Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The great big "ask an airline pilot" thread!

Options
1…5354565859…116

Comments

  • Options
    #1652
    Suasdaguna1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 525 ✭✭✭Suasdaguna1


    Am I alone but me feels this thread is just jaded and run out of steam. .

    Sorry, I tell it as it is.......


  • Options
    #1653
    ElWalrus
    Registered Users Posts: 173 ✭✭ElWalrus


    Suasdaguna1 wrote: »
    Am I alone but me feels this thread is just jaded and run out of steam. .

    Sorry, I tell it as it is.......

    What the hell, see if we can breathe some life back into it! :pac:

    For ye ryanair heads, just past front entry/exit on a boeing 737-800 on the fuselage there's a sign that says 'static port - do not plug or deform holes'. What are these for?

    Cheers!


  • Options
    #1654
    hidinginthebush
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,679 ✭✭✭hidinginthebush


    ElWalrus wrote: »
    What the hell, see if we can breathe some life back into it! :pac:

    For ye ryanair heads, just past front entry/exit on a boeing 737-800 on the fuselage there's a sign that says 'static port - do not plug or deform holes'. What are these for?

    Cheers!

    I'm not a pilot but I think it's for discharging static buildup when the plane lands.


  • Options
    #1655
    eatmyshorts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 821 ✭✭✭eatmyshorts


    ElWalrus wrote: »
    For ye ryanair heads, just past front entry/exit on a boeing 737-800 on the fuselage there's a sign that says 'static port - do not plug or deform holes'. What are these for?

    Cheers!

    Those are the sensors for measuring static air pressure. This info is then fed into the aircraft systems for calculating airspeed, altitude etc.

    More here... http://www.b737.org.uk/probes.htm#staticports and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitot-static_system


  • Options
    #1656
    eatmyshorts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 821 ✭✭✭eatmyshorts


    hidinginthebush wrote: »
    I'm not a pilot but I think it's for discharging static buildup when the plane lands.

    You're confusing static ports with static wicks.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_discharger


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1657
    Bigcheeze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    ElWalrus wrote: »
    just past front entry/exit on a boeing 737-800 on the fuselage there's a sign that says 'static port - do not plug or deform holes'. What are these for?

    Blocking them can end badly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroperú_Flight_603

    Ever since watching the Aeroperu documentary, I always look at the static ports when I'm boarding an aircraft by the stairs.


  • Options
    #1658
    Curly Judge
    Registered Users Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭Curly Judge


    Bigcheeze wrote: »
    Blocking them can end badly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroperú_Flight_603

    Ever since watching the Aeroperu documentary, I always look at the static ports when I'm boarding an aircraft by the stairs.

    Do you kick the tyres as well?:)


  • Options
    #1659
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,068 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    That was a nasty accident and its a scenario that is now taught by simulator instructors, either that or having the pitot system freeze up so that you also get erroneous information. It certainly focuses the mind when you have lots of information coming to you and not knowing which to believe. The FMS page for the GPS comes in handy at this stage.


  • Options
    #1660
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,068 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    Do you kick the tyres as well?
    Only if you want to break your toe :)


  • Options
    #1661
    tennis12
    Registered Users Posts: 158 ✭✭tennis12


    Was on a Ryanair flight the other night, girl sitting beside me said they bang down the plane hard to save fuel... Any truth in that?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1662
    Skuxx
    Registered Users Posts: 2,370 ✭✭✭Skuxx


    tennis12 wrote: »
    Was on a Ryanair flight the other night, girl sitting beside me said they bang down the plane hard to save fuel... Any truth in that?

    None what so ever! They get the plane down quickly as some runways Ryanair land at would be fairly short, as a lot a small airports they use wouldn't have the need for long runways! By getting the plane down quickly you are leaving the max amount of runway available for stopping!
    There's nothing wrong with it, the airplane is well able for it, infact I think it's the best option!


  • Options
    #1663
    tennis12
    Registered Users Posts: 158 ✭✭tennis12


    Skuxx wrote: »
    None what so ever! They get the plane down quickly as some runways Ryanair land at would be fairly short, as a lot a small airports they use wouldn't have the need for long runways! By getting the plane down quickly you are leaving the max amount of runway available for stopping!
    There's nothing wrong with it, the airplane is well able for it, infact I think it's the best option!

