The great big "ask an airline pilot" thread!

Cessna_Pilot

scudzilla wrote: »

Now i've seen some of these Airport programmes and the clowns who turn up late, what's the pilots point of view on that? Some of the pilots on the programme let them on, others don't, what makes you come to that decision?

Even if the loadsheet has been signed and the head count's complete, if we have a few minutes to spare or are just feeling considerate there's no issue with taking a last minute passenger, if they run No point in screwing up someone's day if it can be helped.
Simple LMC and off we go.

IngazZagni

scudzilla wrote: »

I'm one of those people that when i'm flying somewhere i'll arrive at the airport 2hrs before, check in the bags and go for a pint, just so i'm there etc.

Now i've seen some of these Airport programmes and the clowns who turn up late, what's the pilots point of view on that? Some of the pilots on the programme let them on, others don't, what makes you come to that decision?

The check in staff sometimes say they can't let a passenger on because all the weights have been done, surely 2 people and a couple of cases can't affect the weight load that much??

It won't make a big difference to the weight but it all needs to be noted on the load sheet. The load sheet will be completed when the gate closes. There are only so many "last minute changes" that can be made to this before a brand new load sheet has to completed. So this would be a good reason not to accept a latecomer.
If however you are more or less on time and don't have an imminent takeoff slot and you're not in a bad mood, then yes, we would normally accept them.

Bearcat

Most airlines use the criteria that a new load sheet is not required once the Lmc is not greater than 1% of the max take off weight.

In case anyone thinks we do Lmc's with a nod and wink is mistaken and is serious business. It's best to get a new load sheet even if your below your 1% criteria imho.

host_found

smurfjed wrote: »

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

Thanks smurfjed

Its an interesting peace of doc

Cheers

smurfjed

Not sure if people want to read reports lie these, but writing them keeps me amused when I'm sitting around waiting......

After a week of flying short haul 1 hour flights, we got to deadhead to London to operate a flight. We went on a B777-300, first time that I have had the opportunity to fly on one. The aircraft had a 2 class configuration, 30 business seats and 388 economy, (high density B747 Classic replacement). We were lucky and got 2 empty business seats, but we also got to try out the crew rest area, I'm used to the crew rest in the 777-200, but this one has a stairs leading to the ceiling area, there are 2 seats and 2 bunks up there, I was actually surprised at how quiet it was.

Landed in London, as we weren't operating crew, we had to go through the terminal building for immigration and customs, then we got driven to a Marriott hotel downtown. We only had a 16 hours layover, so it's was a case of doing some shopping, get dinner, and sleep.

Next morning, logged on to find our flight plan, 6hours at FL390, checked the weather, we should escape from Luton while the weather is nice, the enroute weather showed isolated CBs up to FL400 on the Mediterranean coast. the destination weather was hot, sticky and sandy!

Our departure was from RWY08, this was a first for me, previously we have always used 26, it's also fun as it has a SID based on using the Hendon NDB. As its a noise abatement procedure, we climbed to 1500, selected climb power, maintained 180 knots for the 180 degree turn, retracted the flaps at 3000 feet, then accelerated to 250.

The departure went as planned, but we were held down at FL70 for about 60 miles, this is very different to my last departure from Luton when they wanted us to climb as rapidly as possible. After about 10 step climbs we were changed over to Brest control, who cleared us to FL410 with free speed.

It was a turbulent day even at 410, so we flew most of the flight at the turbulent air penetration speed, primarily as the passenger has a nervous disposition. We encountered mature and dissipating thunderstorms over the end of Italy, deviating 10 miles to the right gave us ample clearance.

About halfway into the flight, we called the company on HF to give an enroute report and to get the destination weather, it had changed dramatically, Thunderstorm activity had created a sand storm so the visibility was reduced to 1000 meters, it was now a question of how bad was it going to get, we also got the weather for the alternate, it was also suffering from the Thunderstorm activity. We had the choice of 3 coastal airports that were CAVOK, if we decided to avoid the weather completely. Remember that we had a very nervous passenger, so we had no desire to scare her.

The next weather report showed some improvement, about 300 miles from the destination we could see weather activity on the radar, the weather was moving away from the airport towards us.

We could see a line of thunderstorms going about 100 miles south over the mountains, it looked really impressive. Allowing for a descent profile calculated 3 times the altitude, we would normally commence descent at about 123 miles. That was exactly where we would meet the thunderstorm! ATC gave us clearance to deviate to the left as much as we desired, we cleared the weather with about 70 miles to go, with no expected delay as we were nbr 1 for the left runway. To lose the height we used the speed brakes but remained at the turbulent air speed. We turned base at 7000 feet, with an ILS to landing. Vacated left to special parking.

Our passenger was very happy, so we all got a nice gratuity.

Now I have 10 days off until the end of the month, followed by a months vacation, and the possibility of first 10 days off in December, so 50 days off !!

