The great big "ask an airline pilot" thread!

Host_found, you might be interested in this, reports such as these are a much better source of factual information than TV shows.

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/files/report-attachments/REPORT_2012_015.pdf

smurfjed

hidinginthebush wrote: »

1. A few years I was on a flight from Chicago O'Hare to Dublin, when during the climb, all the power in the plane just went. As in the engines even shut off to the point that you could feel the angle of incline decrease until the plane started to tilt forward, it was a genuine brown trousers moment, there were a few shrieks from the passengers, then the everything kicked back in and we proceeded on with the flight. To be bluntly honest, it was the worst flight of my live, knowing I was on a plane that seemed a bit dodgy. I later asked a friend who is an airhost (is that the pc term?) and he said it was probably just a circuit breaker that tripped and was then reset. But I'm just wondering how regular an occurrence this is? I assume if the pilots had any doubts about the stability of the plane they are allowed to turn around and head back?

If the engines actually shut down I very much doubt that the plane would go anywhere and an immediate landing would be called for.
I was going to suggest that perhaps the pilots were told to halt their climb suddenly for traffic reasons, but this may not be the reason. No breaker tripping would cause all power to go and the engines to shut down......that is totally opposed to the fail safe rule.

2. Probably for the pilots who fly bigger liners, but do you ever miss being on the smaller planes where you need hands on the controls at all times and actually fly the plane, as opposed to monitoring the autopilot and only really getting to control on take off and landing? Or does he thrill of flying a huge plane overcome that?

I miss spinning......spinning an A320 is not good, although I'd like to give it a go....:D but HAL won't let me!:( When I did my 1st actual non simulated take off and put the levers to full TO thrust I almost messed myself. It's certainly a different experience to doing it in a C172 or MEP aircraft. When you think about it, flying a light aircraft you take off, climb, trim it for a level cruise(and do regular checks etc) and go where you go, before descending(usually trimmed again) and landing. In a sense it's not all that different. There's actually more to do in the cruise in a jet I think with regular checks of all the various systems and navigation instruments as well as fuel checks and ATC liaison/arrival/approach briefing and descent plan. Personally when I was flying light aircraft the height of my descent/arrival/approach plan was getting rid of Dublin FIS at Enfield, getting Weston's ATIS, and calling them up at Kilcock. Obviously the MEIR was different, but that wasn't really pleasure flying.

3. It was mentioned a while back, but I didn't see it as fully conclusive, is auto-land ever used and how often? I recall being told it is used in heave fog conditions. As pilots, do you find it hard to trust the auto-land systems when you're sitting so close to the controls?

Only in fog or low vis. Never because of fatigue. My company states that autoland shouldn't be used if possible in wind above a certain direction and component. The autoland is fine and trustworthy simply because we are watching it the whole way in. Sometimes it can be disconnected when visual with the lights because it can plant the aircraft in the runway, rather than "touch it down".

4. Finally, a potentially ridiculous question, how different is it flying different planes? I mean, I'm sure there's a lot of training involved if you go from flying a boeing to an airbus, but, if, say a pilot usually accustomed to flying a 767 was passenger on an airbus a320 (for arguments sake), and both pilots on that plane were unable to land the plane, would he be able to take over and get everyone safely on the ground, or are the systems completely different to eachother?

I think it would be manageable for a lot of airline pilots to land a heavy jet they were not rated on if needed. It may not be a 10/10 landing but I think it would be more than doable. A lot of reasonably experienced GA pilots could make a reasonable fist of it too I'd say.

Hello!
I have one question about flight routes.
Well, I am a frequent flyer between Ireland and Baltic countries (Dublin-Vilnius-Dublin, Dublin-Kaunas-Dublin, Dublin-Riga-Dublin). I check the flight routes of these flights very often on FlightRadar24. I found out, that flight routes are a bit strange. For example, Ryanair and Aer Lingus always make a turn heading Belfast after take off from Dublin, then turn right heading Glasgow and finally make another right turn and fly directly to Baltic countries. However, AirBaltic chooses a different route. After take off from Dublin they fly directly heading Amsterdam. When crossing UK coastline, they turn left and fly above Denmark, Sweden to Baltic countries. This route is approx. 80nm shorter. So are there any reasons, why Ryanair chooses a longer route? Maybe it's better due to prevailing winds or something else?
So are there any pilots, who fly to Baltic states? Thanks a million for help!

Airbaltic flies this route at the middle of the night while FR an EI schedules tend to be rather flexible - some flights are performed at late evenings but some are in the middle of the day. That said - I would also guess that it is an airspace congestion matter.

How's the base training coming along (if it's started yet)?

When you have the time, how would you feel about giving us a day in the life post, similar to smurfjeds a few days back, it'd be interesting to see life on the line from the viewpoint of a newbie

LeftBase wrote: »

200hrs......