    Thanks for the reply, was thinking it couldn't be right. Another quick question you might know the answer to, how often would you change the aircraft tyres? They must get some thumping every day.


  • Options
    #1664
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,068 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    None what so ever!
    So if the runway only has one exit taxiway, would you consider landing firmly to stop in the shortest distance rather than having to taxi all the way to the runway turning pads? If this was the case, then you might actually consider this as a means of fuel conservation as the taxi distance is shorter.


  • Options
    #1665
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,739 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    tennis12 wrote: »
    Thanks for the reply, was thinking it couldn't be right. Another quick question you might know the answer to, how often would you change the aircraft tyres? They must get some thumping every day.

    But don't forget that these are no car tyres, these tyres are designed for this "thumping" several times a day.


  • Options
    #1666
    keith16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    smurfjed wrote: »
    So if the runway only has one exit taxiway, would you consider landing firmly to stop in the shortest distance rather than having to taxi all the way to the runway turning pads? If this was the case, then you might actually consider this as a means of fuel conservation as the taxi distance is shorter.

    I have heard that a certain Irish Airline do this. Let's call them FR....no wait, too obvious...RYR?

    But yeah, they prefer to take the earliest exit to save on taxi time / fuel....

    In fact, I heard that one pilot who shall remain nameless (because I don't know his/her name) got the plane down so quick and stopped well in advance of the first taxi-way, so just decided to do a 360 turn (what's commonly referred to as a U-ie in the industry) and taxi back down the runway :pac:


  • Options
    #1667
    basill
    Registered Users Posts: 1,348 ✭✭✭basill


    You forgot the bit about other airlines getting to go around as a result of the runway being closed.


  • Options
    #1668
    LeftBase
    Registered Users Posts: 743 ✭✭✭LeftBase


    keith16 wrote: »
    I have heard that a certain Irish Airline do this. Let's call them FR....no wait, too obvious...RYR?

    But yeah, they prefer to take the earliest exit to save on taxi time / fuel....

    You plan your runway exit and yes it is a lot of the time very beneficial to get off at a certain taxiway but usually because you face a pain in the ass taxi to get to the gates and ATC would prefer everyone to use the same exit....it usually is not too hard to slow down in time.
    keith16 wrote: »
    In fact, I heard that one pilot who shall remain nameless (because I don't know his/her name) got the plane down so quick and stopped well in advance of the first taxi-way, so just decided to do a 360 turn (what's commonly referred to as a U-ie in the industry) and taxi back down the runway :pac:

    This is commonly followed by an invitation to a no tea and biscuits meeting with company brass and/or Aviation Authority officials.


  • Options
    #1669
    keith16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    LeftBase wrote: »
    This is commonly followed by an invitation to a no tea and biscuits meeting with company brass and/or Aviation Authority officials.

    And a go-around for whoever happens to be next in the landing queue!

    Actually, I have always wondered; a lot of aircraft landing seem to touch down perhaps a quarter of the way down the runway.

    Is there any minimum safety requirement for them to do this? I imagine it's influenced by the glide slope? Could say an aircraft descend below the glide slope and hit the runway a bit earlier, say, on the piano keys?

    Or would this result in another biscuit-less meeting? :pac:


  • Options
    #1670
    LeftBase
    Registered Users Posts: 743 ✭✭✭LeftBase


    keith16 wrote: »
    And a go-around for whoever happens to be next in the landing queue!

    Actually, I have always wondered; a lot of aircraft landing seem to touch down perhaps a quarter of the way down the runway.

    Is there any minimum safety requirement for them to do this? I imagine it's influenced by the glide slope? Could say an aircraft descend below the glide slope and hit the runway a bit earlier, say, on the piano keys?

    Or would this result in another biscuit-less meeting? :pac:

    Getting below glideslope on an ILS or below decent profile on any landing and not taking action to correct it would result is a meeting perhaps but the amount of baked goods or confectionery present would depend on the circumstances. You'll see most commercial jets land in what's termed the "touch down zone" which is marked on the runway. You can land it on the numbers but this is not normal practice for commercial jets.


  • Options
    #1671
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,068 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    You can land it on the numbers but this is not normal practice for commercial jets.
    Life is much more fun flying aircraft without FLIDARS or the equivalent :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1672
    Growler!!!
    Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Growler!!!


    http://www.3e.eu/sectors/flidar-floating-lidar/

    Flidar?