Smurfjed

RangeR

smurfjed wrote: »

Not sure if people want to read reports lie these, but writing them keeps me amused when I'm sitting around waiting......

Smurfjed

Absolutely, keep them coming. VERY interested, breaks up my lunchtime

If I could make one request, spell out the abbreviations. Most of us are not in the business

one question about your post. I know you can't tell us who it is that you are flying, but can you postulate the "area" of VIPness. Just out of curiosity [movie, song, royal, government, ultra high earner of other sort?]

Damn, you have me slightly envious sitting behind a desk 9 to 5 Don't get me wrong, I love my job but... man.... exciting stuffs jetting between countries for a living.

smurfjed

I didnt realize that there was so much space in the ceiling area.



RangeR, usually our passengers have HRH in front of their name. In fact this was the first flight that i have done in the last week that didn't involve a military guard of honor.

smurfjed

Bessarion

smurfjed wrote: »

...usually our passengers have HRH in front of their name. In fact this was the first flight that i have done in the last week that didn't involve a military guard of honor.

smurfjed

I am very envious of your position. I had a small experience of this a few months back. During the NATO conference in Chicago I happened to be operating with VIP politicians both in and out. Lots of protocol around the whole area. And the number of uniforms (along with guys in dark suits wearing earpieces) visible in O'Hare on that day of departure was quite impressive.

I got checked out by the Polish security delegation while taking snaps of VIP aircraft, they obviously dismissed me as any level of threat as I was small and airside. Not really sure how I should feel about that..........

scudzilla

smurfjed wrote: »

RangeR, usually our passengers have HRH in front of their name. In fact this was the first flight that i have done in the last week that didn't involve a military guard of honor.

smurfjed

Say if you're passenger (s) have bodyguards, what's the situation when it comes to them travelling armed? Also, are your passengers allowed to visit the flight deck in flight or is it the same as commercial?

smurfjed

Private aircraft don't have the same cockpit access restrictions. Your other question i cant answer, sorry.

smurfjed

scudzilla

smurfjed wrote: »

Private aircraft don't have the same cockpit access restrictions. Your other question i cant answer, sorry.

smurfjed

No problem, thanks anyways.

SeaFields

Was on a flight home from Lanzarote this week that was delayed for 9 hours due to a problem with the cabin door. Plane was fully loaded and ready for take off when we were all told to get off again while they got an engineer to fix it

But I was thinking, fully fueled jet sitting in 30+ degrees sunshine for 9 hours. The jet fuel must have been boiling inside in it? Whats the situation with that? Is there a way of keeping it cool or is there a need?

LeftBase

SeaFields wrote: »

Was on a flight home from Lanzarote this week that was delayed for 9 hours due to a problem with the cabin door. Plane was fully loaded and ready for take off when we were all told to get off again while they got an engineer to fix it

But I was thinking, fully fueled jet sitting in 30+ degrees sunshine for 9 hours. The jet fuel must have been boiling inside in it? Whats the situation with that? Is there a way of keeping it cool or is there a need?

There's no need. It wouldnt get that hot in the tanks plus you'd want to get aviation fuel quite hot for there to be an issue like that.

smurfjed

Our maximum temperature for fuel is +90C, even in our environment, we dont see it reach that level. But what you have to be careful with is expansion, as the temperature increases, fuel expands, if the tanks are full, it will overflow through valves designed for this.

smurfjed

Dogwatch

Bearcat wrote: »

Smurfjet, why are you answering questions as a business jet pilot with the thread based on ask an "airline" pilot?......

Parallel universe my friend.

Does the fuel on a non business jet react differently then? If so, what is the difference???????????:D:D

LeftBase

Bearcat wrote: »

Smurfjet, why are you answering questions as a business jet pilot with the thread based on ask an "airline" pilot?......

Parallel universe my friend.

Many of the questions may be answerable by him. However I agree that he cannot comment(unless he has airline experience) on the company demands/pressures for time and money saving you get in a commercial airline, along with OPs for normal passenger airline flights.

pclancy

The title may be somewhat deceptive but being a commercial pilot is all I ever asked for this thread Bearcat. We've got CPLs and ATPLs who fly all kinds of aircraft other then the ones flown by commercial airlines so I don't see what the issue is....

pclancy wrote: »

This thread is for people who are interested in a commercial career in flying to ask a qualified commercial pilot questions about their daily lives, technical/system questions, career guidance, licencing, how best to become an airline pilot etc

Over time it will become full of good nuggets of information and serve as a good reference point for people wanting a career in the flight deck.

It is not intended for general discussion, general aviation or PPL questions, chit-chat, discussion of sensitive hr/corporate airline information or anything that could break the A&A forum charter.

