Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

....To add to JBs comments, some of our aircraft are fitted with auto brake and some are not. In those that aren't, it is a matter of judgement as to when to apply the brakes and how much.

There's basically three braking systems being talked about here. Manual braking...I'm sure everyone understands. Auto brake is a system that automatically applies the brakes after landing, and modulates them to achieve a preset deceleration rate. "Brake to vacate" is a variation on that, that uses the GPS data to target a particular runway exit.

 

[jb747]

....You didn't mention CNS, DRW, LST or OOL so either you regard these as broadly acceptable or perhaps do not visit there often, or are they (exception of OOL) too small to matter?

I expect you should assume Boris doesn't go there. I didn't answer at all, as my experience in the last decade only covers Sydney and Melbourne. Toss a coin for them....

 

[Boris spatsky]

I expect you should assume Boris doesn't go there. I didn't answer at all, as my experience in the last decade only covers Sydney and Melbourne. Toss a coin for them....

Those don't normally appear on my roster as they are usually flown by crew from other bases. We could theoretically get called out on a blank line to end up in those ports but it is not common.

LST is just a country airport with little infrastructure from my last trip there. The others are fine (provided OOL gets aerobridges sometime soon!)

 

[SenZubEanS]

05/10 9 MEL-DXB
08/10 9 DXB-LHR
10/10 2 LHR-DXB
13/10 10 DXB-MEL

Bugger. Off on my honeymoon QF9 on the 10th Oct. Been hoping for years that you'd be flying my first QF A380 jaunt. Oh well, there is still a super slim chance your next roster might have the QF 10 Nov 5th DXB-MEL leg i suppose. Fingers crossed.

 

[jb747]

Bugger. Off on my honeymoon QF9 on the 10th Oct. Been hoping for years that you'd be flying my first QF A380 jaunt. Oh well, there is still a super slim chance your next roster might have the QF 10 Nov 5th DXB-MEL leg i suppose. Fingers crossed.

That's all changed now anyway. I swapped the trip with another pilot.

Now...
03/10 9 MEL-DXB
06/10 9 DXB-LHR
08/10 2 LHR-DXB
11/10 10 DXB-MEL.

After that it's the next roster, which I expect will be a 'blank line' i.e. standby and ad hoc flying.

 

[mjt57]

That's all changed now anyway. I swapped the trip with another pilot.

After that it's the next roster, which I expect will be a 'blank line' i.e. standby and ad hoc flying.

A "relief" roster, perhaps? Does this seem co-incidental that it's approaching Christmas?

How long before you're top dog, anyway???

 

[jb747]

A "relief" roster, perhaps? Does this seem co-incidental that it's approaching Christmas?

They're shared around, so everyone gets their turn at one every year or so. It will be over before Christmas, and then I should rotate back to a fairly good position.

How long before you're top dog, anyway???

Never. There are plenty of people who are younger than me, but more senior. If I stay until 65 I think I'll get to about number 60 or so of the overall seniority list.

 

[mjt57]

Never. There are plenty of people who are younger than me, but more senior. If I stay until 65 I think I'll get to about number 60 or so of the overall seniority list.

Did they start before you at a younger age? You've been a captain for since, forever, as the teenagers would say. And flying the top tier aircraft whilst your A380 colleagues were on twins, still.

That's prompted me to ask. You've got an FO, for example, who's been at QF longer. So, would he have a higher seniority number? If he decides to go for command, would he then be senior to you if he's successful?

 

[jb747]

Did they start before you at a younger age?

Exactly. Mostly they came from GA. You can't get out of the military until you're about 30.

You've been a captain for since, forever, as the teenagers would say. And flying the top tier aircraft whilst your A380 colleagues were on twins, still.

23 years. Though half of that was flying the 767. The most senior guys are actually on the 737 ('cos they can fly past 65 in command for domestic ops). Whilst the 380 might be the top dog, it isn't everybody's choice, and there are many who are more senior than me flying 747 and 330. Some don't what to fly a particular aircraft (or make), whilst for others route structure (or its lack) is everything.

