Ask The Pilot

[Awesom Andy]

Or perhaps the real hell is when you sit there forever, and nothing ever happens.

As the saying goes... 99% boredom, 1% terror. :shock:

 

[jb747]

How regular is that for you?

Passenger sectors are quite common, though normally they're also quite short, i.e. Melbourne to Sydney at the end of a London trip.

Because the 380 only goes to a few places, the schedulers are faced with a dilemma with regard to scheduling peoples' annual route checks. Thus far they've tended to use the SYD-SIN-SYD sectors, and as they need around 180 of these per year, they have to remove the sectors from around 15% of the London trips for these checks. That throws up paxing for the 'owner' of the trip, who is displaced for the person under check. The advent of the HK flights gives them another avenue, but they still need around the same number of sectors.

In this case I pax up, and an FO paxes back, so they do two checks on the pattern.

Another reason to pax comes up after any upline sickness or disruption, when, generally, the standby people will be paxed to wherever they are required.

Route checks aren't the only reason for displacements either. Sometimes you'll be bumped to make way for a recency sector for someone who hasn't flown for a while (but not so long as to require other than a self trip). In my case this time, that's more or less what is happening, but I've been away long enough that I had a program that included a couple of sims, and this flight will be with another Captain in the right hand seat (whereas he's in the back on route checks).

 

[jb747]

As the saying goes... 99% boredom, 1% terror. :shock:

Mostly a saying from people who haven't done the job. There should be no terror, and if you're bored, then you don't know what is going on.

 

[mjt57]

JB, question for you.

A mate at work tonight gave me a copy of Flight Safety Australia to read (he "flies" helicopters). It has an interesting article on Electronic Flight Bags. The cover graphic is that of an iPad but subsequent photos show industry specific hardware similar to tablets being used on the flight deck.

Interestingly, UAL has announced that its 11,000 pilots will be issued tablet computers with the aim of completely replacing paper documentation.

It goes on about CASA's intention to implement regs to cover this here in Australia.

Do you think that you'll eventually be issued with this equipment, particularly on the A380?

 

[Flashback]

JB, question for you.

A mate at work tonight gave me a copy of Flight Safety Australia to read (he "flies" helicopters). It has an interesting article on Electronic Flight Bags. The cover graphic is that of an iPad but subsequent photos show industry specific hardware similar to tablets being used on the flight deck.

Interestingly, UAL has announced that its 11,000 pilots will be issued tablet computers with the aim of completely replacing paper documentation.

It goes on about CASA's intention to implement regs to cover this here in Australia.

Do you think that you'll eventually be issued with this equipment, particularly on the A380?

I think earlier in the thread it's mentioned that QF pilots already use iPads as part of their job.

 

[mjt57]

From what I understand they use personal iPads or tablets, nothing official though.

CASA's requirement is that if these tablet computers are adopted officially that "you are not allowed to rely on it for your sole source of documentation or navigation. However, EFBs are very useful in enhancing a pilot's situational awarenesss", according to the article.

The biggest issue facing CASA and other air safety authorities is how this equipment is evolving and what it can and will be able to do in the future and how to regulate it, to maintain appropriate levels of safety.

Now, if the pilots cannot rely soley on an iPad or EFB alone, then that means they still have to carry a lot of documentation with them.

I personally don't understand why most of this can't be stored on the aircraft if a lot of it relates to the aircraft type.

 

[jb747]

From what I understand they use personal iPads or tablets, nothing official though.

CASA's requirement is that if these tablet computers are adopted officially that "you are not allowed to rely on it for your sole source of documentation or navigation. However, EFBs are very useful in enhancing a pilot's situational awarenesss", according to the article.

The biggest issue facing CASA and other air safety authorities is how this equipment is evolving and what it can and will be able to do in the future and how to regulate it, to maintain appropriate levels of safety.

Now, if the pilots cannot rely soley on an iPad or EFB alone, then that means they still have to carry a lot of documentation with them.

I personally don't understand why most of this can't be stored on the aircraft if a lot of it relates to the aircraft type.

Any iPads used at the moment are personal, and subject to the same usage rules as passenger equipment. There is supposedly a project looking at the use of iPads or some other form of tablet, but none of us are holding our breath waiting for them.

Sole source? What about another iPad or a laptop.....the 20kg bag of paper won't still exist. BTW, we have never carried personal copies of this stuff, but some other airlines have.

The 380 currently has a computer based system that shows the charts, but it is appalling, and it is much easier to use the paper. I've seen the Jeppesen iPad app, and it is excellent.

Interesting fly in the ointment here is the comment about not carrying personal software on the pad. One plan that I had heard involved about half of the unit being available, and so meaning that I wouldn't need to carry my personal one. If that's not to be the case, then I'd end up carrying two...and that then starts to throw up all sorts of questions about loss, breakage, excess luggage. As they were also rumoured to be a prime source of contact with crew...why would I carry it at all?

