Ask a Pilot anything....
Discussion
JuniorD said:
Tricuspid said:
speedtwelve said:
Some airlines have a proportion of cabin crew with paramedic training. Mate who was CC with BA had done so (and defib'd at least one passenger in the cruise. Oo-err).
At the risk of coming across as a pedantic t
t .... qualifying as a Paramedic takes at least three years full time, with a high degree of clinical skill and autonomy, and as a result they are paid similar rates to Doctors. As I understand it cabin crew have a sensible level of first aid training, higher than your average first aid at work course, which is A Good Thing, but not quite the same. Sorry, carry on ??
majordad said:
At cruising height in a modern commercial aircraft, how far away is the visible horizon?
236 statute miles at 37,000ft apparentlyJuniorD said:
Tricuspid said:
speedtwelve said:
Some airlines have a proportion of cabin crew with paramedic training. Mate who was CC with BA had done so (and defib'd at least one passenger in the cruise. Oo-err).
At the risk of coming across as a pedantic tt .... qualifying as a Paramedic takes at least three years full time, with a high degree of clinical skill and autonomy, and as a result they are paid similar rates to Doctors. As I understand it cabin crew have a sensible level of first aid training, higher than your average first aid at work course, which is A Good Thing, but not quite the same. Sorry, carry on ??
Tricuspid said:
speedtwelve said:
Some airlines have a proportion of cabin crew with paramedic training. Mate who was CC with BA had done so (and defib'd at least one passenger in the cruise. Oo-err).
At the risk of coming across as a pedantic tt .... qualifying as a Paramedic takes at least three years full time, with a high degree of clinical skill and autonomy, and as a result they are paid similar rates to Doctors. As I understand it cabin crew have a sensible level of first aid training, higher than your average first aid at work course, which is A Good Thing, but not quite the same. Sorry, carry on ??
I have one. This one just occurred to me watching an Aircraft Investigation doc. The bombed Air India jet in 85.
They ran tests, blowing up retired 747's. The cabin looked ancient, which made me think. These planes (any example 747, Airbus etc) cost £100 million plus. What can force it in to retirement? Surely, even if it needs overhalls (cabin, instruments, tech etc) costing millions, it is still more cost effective than retiring it?
Or is it more like a car, where it just depreciates indefinitely? A comparable being a once £100k now £5k Silver Shadow needing £6k of work.
They ran tests, blowing up retired 747's. The cabin looked ancient, which made me think. These planes (any example 747, Airbus etc) cost £100 million plus. What can force it in to retirement? Surely, even if it needs overhalls (cabin, instruments, tech etc) costing millions, it is still more cost effective than retiring it?
Or is it more like a car, where it just depreciates indefinitely? A comparable being a once £100k now £5k Silver Shadow needing £6k of work.
Edited by Fermit The Krog and Sexy Sarah on Thursday 15th February 17:21
Coming into Edinburgh yesterday on Ryanair, we had an almighty crosswind and the plane was jumping about all over the place. Very nervous cabin with some people actually panicking. The pilot managed to plonk it down at great speed - about as rough a landing as I've experienced and I've flown a lot.
However, I assume this happens frequently, but my question is how do the pilots feel about this kind of landing? Are they stting themselves too or is it all just business as usual?
However, I assume this happens frequently, but my question is how do the pilots feel about this kind of landing? Are they s
tting themselves too or is it all just business as usual?Junior Bianno said:
Coming into Edinburgh yesterday on Ryanair, we had an almighty crosswind and the plane was jumping about all over the place. Very nervous cabin with some people actually panicking. The pilot managed to plonk it down at great speed - about as rough a landing as I've experienced and I've flown a lot.
However, I assume this happens frequently, but my question is how do the pilots feel about this kind of landing? Are they stting themselves too or is it all just business as usual?
