fresh crews!

What time do crew wake up for the 0600 Cityflyers?

 

[jb747]

What time do crew wake up for the 0600 Cityflyers?

Well, I guess if they live reasonably locally, then they’d probably be up around 4:00 am. They’d have to be in the terminal by 5am. They could then be at work until 4pm or so. But, if the flight has been tacked on to the end of a night flight (perhaps from Perth), and any curfew doesn’t stop them, then they could well have been at work all night. And in that case, they might not have slept since am the previous day. This was extremely common with the 767 operation, though I don’t know that the 330 or 737 are quite so versatile.

There was discussion from CASA a few years ago about the implementation of a fatigue management system. I don’t know how far that has progressed, but from what I saw of QF’s proposals with regard to it, then it would have been a way of making things worse. If regulators were actually honest about it, then I think that many of history’s “pilot error“ accidents would have fatigue as a root cause.

 

[TiredOldFlyer]

On a recent domestic flight the cabin staff insisted that the seats were to be upright
and tray tables to be stored for landing. As we were still over 30 mins to our destination it made me wonder if there was a mandatory time for this or was it to better suit the
crew ?
I do, of course, understand the reason for this but 30 + mins out seemed a little excessive.

 

[p--and--t]

On a recent domestic flight the cabin staff insisted that the seats were to be upright
and tray tables to be stored for landing. As we were still over 30 mins to our destination it made me wonder if there was a mandatory time for this or was it to better suit the
crew ?
I do, of course, understand the reason for this but 30 + mins out seemed a little excessive.

I was once on a flight landing at SGN and 45+mins out and we hadn’t begun descent, over the tannoy - no more toilet usage, locked for landing! They still hadn't collected all the trays from breakfast so people waiting to go, couldn't.

 

[AviatorInsight]

On a recent domestic flight the cabin staff insisted that the seats were to be upright
and tray tables to be stored for landing. As we were still over 30 mins to our destination it made me wonder if there was a mandatory time for this or was it to better suit the
crew ?
I do, of course, understand the reason for this but 30 + mins out seemed a little excessive.

Was this accompanied with a PA from the flight crew saying “cabin crew prepare for landing” or something of the sort? Given the weather around the country at the moment it could have something to do with it and getting cabin crew seated shortly thereafter?

 

[TiredOldFlyer]

No weather problems and the "prepare for landing " announcement came much later.

 

[jb747]

On a recent domestic flight the cabin staff insisted that the seats were to be upright
and tray tables to be stored for landing. As we were still over 30 mins to our destination it made me wonder if there was a mandatory time for this or was it to better suit the
crew ?
I do, of course, understand the reason for this but 30 + mins out seemed a little excessive.

My first thought was that it would be weather related in some way. If the crew had been advised to expect turbulence on descent, then they would clean up earlier. 30 minutes out is only around 10 minutes before top of descent, so not all that unusual, especially if they were in the jet stream and were thinking about bumps as they exited it. Having said that, you’d then also have the seat belt sign on as you left the cruise.

No weather problems and the "prepare for landing " announcement came much later.

That warning is a different part of the procedure, which generally comes at a fixed altitude (though you can vary it according to the conditions).

You didn’t happen to have any problematic passengers by any chance?

 

[TiredOldFlyer]

Thanks jb.
It may have been weather related, although the weather was good for our approach there were a few isolated showers around and it was the day after a fairly bad storm - no unruly passengers that I was aware of.

 

[Saab34]

Gents. Thoughts…..

Pushing the column forward at 0.31? Seemed to create further issues.

 

[jb747]

Gents. Thoughts…..

Pushing the column forward at 0.31? Seemed to create further issues.

I’d made a comment on that video on youtube, and some ‘expert’ told me I was wrong. Don’t think so.

It’s entirely an own goal, and is a pretty appalling bit of flying. My wife asked if one of the stewards might have been doing the landing.

The sequence starts when the left wing drops very slightly at around 25 seconds, but instead putting in a right control input to correct that, there’s a quite solid left roll input, and from that point he almost seems to be randomly moving the controls. The slight pitch up should have been the start of a go around, but sadly not. There’s crosswind in the approach, but that‘s not the cause of this hideous bit of flying.

 

[Saab34]

I’d made a comment on that video on youtube, and some ‘expert’ told me I was wrong. Don’t think so.

It’s entirely an own goal, and is a pretty appalling bit of flying. My wife asked if one of the stewards might have been doing the landing.

The sequence starts when the left wing drops very slightly at around 25 seconds, but instead putting in a right control input to correct that, there’s a quite solid left roll input, and from that point he almost seems to be randomly moving the controls. The slight pitch up should have been the start of a go around, but sadly not. There’s crosswind in the approach, but that‘s not the cause of this hideous bit of flying.

Thanks JB
Would this be an approach one would give to a FO? Certainly most US carriers have large amounts of new to type FOs in both wide and narrow bodies, most are only a few thousand hours.

Hard to think why someone would add more left roll, when it’s already rolling left. However I am sure people do stupid things like we all see in the workplace every day. Sounds like unacceptable stuff from the left seat if that’s the case.

 

[mjt57]

but that‘s not the cause of this hideous bit of flying.

At least the video is reasonably good (none of that "portrait" video garbage that people seem to be obsessed with).

 

[flyer89]

I’d made a comment on that video on youtube, and some ‘expert’ told me I was wrong. Don’t think so.

At risk of becoming irritated by the answer, pray tell what the expert said? I see a lot of “kudos” being given in the comments. It’s atrocious flying really.

 

[mjt57]

At risk of becoming irritated by the answer, pray tell what the expert said? I see a lot of “kudos” being given in the comments. It’s atrocious flying really.

JB's name is in his YT username so the guy might've looked him up (guessing here) and decided not to argue with him as JB posted a 2nd reply to the guy detailing his views on what happened.

Lots of comments about it and from my perspective they sound like pilots themselves, but who knows? I was mostly impressed by the vision itself.

 

[JohnM]

I’d made a comment on that video on youtube, and some ‘expert’ told me I was wrong. Don’t think so.

It’s entirely an own goal, and is a pretty appalling bit of flying. My wife asked if one of the stewards might have been doing the landing.

The sequence starts when the left wing drops very slightly at around 25 seconds, but instead putting in a right control input to correct that, there’s a quite solid left roll input, and from that point he almost seems to be randomly moving the controls. The slight pitch up should have been the start of a go around, but sadly not. There’s crosswind in the approach, but that‘s not the cause of this hideous bit of flying.

Do you have any comment on Juan Browne's assessment of that landing?:

 

[jb747]

Thanks JB
Would this be an approach one would give to a FO? Certainly most US carriers have large amounts of new to type FOs in both wide and narrow bodies, most are only a few thousand hours.

I've certainly given a huge number of landings to FOs, in less than perfect conditions. They've generally done an excellent job. Actually the worst landings have occurred in nice conditions. Relaxed too soon. QF had limits on what the FOs were allowed to do, with regard to visibility and crosswind. I haven't seen a new FO for a long time, but they were restricted to 15 knots of crosswind for about 6 months. That limit would rise to 20, but still well shy of the aircraft limit. Of course, your personal assessment of what 20 knots looks like might vary a bit on the day.

Hard to think why someone would add more left roll, when it’s already rolling left. However I am sure people do stupid things like we all see in the workplace every day. Sounds like unacceptable stuff from the left seat if that’s the case.

I'd love to see a video of the control yoke motions. I'll bet he was literally just stirring the stick (yoke) and never letting things settle. These are large aircraft, and there is always a tiny bit of lag between your input and the aircraft response.

At risk of becoming irritated by the answer, pray tell what the expert said? I see a lot of “kudos” being given in the comments. It’s atrocious flying really.

Basically an excuse followed by kudos, which of course tells you that he isn't a pilot, and has no idea.

JB's name is in his YT username so the guy might've looked him up (guessing here) and decided not to argue with him as JB posted a 2nd reply to the guy detailing his views on what happened.

I doubt that he went to that much trouble. And that wouldn't stop the average non pilot from arguing anyway.

Lots of comments about it and from my perspective they sound like pilots themselves, but who knows?

Not pilots.

Do you have any comment on Juan Browne's assessment of that landing?

It's a pretty decent discussion of PIOs and stability. I wonder if the more controlled response that eventually settles it down is indicative of a change of control. BTW, I thought Juan was a Captain, but apparently not.

One thing that he mentions is possible wake. Not likely in a crosswind. A more likely cause of a sudden wind change as you land at London will be the 'blanking' of the wind that happens as you come abeam the hangars/terminal. This was especially evident on 27R, with a strong southerly, and would kick in (or out) at around flare height. He also mentions how tightly ATC keep the arriving aircraft. They certainly do, but not when they're doing 'actual' ILS approaches.