Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

The cloud broke for long enough.

 

[Duffa]

Well to my simple brain it seems like introducing an element of risk but I am sure it is being well managed. I mean, I was fazed when landing in DEN or LA (can't recall which) recently where they had the cross run way in operation with planes happily crossing over the main operational runways between takeoffs and landings but it seemed to all be working to plan.

Happened in Melbourne this morning.
We were lined up on 34 and a Qantas jet landed on the cross runway immediately after a Jetstar departed in front of us on 34.
We then departed before the Qantas had backtracked

 

[jb747]

Happened in Melbourne this morning.
We were lined up on 34 and a Qantas jet landed on the cross runway immediately after a Jetstar departed in front of us on 34.
We then departed before the Qantas had backtracked

Yes, but that's just normal crossing runway ops. I guess it has it's own risks, but probably better understood.

What we were talking about is opposite direction (i.e. 16 & 34), on narrow spaced parallel runways. So, Sydney 16L and 34L at the same time.

 

[Duffa]

Sydney 16L and 34L at the same time.

No thanks.

 

[jb747]

One for the Boeing fans. Note how many passengers take their bags. The message will never get through.

 

[RooFlyer]

Good God. Have a look at 3:16 and this person - took 12 seconds just to clear the door - but then look what they took out. I hope this film gets reviewed and maybe something done (but I'm not holding my breath - in the USA).



From my armchair, it looks like a dubious decision to evacuate, too, given usual dangers of evacs.

 

[jb747]

From my armchair, it looks like a dubious decision to evacuate, too, given usual dangers of evacs.

No, there’s nothing wrong with the decision to evacuate here. It looks to be an electrical fire in the forward equipment bay. Smoke from there would rapidly make its way into the cabin. They’re not going to connect the aerobridge, and should be pulling the equipment away from the aircraft. There are no fire extinguishers in these bays.

 

[Captain Halliday]

What struck me watching this was that there didn’t seem to be a ground stop.

Certainly vehicles continued. The DL that had pushed back was allowed to taxi out during the evacuation and another aircraft pulled into the bay behind.

I know pax are often walking around the bays to board via rear stairs, but that’s generally controlled.

In this situation there’s not really any marshalls/ ground crew and with pax likely in a high stress situation, it’s possible they could go in any direction.

 

[D747]

No, there’s nothing wrong with the decision to evacuate here. It looks to be an electrical fire in the forward equipment bay. Smoke from there would rapidly make its way into the cabin. They’re not going to connect the aerobridge, and should be pulling the equipment away from the aircraft. There are no fire extinguishers in these bays.

Forward equipment bay, is that the avionics bay JB? What would the rationale be for not having fire extinguishers in there?

 

[jb747]

There is smoke detection in the various bays, but the procedure leads you to getting rid of the smoke (i.e. keeping it out of the coughpit/cabin), and subsequent isolation of the bus(ses) powering the fire. I don’t know specifically why no extinguishers are installed.

 

[jb747]

What struck me watching this was that there didn’t seem to be a ground stop.

Certainly vehicles continued. The DL that had pushed back was allowed to taxi out during the evacuation and another aircraft pulled into the bay behind.

I know pax are often walking around the bays to board via rear stairs, but that’s generally controlled.

In this situation there’s not really any marshalls/ ground crew and with pax likely in a high stress situation, it’s possible they could go in any direction.

US airports (LAX especially) are quite chaotic on the ground. I wonder what the timing of the tower being informed was?

 

[747sp]

Hi Pilots. There are so many urban myths about the temperature in the hold where the bags are stored.
My question is it will my bottle of wine in my main luggage be slightly chilled or could it get frozen?
Or more seriously what is the real story with the temperature in the baggage hold?

 

[jb747]

Hi Pilots. There are so many urban myths about the temperature in the hold where the bags are stored.
My question is it will my bottle of wine in my main luggage be slightly chilled or could it get frozen?
Or more seriously what is the real story with the temperature in the baggage hold?

Your wine will be pretty safe. Looking at many of the images I took in flight, the lowest temperature that I can find is 12ºC, and the highest is 20ºC. It was kept warmer with any animals in the hold.

 

[Captain Halliday]

Couple of questions related to Wednesday's QF1050 MEL-BME.

QF1050 (QFA1050) Qantas Flight Tracking and History 15-May-2024 (MEL / YMML-KTA / YPKA) - FlightAware

Track Qantas (QF) #1050 flight from Melbourne Tullamarine to Karratha

www.flightaware.com

The flight close to top of descent when the crew opted to divert to KTA which was much further away.

QF described it as "pilots received notification of a potential minor mechanical issue".

Time on ground in KTA was less than 60 mins before they continued to BME.

Does KTA have engineering capability that doesn't exist at BME?

What sort of minor mechanical issue could be resolved in KTA in less than an hour that couldn't have been sorted in BME during the turn?

 

[Saab34]

Pilots.

Are there any airports/strips in Australia that you have never flown into that you would like to.

 

[jb747]

Does KTA have engineering capability that doesn't exist at BME?

What sort of minor mechanical issue could be resolved in KTA in less than an hour that couldn't have been sorted in BME during the turn?

I suspect that difference might have been the availability of an actual LAME, licenced on the aircraft, who could sign off on an MEL.

 

[jb747]

Are there any airports/strips in Australia that you have never flown into that you would like to.

In Oz? None leap to mind. The old Hong Kong (Kai Tak) was the most interesting that I ever regularly operated to.

 

[RailFlyer]

A few questions regarding weather from a curious flyer:

• Do modern planes have any audible warning if the plane is heading towards an area of severe storms (for the case that both pilots are (accidently) asleep in cruise or distracted)?
• Is the return on the radar recorded in the flight data recorder?
• Can you recall any notable events where really nasty weather was hiding behind what looked like a fairly tame radar return and you had to take immediate action (or tighten belts if that wasn't possible)?
• jb474 over your career did you see big advances in how planes detected bad weather and/or how they managed turbulence? Do you think flying long haul these days is smoother than it was when you started your career (not a comment on pilot skill!) due to technological improvements (e.g. either detecting/avoiding bad weather and/or better auto-pilot to keep plane more stable in bad conditions?)

 

[jb747]

• Do modern planes have any audible warning if the plane is heading towards an area of severe storms (for the case that both pilots are (accidently) asleep in cruise or distracted)?

There's "windshear" down low, but not in the cruise. You're actually supposed to be awake! I have heard some crazy stories about some pilots and their radar use though. How about turning it off, 'cos he's worried about the radiation the radar emits!

• Is the return on the radar recorded in the flight data recorder?

The returns and what is being displayed are very likely two different things. It's quite possible for the radar to be seeing something that isn't being displayed, which is why I've made comments about the way pilots manipulate the radar. The A380 (and it's ilk) actually create a database of radar returns, and that allows the somewhat weird effect of being able to 'look' behind you. It's history, but occasionally relevant. I suspect the amount of storage required to keep this data would be well beyond what is available for FDR purposes, but I guess that it could be recorded, at least in theory. You'd then need to be able to separate the raw data, and the displayed.

• Can you recall any notable events where really nasty weather was hiding behind what looked like a fairly tame radar return and you had to take immediate action (or tighten belts if that wasn't possible)?

This comes back to how you read and operate the radar. Yes, I've seen nasty stuff, hiding, plenty of times. It's very common. I've never had an issue with it though...it's something you actually should be looking for. The radar gives plenty of clues.

I actually learnt to operate radars before I became a pilot. The RAN Observer training was a crossover between the RAAF navs and AEOs, and then managing the radar was a large part of the O's function in either the S2 or the Seaking. Pilot training, right through the airlines was more by osmosis from the older pilots, which is a method that is scatter-gun at best.

• jb474 over your career did you see big advances in how planes detected bad weather and/or how they managed turbulence?

Radar has become easier to use, and more reliable. But, each new system wasn't necessarily a huge advance on what came before. The old green screens in the early Classic 747s could show quite a detailed picture, if you knew how to use them, and took the time to continually play with them. Later systems required less oversight, and made the huge ergonomic advance of integration with the navigation displays. That put them more in your line of sight, but sadly they also started to incorporate automatic functions, which can lead to misjudging the weather (for better or worse). WX/T (weather plus turbulence) was a mode that I particularly distrusted on the 767 and 747-400.

Weather that isn't really there leads people into too much seat belt sign use (and we know where that takes us). Too much suppression of distant targets leads to 'in close' surprises, when it suddenly burns through whatever filtration is being used.

• Do you think flying long haul these days is smoother than it was when you started your career (not a comment on pilot skill!) due to technological improvements (e.g. either detecting/avoiding bad weather and/or better auto-pilot to keep plane more stable in bad conditions?)

I was lucky enough to be part of a culture that treated the weather with respect, and so survived an entire airline career without ever having any weather surprises. We found some for sure, but it was never a surprise. The radar integration helps with workload when you're spending a couple of hours dodging around the Pacific. The modern autopilots, especially in the FBW aircraft, are much smarter in how they respond, and there should never be a need to disconnect the autopilot during any turbulence encounter. In fact, any such action strikes me as extremely negative.

 

[AviatorInsight]

• Do modern planes have any audible warning if the plane is heading towards an area of severe storms (for the case that both pilots are (accidently) asleep in cruise or distracted)?

No. That's the job of the cabin crew to call us every 30mins or so to check. It's amazing how many simply just do not care and why that call is there. Yes, pilots shouldn't be asleep or at the very least some controlled rest. But we are now pulling in 4 sector days over 12-14hr shifts. Do this back to back with different start and finish times over a week and it gets exhausting. Then do it over an entire roster. All because the computer says you can do it.

• Is the return on the radar recorded in the flight data recorder?

The returns? No. I'd imagine there's just too much data and not enough space on the FDR to keep that kind of information. It will have inputs from abient temperature, ice detectors, wind speed, etc, from the aircraft itself. And will also include any aural alerts (windshear cautions) but that is only close to the ground.

• Can you recall any notable events where really nasty weather was hiding behind what looked like a fairly tame radar return and you had to take immediate action (or tighten belts if that wasn't possible)?

I have definitely had it the other way around, where the thunderstorm in front of us was so powerful and dense that it has masked what is actually behind the storm. As we manoeuvred around it the radar then began picking up the next storm cell behind.

I'm usually pretty active with the radar, I'll take it out of auto and manually tilt it up and down to get a better picture of what is going on.