Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

One of my friends was the 747 fleet manager at the time, and he was also in the coughpit for that flight. I've just sent him a message to see what he recalls about the loading.

From the horses mouth, 20t ex Sydney. It would have been spread evenly across 1/2/3/4 mains. APU only gets its fuel from main 2. There's no reason that I can think of that would have required anything other than a standard load distribution.

Quote from the ops manual:
B744ER L CHAPTER 1
NO TAIL OR AUXILIARY BODY TANK FUEL LOADED

1. Each Main Tank must contain sufficient fuel for engine start, taxi, takeoff and landing.
2. When Main Tanks 1 and 4 are not full and the Actual Taxi Weight exceeds the Maximum Zero Fuel Weight(MZFW), the required minimum weight of fuel in Main Tanks 1 and 4 must equal one-half the difference between the Actual Taxi Weight and the certified Maximum Zero Fuel Weight. Minimum Fuel (Main Tanks 1 & 4) = 1⁄2(Actual Taxi Weight - MZFW)
3. Reserve Tanks 2 and 3 must be full above 335 658 kg.
4. Fuel in the Centre Tank is allowed only when all Main and Reserve Tanks are full, except when Centre Tank fuel is considered as payload. Refer to the Operations Manual for fuel distribution with fuel in Centre Wing Tank when Wing Tanks are not full.
5. All tanks must be loaded symmetrically. The variations in symmetry due to fuel gauging, automatic shut-offtolerances, and the effects of aeroplane ground attitude are considered part of the allowable random unbalanced moment.
6. Wing tanks not full: Up to 10000 kg of fuel in the Centre Wing Tank (CWT) can be accepted provided the Actual Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) plus fuel in the CWT does not exceed the Maximum Zero Fuel Weight (MZFW).

Item 4 tells you that no fuel is allowed in the CWT unless the mains are full. Item 6 tells you how much fuel is allowed, but it's only payload fuel (i.e. not to be used).

 

[Saab34]

AV and JB do you have many issues with security screening?

I noted an Alliance pilot recently had a bit of a run in with security. Was the body check machine and they must have found something. They did the full wand and padded down areas check afterwards and scans. He wasn’t overly happy and was quite aggressive to the person doing it.

Noted a VA pilot also another week who has picked out for that random bag wand check. He was very annoyed and made that known to the person.

I do recall in some countries that Pilots are not required to do certain parts of the security.

 

[AviatorInsight]

AV and JB do you have many issues with security screening?

I noted an Alliance pilot recently had a bit of a run in with security. Was the body check machine and they must have found something. They did the full wand and padded down areas check afterwards and scans. He wasn’t overly happy and was quite aggressive to the person doing it.

Noted a VA pilot also another week who has picked out for that random bag wand check. He was very annoyed and made that known to the person.

I do recall in some countries that Pilots are not required to do certain parts of the security.

You definitely get used to each port’s intricacies. It’s the constant pat down and having to remove parts of clothing that gets most people.

For example in MEL the belt comes off but everything else can stay on.
In PER if you go through with a pen they make you take it out and click it….yep. And if you went through with your belt then they’ll make you undo it.

It’s almost as if our ASICs aren’t worth the plastic they’re printed on.

I still remember the US being absolutely fantastic for crew.

 

[jb747]

AV and JB do you have many issues with security screening?

Whilst we'll agree that it's necessary, it's largely theatre in the way that it's done. The rules are completely inconsistent, and there are some (certainly not all) of the inspectors who seem to take delight in being a PITA to crew. The explosive checks, whilst supposedly random, actually seem to target crew. I forget the number now, but I had a very consistent hit rate any time I went through Melbourne in uniform. I actually started going up to them even though they hadn't picked me, and then, when they were under way, pointing out that that was exactly what I would do if I wanted them to miss the next person after me. I found that it floated over many heads. Pointing out that you don't need explosives also missed the mark.

They did occasionally provide some level of amusement. One was extremely concerned about a pilot (not in uniform) carrying a 747 manual.

 

[RooFlyer]

One was extremely concerned about a pilot (not in uniform) carrying a 747 manual.

As in... untrained pilot planning to fly the plane for a while?

Edit: nefarious purpose

 

[flyer89]

I seem to to have an equal hit rate for the explosives test regardless of what clothes I’m wearing. I suppose I just have a certain look on my face, or I look dodgy…..