Asking Questions: Please only post if you are asking or answering a question so as to keep it nice and tidy. commercial pilots are requested to include their licence type, relevant rating held and hours in their response ie ATPL(F), 738, 500. I don't expect you to divulge your airline or personal details but at least it might serve as some proof to your credentials

We'll see how it goes and sticky if its busy enough.

pclancy

Also maybe time again to reiterate that I really only wanted questions and answers in here, not people bashing each others experience or credentials....YAWN!

guttenberg

Probably a stupid question, but how come pilots (IME) never elaborate on reasons for delays to flights rather than simply blaming "technical difficulties"? I've been delayed for up to 7 hours before, and it would have been nice to know exactly why I've been stuck in the airport longer than anticipated:)

LeftBase

guttenberg wrote: »

Probably a stupid question, but how come pilots (IME) never elaborate on reasons for delays to flights rather than simply blaming "technical difficulties"? I've been delayed for up to 7 hours before, and it would have been nice to know exactly why I've been stuck in the airport longer than anticipated:)

Blanket reason so everyone know's the score.

If I said "We're delayed due to a cracked compressor blade" everyone would ask "what's that?" "is it serious?" "oh **** we're all going to die!"

Technical Difficulties spares more questions and doesn't sound overly technical and complicated. Small issues can sound serious and cause panic...

speedbird777

hey great thread,..iv a question , have you ever in your career ever doubted your skill or ability ?? i mean that in the sense have you ever second guest your navigation, fuel calculations, v speeds ,etc. thanks

Bearcat

I apologize unreservedly to smurfs for my unwarranted snipe. Jet lag/wine/key board self appointed idiot warrior.

A large sorry.....

LeftBase

speedbird777 wrote: »

hey great thread,..iv a question , have you ever in your career ever doubted your skill or ability ?? i mean that in the sense have you ever second guest your navigation, fuel calculations, v speeds ,etc. thanks

I think if you don't you shouldn't be flying! I always assume that I've gotten something wrong and set about finding it....it means that in the end if I am wrong I fix it and if I'm not I've double and triple checked everything.

speedbird777

LeftBase wrote: »

I think if you don't you shouldn't be flying! I always assume that I've gotten something wrong and set about finding it....it means that in the end if I am wrong I fix it and if I'm not I've double and triple checked everything.

thanks, the reason i asked is because i seen this on here and wondered is it a common thing?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider , id imagine most calculations are crossed checked as you already pritty much stated

LeftBase

speedbird777 wrote: »

thanks, the reason i asked is because i seen this on here and wondered is it a common thing?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider , id imagine most calculations are crossed checked as you already pritty much stated

That crash was more due to the use of Imperial units rather than Metric I believe, though I will stand corrected.

As an airline pilot most of the calculations are already done for you by Ops and so you are handed many of the sheets already filled in and totted up. However it is good practice(and common sense) to check all of these yourself for errors...after all it isnt the planner that's taking a fully loaded jet into the air!

smurfjed

Many of the questions may be answerable by him. However I agree that he cannot comment(unless he has airline experience) on the company demands/pressures for time and money saving you get in a commercial airline, along with OPs for normal passenger airline flights.

Have you actually qualified to fly the aircraft that you have paid to fly??

Bearcat, apology accepted, I dont know why i get under you skin, but its apparent that i do, for that I apologize. To answer your original question, I'm employed by an airline that has about 120 aircraft, I have been involved in the contractual negotiations for most of them, introduction into service, and operation of these aircraft (not flying, I hasten to add). I therefore have a little bit more knowledge about airline operations than someone who has just purchased his seat!

As for our corporate operations, well considering that our largest aircraft are B747's, and the smallest is the one that i fly, I think that you might find that fuel behaves the same in all of them!

Now if PClancy wants me to stop posting, then I will, but as he has already discovered with BoeingBoy, we are real pilots plying our trade in a different way!

Now its 1am my time in this part of the world, I'm enjoying some cold beers beside my new swimming pool........

smurfjed

amen

So you are flying alone at 10,000m on a plane with winglets. One of the winglets falls off. What is the impact on flight performance ? do you have to descend ?
What about when landing ? Do you have to compensate for the missing winglet and if so how?

LeftBase

smurfjed wrote: »

Have you actually qualified to fly the aircraft that you have paid to fly??

Do I detect some green eyes?

IngazZagni

amen wrote: »

So you are flying alone at 10,000m on a plane with winglets. One of the winglets falls off. What is the impact on flight performance ? do you have to descend ?
What about when landing ? Do you have to compensate for the missing winglet and if so how?

I think the effect would be quite minimal. Remember originally most aircraft were designed without winglets and they were added later. The aircraft may want to roll one direction due to less/more drag on one side than the other. This probably could be corrected with aileron trim. But it would be a pretty serious incident to have that happen so I would start descending to the nearest airport preferably with good maintenance facilities.

I was taxiing past an Easyjet the other day and noticed it had it's wingtip fences missing on one side. I'm not familiar with Airbus but I guess they are not too important if it can be dispatched for flight like that. They are a lot smaller than most winglets though.

smurfjed

Do I detect some green eyes?

Who me???? Tell you what, have a look at my world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxnvUmB4KjM&feature=related

smurfjed