  • Options
    #1673
    Bigcheeze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,858 ✭✭✭Bigcheeze


    Curly Judge wrote: »
    Do you kick the tyres as well?:)

    And give the fan blades a quick spin.

    The static ports are in your line of sight when boarding so it always reminds me of the accident.


  • Options
    #1674
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,068 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    http://www.easa.europa.eu/safety-and-research/european-authorities-coordination-group-on-flight-data-monitoring-EAFDM.php Brand name for a product that provides above service. Everything that is done is monitored and downloaded, unlike the old days when the data recorders were only removed and analysed following an incident. These days some airlines have a "3 strike and your are out" policy based on flight data monitoring results.


  • Options
    #1675
    keith16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    smurfjed wrote: »
    http://www.easa.europa.eu/safety-and-research/european-authorities-coordination-group-on-flight-data-monitoring-EAFDM.php Brand name for a product that provides above service. Everything that is done is monitored and downloaded, unlike the old days when the data recorders were only removed and analysed following an incident. These days some airlines have a "3 strike and your are out" policy based on flight data monitoring results.

    Interesting link smurf. If I read it right, FDM isn't a compulsory requirement for airlines?

    Do you think many commercial operators use it or would want to use it? Is the technology new and if so, is the cost high?

    Sounds like it might open up a world of possibilities - could black box data be streamed and stored in a central repository? If so, if a black box were never located after an incident - it wouldn't matter?

    Sorry for all the questions :)


  • Options
    #1676
    Curly Judge
    Registered Users Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭Curly Judge


    keith16 wrote: »
    Interesting link smurf. If I read it right, FDM isn't a compulsory requirement for airlines?

    Do you think many commercial operators use it or would want to use it? Is the technology new and if so, is the cost high?

    Sounds like it might open up a world of possibilities - could black box data be streamed and stored in a central repository? If so, if a black box were never located after an incident - ittter? wouldn't ma

    Sorry for all the questions :)

    That sounds like a very good idea?


  • Options
    #1677
    keith16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    Curly Judge wrote: »
    That sounds like a very good idea?

    There are probably lots of reasons it's unworkable :)


  • Options
    #1678
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,068 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    Safety Management Systems are mandatory under ICAO, so airlines have to establish one designed to match the complexity of their fleets, so more airlines are starting to use Flight Data Monitoring. It can be a great tool if used correctly, such as identifying specific procedures that aren't suitable for some airports, or as a training aid during recurrent, we get to view desensitised flight profiles from within the company so we can learn from errors.

    What i don't like about them is the ability to chase crews who turned on the autopilot at 500 feet rather than 400 feet :)


  • Options
    #1679
    Curly Judge
    Registered Users Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭Curly Judge


    Having been out of the aviation business since the early Seventies, and not kept up with developments, I was wondering if the whole business of QFE, QNE and QNH had been automated?
    I seem to remember that in the fifties and sixties several prangs on approach were put down to the captain or co-pilot having the wrong barometric or elevation setting selected.
    It would seem to me to be a little chore that could be solved by technology especially as the more vital adjustments needed to be done on approach when both crew were very busy and otherwise engaged?


  • Options
    #1680
    keith16
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭keith16


    smurfjed wrote: »

    What i don't like about them is the ability to chase people chase crews to turned on the autopilot at 500 feet rather than 400 feet :)

    They were my immediate thoughts too, could quickly become contentious with people on the ground looking for any slight deviations. This could become somewhat dangerous with crew perhaps too aware that their every move is being watched?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1681
    smurfjed
    Registered Users Posts: 10,068 ✭✭✭✭smurfjed


    I was wondering if the whole business of QFE, QNE and QNH had been automated?
    QNE and QNH are now the most common, however, we have procedures for operating in Russia where they still use QFE.

    It is something that needs to be revised and starting by having a common transition altitude/level would be a great start. Having a different transition for each airport in Europe is a pain in the xxx.

    As for automation, I don't know of any aircraft that changes from QNH to QNE automatically, but some do have the ability for you to enter the value and it will remind you once you passed that altitude/level. Maybe this is a little bit late, but its better than nothing.


Advertisement