That's prompted me to ask. You've got an FO, for example, who's been at QF longer. So, would he have a higher seniority number? If he decides to go for command, would he then be senior to you if he's successful?

One way to think of your seniority number is to consider it your position in a queue. Join the queue first, and you have a lower number. In your example, yep, said FO on completing command training would come onto the list in a higher position than me. It used to happen a lot in my first few years in command, but not for a long time.

 

[legroom]

.

One way to think of your seniority number is to consider it your position in a queue. Join the queue first, and you have a lower number. In your example, yep, said FO on completing command training would come onto the list in a higher position than me. It used to happen a lot in my first few years in command, but not for a long time.

Seems odd to me the way it works.

In that example, the recently promoted FO (now captain) would actually have fewer command hours than you (as a captain) but .... is judged to be more 'senior' !

Wouldn't it be better if a 'senior' ranking reflects the actual command time of that post ?

 

[jb747]

Seems odd to me the way it works.

In that example, the recently promoted FO (now captain) would actually have fewer command hours than you (as a captain) but .... is judged to be more 'senior' !

Wouldn't it be better if a 'senior' ranking reflects the actual command time of that post ?

Seniority has very little to do with flying experience. Again..it's just a ticket at the Coles deli.

When QF30 happened, the FO had a lot more hours on the 747 than I did....irrelevant.

 

[michaele]

I'll have to resort to waving to you on QF2 as I pass you on QF1 on the 8th (DXB-LHR leg), as (yet again) I miss you by a matter of days!

Looking forward to listening to that interview on FlightPodcast too.

 

[Flyboy78]

The discussion of braking over the last few pages had me thinking, what does it feel like to hit the brakes in a large airliner? Do they have any 'feel' or are they merely on or off? Do you have to push hard, or are they quite responsive? Do you need to use a lot of finesse when parking at the gate to achieve a smooth stop?
JB- you've flown several large airliners, any have better brakes than others?

 

[Boris spatsky]

The discussion of braking over the last few pages had me thinking, what does it feel like to hit the brakes in a large airliner? Do they have any 'feel' or are they merely on or off? Do you have to push hard, or are they quite responsive? Do you need to use a lot of finesse when parking at the gate to achieve a smooth stop? ?

Braking smoothly is a challenge, especially during landing. The brakes on narrow bodies that i have flown tend to bite - so you squeeze the pedals, and keep gently squeezing until they start to take. Squeeze too fast and they suddenly take too much (very uncomfortable) and squeeze too slow and you will miss the rapid exit that you are meant to take off the runway (if no autobrake fitted). Car brakes tend to have good feel; airliner brakes don't!

Coming onto the bay is better as the speed is slower but it is similar. Squeeze too hard as you come to the line and you will jar to a halt. Hence why we leave the belts on until stationary!

The compounding factor with brakes is that they all have different amounts of pad left. We can tell from inspecting the brakes. We find that the newer brakes take earlier, so you can get one side taking before the other side during landing which causes asymmetric braking.

 

[jb747]

The discussion of braking over the last few pages had me thinking, what does it feel like to hit the brakes in a large airliner? Do they have any 'feel' or are they merely on or off? Do you have to push hard, or are they quite responsive? Do you need to use a lot of finesse when parking at the gate to achieve a smooth stop?
JB- you've flown several large airliners, any have better brakes than others?

Firstly, you try not to 'hit' the brakes. As smoothly as possible is the rule.

There is pretty much no feel in the brakes, nor can you hear/feel anything that might be happening on the ground. If a brake is locked, it is quite likely to be unnoticeable. That's why the loss of anti skid systems has such a huge effect on braking distance (increase of 50-100%). A rotating failed tyre might be noticeable, but it's quite possible that what is very obvious to someone sitting on top of it, might be much less so in the coughpit.

Even though the brakes have limited feedback, you need to learn to modulate them over the entire range from maximum to extremely gentle. They are extremely powerful, and a solid push will give much more of a result than you want, especially at low speeds. The amount of heat that goes into them is extreme. The 380 brakes are regularly up around 500º (after landing). Higher is possible, but undesirable. Wheels have to be removed if the temperature exceeds 700º. Brake cooling is provided as a matter of course on most transits.

It's generally a good idea to keep the auto brake engaged until you reach taxi speed. It will use the brakes much more evenly than most pilots, and tends to give a more even temperature across the bogies. Manual braking, especially in a bit of crosswind, where you're applying rudder for most of the landing roll, tends to give 'sided' temperature results.

Parking can be interesting. Not all bays are exactly level (a couple in Melbourne come to mind), but they are always sensitive to the amount of power you have applied (because of possible blast issues). You don't want the aircraft to roll to a stop before you reach the stop point, nor do you want excess power in the bay....so you try to juggle the amount of inertia you have as you exit the turn on to the bay. Sometimes using just one foot (asymmetric braking) will give a smoother, better modulated stop as you park.

The carbon brakes that all of the heavies use now are generally very powerful and less abrupt than the steel brakes of years past. The 767-200, in particular, had very grabby brakes at low speed, and you just had to learn the knack. We often just used one side (when taxying), and alternated to ensure they didn't get too hot.

 

[opusman]

You don't want the aircraft to roll to a stop before you reach the stop point, nor do you want excess power in the bay....so you try to juggle the amount of inertia you have as you exit the turn on to the bay.

This reminds me that earlier this year on arrival at SCL we pulled up a few metres short, and had to wait (about 15 minutes IIRC) for a tug to take us those last few feet. Is a tug really the only option in that situation?

 

[jb747]

This reminds me that earlier this year on arrival at SCL we pulled up a few metres short, and had to wait (about 15 minutes IIRC) for a tug to take us those last few feet. Is a tug really the only option in that situation?

I haven't been to SCL so I don't know the specifics of their bays.

In many cases there are issues with either the parking guidance, or the clearance at the parked position. In this case stopping, and then being towed the last bit is normal. Generally the tug is already waiting, and it takes only a few seconds longer than power on. This was a normal event in LA, though the reason there was potential blast damage.

Many airports have restrictions on the use of more than idle power as you park (some gates in Melbourne come to mind). Idle is often enough power to make the aircraft taxi at light weigh anyway, but coming out of a tight turn (i.e. just about all gates), and especially coupled with a slight uphill slope, that may not be enough power to keep the aircraft rolling if you get too slow. Especially an issue if it's wet, as you have to be slower than normal in the turns (otherwise the nose gear skids). Whilst it all works out most of the time, if you do end up short, it will take a few minutes to get a tug.

Other options? I guess you could push, but if they've limited the use of power, then there's not much else. You can't go faster into the turn. It simply isn't safe...they're really good aircraft, but lousy cars.

 

[Melburnian1]

jb747, are you seniority nunber 60 out of how many QF A380 pilots? 450?

 

[flychrisfly]

Are pilots trained to taxi and park in the sims? Is it possible to not gain/lose a license if a pilot fails a parking sim?

 

[jb747]

jb747, are you seniority nunber 60 out of how many QF A380 pilots? 450?

Seniority number is over the total number of pilots in the airline, both long and short haul. In that case, it's about 130 out of 2000.

With types and bases, you have a sequence number which varies every roster (in both directions). It's based upon the number of people in each rank, on each type, and at the same base, who will be available in the next roster period. Every rank, type, and base is separate (i.e. the 380 Captain list in Sydney has limited relevance to me, and the 330 list, none). So, whilst a seniority number represents your overall position in the scheme of things, it won't help you if you don't tick the other boxes as well. For instance, a very senior 380 FO based in Sydney, cannot bid for a Captains leave slot, nor could he bid for an FO's one in Melbourne...he's limited to whatever is available for Sydney 380 FOs.

So, to answer your initial question. Overall on the 380, you're about right, sitting about half way down the 380 Captains. But, within the Melbourne base, I'm better off, at about the 30% position. Of course, it makes very little difference, as the flying is pretty much identical.