The great big "ask an airline pilot" thread!

Wibbs

LeftBase wrote: »

Interesting issue with Airbus side-sticks is that one guy can be throwing the stick around or have it all the way back(a la Air France) and the other guy's stick stays central and does not move like Boeing control wheels would. This means that a Captain flying with an inexperienced FO has to monitor the systems he monitors as PNF and keep a close eye on the inputs the FO is putting in as he cannot see them through his stick.

Interesting. A little worrying too, for me anyway. Just talking through my arse from an interested amateur POV, but when I first saw those side sticks mooted as a good thing I had a real "eh wut?" moment. Made little or no sense compared to a central joystick/control column. Take your example. It increases the chances of one pilot not being aware of what the other is doing. With the old stylee yoke this is far more clear.

Take the Air France jet that plunged into the atlantic ocean on the flight from Brazil a few years back. The copilot stalled her all the way into the sea. He was holding back on the stick all the way down(major WTF in a stall but anyway). The captain didn't realise this. If a central stick had been in place it's far more likely he would have been aware of this. It's kinda madness they don't even have servos that transmit what one pilot is doing. :eek:

The other aspect is handedness. Most people are righties, but many are lefties. Yes you can learn to be pretty good with your non dominant hand, but again it's adding an issue where it doesn't need to.

LeftBase

Wibbs wrote: »

The other aspect is handedness. Most people are righties, but many are lefties. Yes you can learn to be pretty good with your non dominant hand, but again it's adding an issue where it doesn't need to.

I'm a righty and fly with my right as an FO. However most pilots learn to fly with their left hand so I actually had a harder time adapting to flying with my dominant hand.

Shamrock231

Well, regardless of whether you use a side-stick or yoke, the throttles are always going to be in the middle, so for half* your career, you'll be using your dominant hand on the control column/side-stick, and the other half* your non-dominant one.

*Just go with it, no need to be pedantic...

Wibbs

Still, what are the actual practical advantages of a sidestick arrangement? I can see few, but can see more disadvantages compared to the centre mounted yoke.

Shamrock231

Weight savings and pilot incapacitation come to mind.

amen

but when I first saw those side sticks mooted as a good thing I had a real "eh wut?" moment

Take the Air France jet that plunged into the atlantic ocean on the flight from Brazil a few years back. The copilot stalled her all the way into the sea. He was holding back on the stick all the way down(major WTF in a stall but anyway). The captain didn't realise this. If a central stick had been in place it's far more likely he would have been aware of this. It's kinda madness they don't even have servos that transmit what one pilot is doing.

This though is nothing to do with side sticks or traditional yokes. This is more a design Philosophy whereby Airbus don't have the sidesticks move in tandem. You could just as easily have this occur for traditional control.

Similarly Airbus could have implemented this feature for the side stick.

Wibbs

amen wrote: »

This though is nothing to do with side sticks or traditional yokes. This is more a design Philosophy whereby Airbus don't have the sidesticks move in tandem. You could just as easily have this occur for traditional control.

Oh I agree, but IMH that's only partially the case. It's simply easier to visually acquire a traditional yoke and see it's relative position especially in a darkened cockpit(even if they weren't in tandem). Are there examples where traditional yokes aren't in tandem? I understood they were, so pardon my ignorance. In the air france incident, it would be a lot more obvious to the rest of the crew that the guy flying was flying nose up with a traditional yoke, even from his body/arm position and that may have averted disaster in a situation of confusion and overload from alarm and instrument failure.

The lack of tandem cues just adds to the idea being a daft one. It just seems like an "improvement" for the sake of being different. I could see the advantages in say a single seat fighter aircraft, the potential for high G loadings would make the closer and smaller sidestick a better bet, but for commercial aircraft? I really don't see any advantages as Airbus implements them.

Surveyor11

Wasn't it the case that the pilot in the jump seat could see the error i.e. Captain pulling the yoke up, but the co-pilot couldn't / didn't realise what the captain was doing? Sorry, just my amateur 10c:o

Danno

Flew DUB to CDG on 13/08 - a very smooth flight EIN522. Over the English Channel the engines seemed to almost switch off, is this done as a fuel saving exercise?

The return leg home on 17/08 - a little turbulent flight EIN523. Over England at good height the plane was a little bumpy and at one stage I felt the plane being pushed eastwards - was this a jet stream ribbon? It felt like a strong crosswind hitting a car when you pass a gap in the hedgerows driving along.
We seemed to be beneath the low cloud base from around 40 miles out over the Irish sea with the plane swaying - in fairness the captain (J Donoghue?) got us down with a little thud in Dublin, as a nervous flyer this was probably the most uncomfortable flight I was ever on (not a frequent flyer by any stretch).

This was my first time to fly on an airbus and felt that the takeoff and landing were generally more smooth than the boeings I flew with in previous flights, however the airbus when up seemed to be more sensitive to weak turbulence than the boeing with the wing tips visibly shimmying more in the air.

smurfjed

the engines seemed to almost switch off, is this done as a fuel saving exercise?

This procedure would save a lot of fuel, but the aircraft range would suffer dramatically.

one stage I felt the plane being pushed eastwards - was this a jet stream ribbon?

Wow, are you sure that you really felt the aircraft being pushed sidewards, this seems strange.

as a nervous flyer this was probably the most uncomfortable flight I was ever on (not a frequent flyer by any stretch).

You appear to be extremely sensitive to flying, your ears can play some terrible tricks on you as you have little or no visual reference, I can assure you that the only time that the engines will have the power reduced in a cruise is when they are in idle power for descent, and even this is a misnomer as for us, idle power means that the engine is rotating at 67% of the possible speed and still delivering power.

Danno

smurfjed wrote: »

...You appear to be extremely sensitive to flying...