 

[p--and--t]

I seem to to have an equal hit rate for the explosives test regardless of what clothes I’m wearing. I suppose I just have a certain look on my face, or I look dodgy…..

In one batch of flights I had
4/4 departing MEL
0/2 departing SYD
0/4 departing ADL
0/6 depart8ng BNE

 

[mjt57]

Security-wise from a pax's perspective I too found things to widely differ across airports both here and internationally. The most "relaxed" were the TSA at LAX when we were flying to New York back in July.

I have what's called a stoma, the result of bladder cancer. The reaction to it varied greatly too. Some times it popped up on their scanners, other times I walked through unmolested. And the only security bod who was familiar with it was a guy in Perth back in December. Most of the other officers had to refer to their supervisors, the funniest being the TSA guy in LAX who, my wife said, went as red as a QF tail...

But reading these stories on here today, I'm still flabbergasted that they'd be checking aircrew like they do. Maybe it's the "tall poppy" thing. Who knows?

 

[Saab34]

I recall being in one domestic airport in the US, can’t recall which one, and aircrew had a dedicated side entrance and the TSA just scanned the ASIC like card and went through without screening.

Domestic Flight Crew should only need to provide a ASIC and subsequent not need to go through all that screening. Random checks perhaps on a couple crew per hour or something.

I note some airports here don’t have dedicated crew lanes. I witnessed one crew only a few days ago attempt to negotiate the line of a hundred people with little to no space in order to get to the front.

 

[flyer89]

But reading these stories on here today, I'm still flabbergasted that they'd be checking aircrew like they do. Maybe it's the "tall poppy" thing. Who knows?

I think it’s also the path of least resistance. Crew are unlikely to do their nana when in uniform in and representing the company.

I have also been selected increasingly when I travel with my young family. Is dad going to lose it in front of his wife and kids? Probably not.

Are you going to select a FIFO worker who’s already 4 beers in laced with explosive residue after 2 weeks in a mine?

I will also add that I have once tested positive for explosive residue. I asked the security guy what he wanted me to do, he repeated that I had tested positive multiple times, I looked at him blankly, we both shrugged our shoulders and I off I went on my way. I would guess that’s not official protocol…..

 

[jb747]

I note some airports here don’t have dedicated crew lanes. I witnessed one crew only a few days ago attempt to negotiate the line of a hundred people with little to no space in order to get to the front.

In my time there were no crew lanes domestically. I think the geniuses in charge intentionally put crew through with the passengers, so that the pax would see that nobody was exempt. And crew were expected to quietly acquiesce as an example to the pax. It didn’t take long before they got anger. And it’s amazing how many people actively object when we have to jump the queue.

 

[mjt57]

It didn’t take long before they got anger. And it’s amazing how many people actively object when we have to jump the queue.

And they'll howl even louder if their flights are delayed because of this.

Post automatically merged: Feb 16, 2024

Folks, any idea on why QF780 PER-MEL decided to fly way north then back to MEL? It was reported on the 3AW "Rumor File" (the guy calling in couldn't even name the airline for whatever reason).

Live Flight Tracker - Real-Time Flight Tracker Map | Flightradar24

The world’s most popular flight tracker. Track planes in real-time on our flight tracker map and get up-to-date flight status & airport information.

www.flightradar24.com

 

[jb747]

Folks, any idea on why QF780 PER-MEL decided to fly way north then back to MEL? It was reported on the 3AW "Rumor File" (the guy calling in couldn't even name the airline for whatever reason).

There’s another thread about this, and I’ve just found the answer. MEL 27-93-01A. PRIM 1. First item in the procedure is no ETOPs.

 

[Major]

When you first started your pre flight walk arounds did you have a checklist and/or another pilot to indicate things to look for?

All I see now are walk arounds with pilots looking from memory.

Have you ever found a problem from your walk around?

 

[torks]

I see that Etihad is now allowed to have their pilots fly both the A380 and A350 concurrently. Is this reasonable? Are the systems similar enough that they can do this with no issues, or is this a case of the company wanting increased flexibility and possibly compromising on safety/pilot knowledge as now they are potentially flying different aircraft on different days with different systems?

 

[jb747]

ound.

When you first started your pre flight walk arounds did you have a checklist and/or another pilot to indicate things to look for?

All I see now are walk arounds with pilots looking from memory.

Have you ever found a problem from your walk around?

The flight manuals contain sequences for the external preflight. Whilst much of it is common sense items like leaks and tyre condition, there are many specific items to be checked as well (for instance all of the engine nacelle latches). Covers and pins were very high on the list, though history shows they still get missed. It was very rare to find something after the engineers had done their own walkaround.

 

[jb747]

I see that Etihad is now allowed to have their pilots fly both the A380 and A350 concurrently. Is this reasonable? Are the systems similar enough that they can do this with no issues, or is this a case of the company wanting increased flexibility and possibly compromising on safety/pilot knowledge as now they are potentially flying different aircraft on different days with different systems?

Previously many airlines have been mixing the 330 and 350. I thought this was an accident waiting to happen as their only similarity is that they are similarly sized and have two engines. Systems are completely different, and at least a generation apart. Not a great match and really an example of regulators bending to the financial will of the airlines.

The 350 & 380 mix is rather different. They're pretty much identical coughpits, and are very similar technology. The 380 is probably a bit more complex...so perhaps the 350 would seem easy in comparison. I'd be curious as to how they handle some of the different procedures, but as long as there is sufficient recurrent sim time on both, and rosters keep people flying both regularly, I think it would be better than the 330/350 mix.

 

[D747]

From the horses mouth, 20t ex Sydney. It would have been spread evenly across 1/2/3/4 mains. APU only gets its fuel from main 2. There's no reason that I can think of that would have required anything other than a standard load distribution.

Quote from the ops manual:
B744ER L CHAPTER 1
NO TAIL OR AUXILIARY BODY TANK FUEL LOADED

1. Each Main Tank must contain sufficient fuel for engine start, taxi, takeoff and landing.
2. When Main Tanks 1 and 4 are not full and the Actual Taxi Weight exceeds the Maximum Zero Fuel Weight(MZFW), the required minimum weight of fuel in Main Tanks 1 and 4 must equal one-half the difference between the Actual Taxi Weight and the certified Maximum Zero Fuel Weight. Minimum Fuel (Main Tanks 1 & 4) = 1⁄2(Actual Taxi Weight - MZFW)
3. Reserve Tanks 2 and 3 must be full above 335 658 kg.
4. Fuel in the Centre Tank is allowed only when all Main and Reserve Tanks are full, except when Centre Tank fuel is considered as payload. Refer to the Operations Manual for fuel distribution with fuel in Centre Wing Tank when Wing Tanks are not full.
5. All tanks must be loaded symmetrically. The variations in symmetry due to fuel gauging, automatic shut-offtolerances, and the effects of aeroplane ground attitude are considered part of the allowable random unbalanced moment.
6. Wing tanks not full: Up to 10000 kg of fuel in the Centre Wing Tank (CWT) can be accepted provided the Actual Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) plus fuel in the CWT does not exceed the Maximum Zero Fuel Weight (MZFW).

Item 4 tells you that no fuel is allowed in the CWT unless the mains are full. Item 6 tells you how much fuel is allowed, but it's only payload fuel (i.e. not to be used).

JB, "APU only gets its fuel from main 2." Would main 2 be the last tank to empty, theoretically, for this reason?

 

[jb747]

JB, "APU only gets its fuel from main 2." Would main 2 be the last tank to empty, theoretically, for this reason?

Not really. If you left the aircraft sitting on the ground, with nothing else on but the APU, it would be the first tank to empty. In flight, the 747 can't start the APU, so unless you've left it running for the entire flight, it can't be a factor. There is common plumbing, so it's possible to feed any engine from any main. Flight engineers used to keep tanks balanced to a tiny tolerance...the automatics aren't as fastidious.

Mains 2 & 3 are much larger than main 1 & 4. The sequence is automated (but you can interfere), so you'll feed all of the engines from 2 & 3 until the amount in them equals 1 & 4, then each engine from its respective main. Some pumps have higher output pressure than others, so even with all pumps on, those high pressure pumps override the output of others. It's a way of sequencing usage...letting the hp pumps run their tanks down before moving to the next, without any risk of finger trouble turning the wrong pumps off. The engines will also gravity feed from their respective collector tanks.

Yep, resurfacing the main runway and taxiways plus installation of new energy efficient LED lighting. Started late last year and is scheduled for completion in late July to early August at this stage.

I know that it's only part of the job....but I wonder if the energy efficiency of the lights would ever offset the energy wasted by this one service.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Yesterday, Sydney airport closed to arrivals and departures due to a fire alarm that went off in the old tower. Aircraft holding were advised of “we have no idea on how long this will last. Please advise your latest diversion time and destination”.