200 Hours with a trainer!! I've never heard of an airline have a trainer that can spend 200 hours on a guy before.

Line training is based on sectors rather than hours. The captain you fly with until you are line chekced will be LTCs, Line training captains. It's their job to fly with you and train you, so it will only be a pain for them if you're not very good.

smurfjed wrote: »

We are the opposite, line training is based on hours not sectors as the sector length can vary from 40 mins to 8.5 hours. A new First Officer gets between 25-70 hours. A new Captain will do 25-40 hours in the right seat then 25-60 in the left seat.

smurfjed

and their goes me thinking the young lads made the tea... :pac:

Ok so I was asked to do a day in the life of a newbie post so I suppose I'll give it a shot and recount yesterday. Never though my life was of such interest!:D

Was up at 5am for a 4 sector day, had an instant coffee and 2 apple turnovers for breakfast(of champions). Arrived at the airport at 6:30am. Went through security and headed down to the crew room. First sector of the day was to Gatwick so I got the met and had a look through the actuals and forcasts for the route(it was all pretty unremarkable) and checked out the forcast winds for Gatwick. Couple of minutes later that Captain came in and asked me to give him the big picture . We had a chat about the met and the possible implications of a wind shift and what affect that would have on the runway at Gatwick and if we would need to carry a bit more fuel to allow a slightly more scenic route should the need arise. Agreement was reached and we headed out to do our cold and dark. We went back through security(because the crew room is full of deadly weapons) and out to the ramp. The Captained trotted up the steps and I did the walk round to make sure skangers hadn't stripped the aircraft in the night. All was clear, there was no visible ice or contaminants, we had tires, no visible cracks or blocked ports or rusted mountings and we had all the compressor blades still attached and unseized to name just a few things.
With that done I went up the steps taking extra care not to splitz myself on the way up and I entered the flight deck where the Captain was speaking with a ground agent. I derobed and took my seat for the cold and dark checks. To cut a long chapter short all electrical, hydraulic and pneumatics were showing green.
Now confident that we had an aircraft capable of flying the sectors required we received the load sheets and set about getting the planned fuel. I was handed them and asked to double check the final figures. There were a couple of no show passengers so the sheet had been amended as such.
With baggage loading started and fueling finished we started loading passengers.
As the passengers filed on I briefed the route, expected SID, enroute altitude, flight time, any delays etc, expected STAR and Approach.
The passengers headcount was done, all were present and the doors were shut. In a master stroke of ground controlling a 757 was instructed to stop behind us waiting to get into the stand beside us, however it was not prepared and so we had a 5 minute wait while they cleared it up and the 757 pulled on to stand. With all obstacles moved we pushed back, started up, taxied and took off. It was a clear enough flight, a few bumps, bit grey etc but not too much to get excited over. We arrived in Gatwick on time and were almost bet out again by their hysterical need to get you on and off stand as quick as is possible! Our next sector was to Geneva, a lovely view of the Alps as we flew along only tainted by the snottiest French controller the Captain had ever heard. Arrival in Geneva saw us delayed again as a company aircraft had a problem with it's air-con and couldn't push until it was fixed. A 40 min delay that forced us to shut down one engine(we would have shut down both but were asked not to).
We got out of Geneva 25 mins behind schedule enroute to Liverpool. We arrived only 10 mins late thanks to ATC who let us cut a little bit of a corner on our route. After Liverpool it was a short hop back to base and home to bed. A day off today and back to the grindstone tomorrow!

The only difference between me and the established FOs is that the Captain can be asked to write up a brief summary of areas he thought I had trouble or could improve. The odd time I am warned a guy may sit in on a sector, so offer up prayers!

dukedalton wrote: »

I have a question about the mechanics of flight:

I understand that lift is generated by the air flowing over the wing quicker than the air flowing under the wing which creates a pressure differential. I know that it is good practice to take off and land into the wind as the wind flowing towards the aircraft will itself generate lift, thus reducing the runway length required for take off and thrust settings required for landing.

I don't understand what people mean when they say that their flight time was reduced "because we had a tail wind". For example, if the aircraft needs to attain airflow over the wing at a speed of, let's say, 200 knots, and there is a tailwind of, let's say, 100 knots, surely that means the aircraft engines would have to generate thrust of what would be a 300 knot magnitude if there was no wind?

If anyone can relieve me of my confusion I'd be very grateful!

The aircraft will fly at say 200kts airspeed in still air. That is 200mph over the ground. With a 20kt headwind in flight it will do 200kts airspeed(speed of air over the wing) but only do 180mph over the ground. With a 20kt tailwind the aircraft will have 200kts airspeed(speed over wing) and a speed over the ground of 220mph. To get the air moving over the wing at 200kts you must fly faster to make up the component of the tailwind moving forward rather than back over the wing. So your speed over the ground will be faster.

Too high an airspeed(air too fast over the wing can damage the structure). So with a tailwind the aircraft can fly faster over the ground for the same speed of air over the wing!

What are those red, green, yellow and orange lights for in the cabins of a commercial airliner, they are up on the ceiling?

Cheers

Locker10a wrote: »

Hmm not sure what you mean! But Is it possible you mean the crew interphone signals?
Im sure you have noticed the Pilots/cabin crew can call eachother on phones! When a call is made you will hear that "ding-dong" sound that you always hear on the plane! Along with the sound a light will illuminate on the ceiling to notify the crew in the cabin!
I think this must be what you mean!
Hope it helps either way!

Thanks, yes that must be them alright. How do they work, why four colours?

Locker10a wrote: »

They just light up when a call is made! SO say if the ding dong goes off in the cabin and the senior ccm looks up they will know from which light it on who is calling! So one colour will mean flight deck, one will mean rear galley, one is emergency and im not sure what the other is! It varies from aircraft type !

Well it differs depending on aircraft type. But usually the blue light indicates a passenger has pressed the call bell in the cabin. The red/pink light means a call from the flight deck or other cabin station and the amber means someone has pressed the call bell in the lavatory. Another light can be used to indicate that the smoke detector has activated in the lavatory closest to that light.