Absolutely!!! :P

Every little twitch the plane makes my stomach churns!!!

whitebriar

Danno wrote: »

Absolutely!!! :P

Every little twitch the plane makes my stomach churns!!!

You wouldn't have liked part of my flight on BA from lhr to yvr last year then.
Somewhere over Newfoundland,the plane hit the strongest turbulence I've ever experienced.I was in 1k in the nose of the plane and at one stage in the worst of the shaking and rattling,the champagne glass leaped off the table and my dinner ended up on the companion seat

Tenger

whitebriar wrote: »

...Somewhere over Newfoundland,the plane hit the strongest turbulence I've ever experienced.....the champagne glass leaped off the table and my dinner ended up on the companion seat

Did you at least save the champagne?

whitebriar

Warey of the risk,that was drank before the dinner was finished.. Priorities Priorities

jubawombbe

Can any Aer Lingus pilot on here answer any of these questions:

1) What is the current job as an EI Pilot like? Hours, Pay, Benefits/Perks, Progression/Promotion etc.

2) Is there any chance that they will reopen the Cadet Recruitment process next year?

I really wanted to apply for the cadet program but missed out due to age.

Thanks in advance

basill

Pay scales are pretty accurate on ppjn. There is an ongoing pay review under way so watch this space on what happens to that. Short haul has a fixed pattern of 5 days on and 3 off. There is an online preferential bidding system where you can select a myriad of things like check in/out, flight lengths, specific flights etc. Depending on your seniority you get a notional satisfaction ratio that the software will try and achieve when it prepares the roster. Most give out about the system as it is not really transparent and also we effectively paid for it by giving up working conditions over the years. As a final measure you an swap flights or even entire rosters if you wish so long as its legal.

Perks are what you would expect from any national carrier. Staff travel on interline carriers to pretty much anywhere in the world. All standby of course - great if your single, not much fun if you have kids in tow. Crew meals, water etc all included.

Progression can be fast or slow depending on when you join. Like any airline with a seniority list it is invariably better to join at the beginning of a recruitment surge. All newcomers go to the rhs of the short haul fleet. Generally most would progress onto the rhs of the 330 around the 6-8 year mark. The record I heard was 18 months but I can't see that being repeated. Having said that some never see the 330 as command comes around beforehand.

With new bases and the 757 wet lease this is creating a huge range of opportunities. Commands are coming up in LHR on the little red for those that have been in around 6-7 years. Normal average would be 10-12 years to see the LHS of the A320 in the ROI.

Unfortunately none of us have an operational crystal ball so time will tell what the future will hold.

Can't answer your point number two as I have no idea.

smurfjed

Staff travel on interline carriers to pretty much anywhere in the world.

Interesting as EI stopped providing ID travel to interline airline employees some years ago, I better check if we got it back :)

Radharc na Sleibhte

Noob ridiculously stupid question, what are medical requirements for a pilot?
Sight, hearing, height?

Shamrock231

Out of curiosity, is there a set minimum number of hours you get flying with EI, presumably the most junior FO could find it difficult to successfully bid for anything other than standby, so is there a fudge factor involved to make sure that all pilots stay current?

smurfjed

The basic medical level is that of a CLASS 1 Medical certificate as defined by JAR. Then the company can apply any other restriction that they like. So if you are interested in a particular airline you should name them.

Shamrock231

smurfjed wrote: »

The basic medical level is that of a CLASS 1 Medical certificate as defined by JAR. Then the company can apply any other restriction that they like. So if you are interested in a particular airline you should name them.

Any specific restrictions EI apply out of curiosity?

basill

ID90s only Smurf with most of the national carriers around the world. On short haul flights your better off buying a confirmed ticket often not far off what the ID90 would have been.

smurfjed

I actually get to work this week, deadhead to Paris tomorrow night, First Class (I hope), spend two nights in Paris and ferry an empty plane back. With our duty time regulations, one crew could operate both in the inbound and outbound flights, but that wouldn't be as much fun

adam88

smurfjed wrote: »

I actually get to work this week, deadhead to Paris tomorrow night, First Class (I hope), spend two nights in Paris and ferry an empty plane back. With our duty time regulations, one crew could operate both in the inbound and outbound flights, but that wouldn't be as much fun

Why two nights in Paris. Are you on stand by???? Would it not make more sense if they flew you out that day or the night before

Sorry if this is a stupid question???

smurfjed

You are right, it would be cheaper and legal, but not as much fun for us. In the same way the inbound crew will stay until Tuesday although there is a flight back on Monday.

Boeing777

This is quite a random question, but why do EI fly to Berlin Schöenfeld and not Tegel? I would've thought TXL is much closer to the city?

donvito99

Boeing777 wrote: »

This is quite a random question, but why do EI fly to Berlin Schöenfeld and not Tegel? I would've thought TXL is much closer to the city?

Cheaper for them I'm guessing. And Schoenfeld is nicely covered by rail if I'm nt mistaken?

Shamrock231

Schoenfeld is supposed to be the new main Berlin Airport (Brandenburg), but the opening has been delayed from 2012 until about 2016, after that point everyone will fly from SFX (BER).

Tenger

Indeed. Not really a great idea to start flights to an airport that was planned to close 1-2 years later. And SXF also allows access to the Greater Berlin catchment area rather than just the city itself.

Poor auld Air Berlin are getting badly stung by the BER delay. They had pinned their business strategy on the new airport being operational at this point.

Shamrock231

Well IIRC it was supposed to be operational last October, everyone was ready to move, new flights had been launched due to the extra capacity at the airport and everything, the plan was in place to move all the airport vehicles over down the road, then about 3 weeks before hand they turned around and said "Nah, give us a few more years".