On a cross-wind landing it's more exciting than usual. There are limits on airframes that will require a hard-landing checklist. But they are designed to cope with 'firm'/'positive contact' landings However, I assume this happens frequently, but my question is how do the pilots feel about this kind of landing? Are they s
tting themselves too or is it all just business as usual?If some of the 02 masks and overhead bins didn't pop open than that will just be a firm landing... Actually for a A320 the following determine if inspection is required:
The limits on the A320 to demand an inspection are:
-Normal acceleration > 2.6 G in a 1 second window around impact OR
-RA rate is > 9 FPS during the same window
You have to do a severe hard landing inspection (you might have disintegrated the L/G) if
-Normal acceleration > 2.86 G in a 1 second window around impact OR
-RA rate is > 14 FPS during the same window
The only post-landing consequence of an overweight landing is these margins are reduced. If the A/C is above MLW:
-Normal acceleration > 1.7 G in a 1 second window around impact OR
-RA rate is > 6 FPS during the same window
demands a hard landing inspection and
-Normal acceleration > 2.6 G in a 1 second window around impact OR
-RA rate is > 13 FPS during the same window
You would really know if you had a 2G landing...
Junior Bianno said:
Coming into Edinburgh yesterday on Ryanair, we had an almighty crosswind and the plane was jumping about all over the place. Very nervous cabin with some people actually panicking. The pilot managed to plonk it down at great speed - about as rough a landing as I've experienced and I've flown a lot.
However, I assume this happens frequently, but my question is how do the pilots feel about this kind of landing? Are they stting themselves too or is it all just business as usual?
However, I assume this happens frequently, but my question is how do the pilots feel about this kind of landing? Are they s
tting themselves too or is it all just business as usual?I've always loved it when it is like that. It's about the only time outside of an emergency when you actually get a bit of a challenge.
The passengers might not be happy, but most in the cockpit are having a great time!
Junior Bianno said:
Hmmm - overall I think I prefer my pilots not to have "challenges", but good to know they're enjoying themselves!
Can't say I enjoy it much
Coming back from Greece in September we had the scariest landing I've ever experienced. Maybe 3-400 feet above the ground, landing, the 737 was caught by some very strong wind. The plane rocked right at what felt like 45 degrees (although I may be miles out) then the same the other way with very little height. I really did think for a moment that the fCan't say I enjoy it much
ker was going to land on its wing!In the nick of time it leveled out, and seconds later touched down, and it was one of the smoothest landings I've ever had. I complimented the captain on it on the way out, he replied 'It was a little hairy there for a moment'
Fermit The Krog and Sexy Sarah said:
Junior Bianno said:
Hmmm - overall I think I prefer my pilots not to have "challenges", but good to know they're enjoying themselves!
Can't say I enjoy it much
Coming back from Greece in September we had the scariest landing I've ever experienced. Maybe 3-400 feet above the ground, landing, the 737 was caught by some very strong wind. The plane rocked right at what felt like 45 degrees (although I may be miles out) then the same the other way with very little height. I really did think for a moment that the fCan't say I enjoy it much
ker was going to land on its wing!In the nick of time it leveled out, and seconds later touched down, and it was one of the smoothest landings I've ever had. I complimented the captain on it on the way out, he replied 'It was a little hairy there for a moment'
Yertis said:
I was reading about Buccaneers yesterday and this was mentioned. Do military aircraft have a device to record each instance and magnitude of G load applied?
Yes,There will be a 'G-Meter' in the cockpit/flight deck which will record the maximum (and minimum) G pulled (or pushed).
Additionally there will be a 'Fatigue Meter' that records instances of increments of G applied (eg: 1G, 1.5G, 1.8G, 2,G, 2.54G etc). The Fatigue Meter will be mounted in the fuselage close to the aerodynamic centre of the a/c and is much more accurate than the G-Meter in the cockpit.
The G records, numbers of pressurisations, and numbers of landings (roller and full stop) are then recorded in something called the RAF Form 700 and used to calculate the remaining FI hours (fatigue Index) of the aircraft. Thus fleets can be 'rotated' through Sqns and Maintenance Units so as to average the FI across the fleet.
The F700 is effectively the a/c's 'logbook' and covers other stuff such as Serviceability, Limitations, Acceptable Defered Defects, Modification States, and so forth.
The a/c Captain signs the F700 when he or she accepts the a/c and then signs it back in after flight.
Has anyone flown a plane into Funchal Madeira airport?
I have been on holiday there a few times and am aware of the need for extra training/certification that pilots have to have for it, plus the short length etc, as well as the frequent "return to base" or diversions due to high winds, but it would be interesting to hear what sorts of things a pilot would actually be wrestling with and having to think about more than at other airports as they try to get down.