Given that ruling, you could probably just leave 3 or 4 in each coughpit, but that invalidates a number of uses, and makes updates a little more problematic.

 

[mosanator]

jb747 - as most definitely one of the 20,000 looking up (and staring at the coughpit door when onboard), thanks again for your contribution here.

I have a question regarding your medicals and drug and alcohol testing.

How often do you have medicals? And what sort of things do they check in the examination, like BMI, BP, blood sugar etc??? Eyesight is always a big issue at entry to the proffession (like yourself into the Navy) but is there a lessening of the requirements as you get more experienced (polite way of saying older!) In the regulatory medicals do they check for drugs with a urine sample?

I am assuming there is a requirement to inform the head shed whenever you are on medications etc?

Also is there a random drug and alcohol testing regime at QF? Also those ATC guys on here please respond if you feel so inclined.

Asking these questions because recently we have introduced a drug and alcohol policy with my employer and there have been different providers of testing methodology making different claims primarily re CASA, QF etc.

Thanks In Advance.

 

[jb747]

I have a question regarding your medicals and drug and alcohol testing.

How often do you have medicals? And what sort of things do they check in the examination, like BMI, BP, blood sugar etc??? Eyesight is always a big issue at entry to the proffession (like yourself into the Navy) but is there a lessening of the requirements as you get more experienced (polite way of saying older!) In the regulatory medicals do they check for drugs with a urine sample?

I am assuming there is a requirement to inform the head shed whenever you are on medications etc?

Also is there a random drug and alcohol testing regime at QF? Also those ATC guys on here please respond if you feel so inclined.

Asking these questions because recently we have introduced a drug and alcohol policy with my employer and there have been different providers of testing methodology making different claims primarily re CASA, QF etc.

I think the timing of medicals can be a bit flexible. Basically, once per year, but depending upon the results, CASA, may require extra tests or more frequent medicals. Items like stress tests will be tripped by age, but also by other test results. The items you mention are tested every medical. Hearing every 5 years. Basic eyesight every time...and basically whatever glasses you have must correct you back to normal, and then the glasses become a requirement of your licence, and you must carry two pairs.

There is random drug/alcohol testing, but run by CASA.

 

[mosanator]

Thanks jb.

Have you ever been random tested?
What about when in other countries? Do you have to submit or comply if requested, or is this left to each individuals national body and testing only occurs on home soil?
Cheers - no pun intended !

 

[jb747]

Have you ever been random tested?

Not so far, but I expect I will one day.

What about when in other countries? Do you have to submit or comply if requested, or is this left to each individuals national body and testing only occurs on home soil?

In another country you obey their laws. They mostly have testing regimes, and if asked you comply.

 

[jb747]

Another set of sim exercises.

When you've been away for a while, depending upon the time since you last flew, you need to go through a requalification process. If it's just been annual leave, then normally either a 'recency' sim, or a standard cyclic licence renewal will suffice. But, if you've been away longer, you may need to do a couple of sims, and a check flight, or, after about six months, a shortened version of the original conversion.

In my case it had been just over 57 days since my last flight, so I was scheduled to do three things…the recency sim, the cyclic, and then a sector.

Recency sims are often the closest things you'll ever have to fun in the simulator. They are not scripted at all, but have a simple requirement for you to do three takeoffs and landings, an abort, and a low vis approach. That doesn't take very long, and so means that you will often have plenty of time to practice whatever takes your fancy. It's a good time for items like multiple V1 cuts (engine failures), or manual engine out approaches. Getting things wrong doesn't matter, as long as you have them right at the end of the session. This particular exercise was for two Captains, so I started off by sitting in the wrong seat. I make a lousy FO.

The next day was a cyclic. As always, you hear various scenarios from other people before you arrive, and as always, it's always good to take whatever happened to others with a grain of salt. Whilst the skeleton of the exercise will be the same, the the instructor has a large amount of leeway as to just how he manages it, so your exercise may not look much like someone else's at all.

In this case we start off with a circuit for each of us. Just like you'd do in your Cessna. Take off, turn left or right as appropriate and land…hopefully without embarrassing yourself too much (circuits simply aren't something we do in the real world, but, of course, you never know). Then into the guts of the exercise. The instructor had briefed that whatever happened, and whatever decisions we made, would be carried out in real time. That's a bit unusual in the sim, as the time is so precious that 'blank' time is often just skipped over (i.e. fuel dumps that take an hour are made happen in minutes), but that has an unrealistic effect on management, and that was what this exercise was largely about.

The plan is a take off from Melbourne 16 for a flight to LA. Max take off weight. I guess we won't go to LA in real time….

Quite late in the take off roll, vibration can be felt, though quite mild. Take off and retract gear, and into the clean up. Once the inhibit period ends, the ECAM comes up with a tyre pressure warning, and the vibration is explained as the failure of SIX tyres on the same truck. Guess we ran over something. Clean up proceeds normally, but the next thing that happens is a fuel system warning, and a look at the tanks shows that the #2 feed tank is leaking. Obviously not going to LA, so off to a holding pattern. Resolving the fuel issue involves turning off all of the fuel transfer pumps (which stops a leaking tank being filled from somewhere else), and in this case shutting down the #2 engine (which is done to see if the leak is at the engine or prior to it). As the leak was confirmed from the tank, the engine can be fed from elsewhere and restarted.

So, you're well above max landing weight. You've lost four brakes (the last set of wheels on the body gear are unbraked). Your weight is going to become very asymmetric once the feed tank eventually drains (20 tonnes roughly). Can you go back to Melbourne, or should you look at going elsewhere? At this stage Melbourne is wet, with about a 15 knot crosswind. Landing appears acceptable in the current situation. So, what next? Well, dump all of the excess fuel. That's about 150 tonnes worth, and, assuming the #2 tank is empty, will leave us with about 60 tonnes. Still plenty for any further issues, but getting back towards a reasonable landing weight. As I don't consider landing is a huge priority at the moment, I also intend flying around for a while after the dump is complete to get the aircraft below max landing weight. For training reasons, the instructor tells us that he needs to see an overweight landing.

Once the dump is happening, we've got the better part of an hour to look through the performance application at our exact scenario, and even time to look at the manuals. The big question is simply "is this all, or will there be more". But, whilst you can plan for more, you can only really react to what has happened, so once the fuel dump is complete, and the various checklists actioned, it's time to head back for a long finals to 16. The decision was made to take the initial flap, and extend the gear, very early, so they were selected at 9000 feet (and about 40 miles to run) and both operated normally. The landing flap selection was next and at about 5000 feet, we were rewarded with a 'Flaps Locked' message, which means the system has detected a problem and the flaps are now locked in their present position, whatever that happens to be. This cannot be fixed in flight. An additional part of this system response is that the aircraft reverted to alternate law, which takes away the option to do an automatic landing (which is the preferred option in any overweight landing). Some more performance figures needed to be crunched to come up with both an approach speed and runway length requirements…but as the weigh was now almost normal, and we had Flap 2, the approach speed was still quite reasonable (in the high 140s). A few more checklists to be carried out, and some items to get into our heads (with regard to speed control, and go around). The approach would be flown automatically with a manual landing, and I disconnected the autopilot at about 500 feet. Landing normal, and no wheel fires or other nasties thrown in. Come to a halt…and then go and get a cuppa.

Last part of the exercise was quite straightforward. FO take off and then ILS approach and landing, and then lo vis take off and landing for me.

 

[mjt57]

Interesting read. How long were you in the simulator for?

 

[jb747]

Interesting read. How long were you in the simulator for?

Our sim sessions are always four hours.

 

[mjt57]

Our sim sessions are always four hours.

Wish ours (power station sim) were that short (2 x 12hr shifts, twice a year). But then you would do a lot more sessions, I s'pose.

And our continued employment isn't contingent upon us passing 100%.

 

[jb747]

Wish ours (power station sim) were that short (2 x 12hr shifts, twice a year). But then you would do a lot more sessions, I s'pose.

And our continued employment isn't contingent upon us passing 100%.

Longer sessions have no value. You more or less burn out, and can't remember anything you've done if loaded up enough (Italian driving...what's behind me doesn't matter). And, in the real world, most events run for minutes, not hours....

 

[beardoc]

Longer sessions have no value. You more or less burn out, and can't remember anything you've done if loaded up enough (Italian driving...what's behind me doesn't matter). And, in the real world, most events run for minutes, not hours....

Four hours would be incredible - compare that to us in the medical simulation field where we usually run for no more than about 20 minutes, because of the wealth of content generated in even that time to talk about afterwards. Although, we're not using it for testing in our scenarios - only as a learning tool.

 

[mjt57]

Longer sessions have no value. You more or less burn out, and can't remember anything you've done if loaded up enough (Italian driving...what's behind me doesn't matter). And, in the real world, most events run for minutes, not hours....

I might suggest that to the training people. The problem is getting people to come into work for four hours here and there. Most would rather come in for a full day, particularly when they have hours owing...

 

[SenZubEanS]

Hey JB, has there been much sent around to pilots about the QFd and QFi split?

 

[jb747]

Hey JB, has there been much sent around to pilots about the QFd and QFi split?

No. We read about it in the paper.