I have been on holiday there a few times and am aware of the need for extra training/certification that pilots have to have for it, plus the short length etc, as well as the frequent "return to base" or diversions due to high winds, but it would be interesting to hear what sorts of things a pilot would actually be wrestling with and having to think about more than at other airports as they try to get down.
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Yes,
There will be a 'G-Meter' in the cockpit/flight deck which will record the maximum (and minimum) G pulled (or pushed).
Additionally there will be a 'Fatigue Meter' that records instances of increments of G applied (eg: 1G, 1.5G, 1.8G, 2,G, 2.54G etc). The Fatigue Meter will be mounted in the fuselage close to the aerodynamic centre of the a/c and is much more accurate than the G-Meter in the cockpit.
The G records, numbers of pressurisations, and numbers of landings (roller and full stop) are then recorded in something called the RAF Form 700 and used to calculate the remaining FI hours (fatigue Index) of the aircraft. Thus fleets can be 'rotated' through Sqns and Maintenance Units so as to average the FI across the fleet.
The F700 is effectively the a/c's 'logbook' and covers other stuff such as Serviceability, Limitations, Acceptable Defered Defects, Modification States, and so forth.
The a/c Captain signs the F700 when he or she accepts the a/c and then signs it back in after flight.
Fascinating – thanks for that. There will be a 'G-Meter' in the cockpit/flight deck which will record the maximum (and minimum) G pulled (or pushed).
Additionally there will be a 'Fatigue Meter' that records instances of increments of G applied (eg: 1G, 1.5G, 1.8G, 2,G, 2.54G etc). The Fatigue Meter will be mounted in the fuselage close to the aerodynamic centre of the a/c and is much more accurate than the G-Meter in the cockpit.
The G records, numbers of pressurisations, and numbers of landings (roller and full stop) are then recorded in something called the RAF Form 700 and used to calculate the remaining FI hours (fatigue Index) of the aircraft. Thus fleets can be 'rotated' through Sqns and Maintenance Units so as to average the FI across the fleet.
The F700 is effectively the a/c's 'logbook' and covers other stuff such as Serviceability, Limitations, Acceptable Defered Defects, Modification States, and so forth.
The a/c Captain signs the F700 when he or she accepts the a/c and then signs it back in after flight.
s2kjock said:
Has anyone flown a plane into Funchal Madeira airport?
I have been on holiday there a few times and am aware of the need for extra training/certification that pilots have to have for it, plus the short length etc, as well as the frequent "return to base" or diversions due to high winds, but it would be interesting to hear what sorts of things a pilot would actually be wrestling with and having to think about more than at other airports as they try to get down.
I’ve been there a few times.I have been on holiday there a few times and am aware of the need for extra training/certification that pilots have to have for it, plus the short length etc, as well as the frequent "return to base" or diversions due to high winds, but it would be interesting to hear what sorts of things a pilot would actually be wrestling with and having to think about more than at other airports as they try to get down.
The main problems are turbulence and wind shear due winds and the island’s topography (the terrain rises steeply close to the airport)
The wind speed and direction are measured at three points along the runway and also at about one mile on final approach to runway 05. If there are any large differences in the reported values at these points, you are likely to experience some turbulence. The tower controller should also pass you any wind shear reports from preceding aircraft.
There is a ‘pie’ diagram on the approach charts showing the max wind limits from various directions. From some directions the limit is quite low - if I recall correctly, a steady wind of over 15 knots from the north-west would preclude a landing. Wind reported from this direction is likely to signal downdrafts and turbulence as it’s from over the high terrain.
The majority of times i’ve flown in have been approaching from the north to land on runway 05.
This involves travelling downwind from a radial from the Funchal beacon and then breaking off for a visual right base turn to land, usually hand flown (aim for the banana sheds).
The one occasion I landed in the other direction,(runway 23) all was going smoothly until we had a lightning strike (woke us up a bit) and then on short final a down draft with a sudden increase in sink rate and an audible warning - surprising as there had been no turbulence up to this point. A large handful of power dragged us out of that.
Like IforB, I relish the challenge of ‘lively’ approaches as so much of modern commercial flying is deathly boring. Certainly with Funchal, brief and plan properly and expect the unexpected!
Edited by Shy Torque on Friday 16th February 16:16
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff