Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

What was your cruise level and approx. how long did the the descent to FL100 take ?

I thought I'd answered this, but it seems to have disappeared into the ether.

FL290. We'd been planned at 330, but were blocked. The descent took roughly 6 minutes from the start of the event. The rate was reduced from 14,000 onwards, and the peak descent rate was at about FL270.

The figure that really amazed me was the cabin...it depressurised in 13 seconds. So from about 7,000 to a bit less that 29,000 in 13 seconds... Do the maths on that and you get an interesting climb rate per minute.

 

[jb747]

Would also be interested in hearing a bit more about this if you can talk about it. I'm curious as to how the incident affected you and what it was like returning to work.

There's a living to be made advising people on how to handle issues like this.

What we found was that everyone's response was quite different. I was very keen to get back on the horse, and came back as soon as I could. I was quite relaxed in the aircraft (and the sim), but I was having a lot of trouble on the ground, especially sleeping. I was actually worse a month after the event. Apparently that's not unusual....I had to make it work at the time, but a month down the road had let the guard down.

In the days after the event, it played over and over in my mind, like a very broken record.

For the cabin crew, the event varied enormously. If they were at the back of the aircraft, it was relatively mild. If you were near the door it was immediately life threatening. For the girls nearest to the event, just pulling themselves together and helping the passengers was a major step.

Problems can crop up for people years afterwards.

I wasn't in a position to follow through with the passengers. I did get notes from many in the aftermath, but with a couple of exceptions, I don't know how they are getting on now.

 

[Flying Fox]

The aircraft automatically transmits data to the company, and in this case sent the EICAS messages to Sydney within seconds of them appearing. Later on, the SO did speak to engineering on the sat phone, but the company had largely worked out for themselves what was happening, and where we would go.

Thanks for sharing this amazing story and well done to you and your crew on saving the aircraft and your passengers!

Does the aircraft transmit data in a similar way to radio comms or is it more similar to an internet connection?

Does every aircraft have a sat phone? Or would you normally use radio comms patched through to engineering?

Does engineering have the equlivant of a 'red phone' that only gets called for emergencies (ie there should never a busy tone when it gets called)?

 

[jb747]

Does the aircraft transmit data in a similar way to radio comms or is it more similar to an internet connection?

It's all digital, so I guess it's like a low data rate internet connection.

Does every aircraft have a sat phone? Or would you normally use radio comms patched through to engineering?

I expect most modern ones do. I can only speak for the 744 and 380...

Does engineering have the equlivant of a 'red phone' that only gets called for emergencies (ie there should never a busy tone when it gets called)?

We call them regularly when we have minor (especially cabin) issues. They've got plenty of inbound lines, so I can't imagine you'd ever have to wait. And there are some others we can call (ops control, weather, ATC, mum).

 

[Simo]

With QF getting Boeing 787 are you able to switch to that aircraft if you want to.

And also how long would it take to be accredited(if that is the right word)to fly either of the A380 and then jump into the 787

 

[jb747]

With QF getting Boeing 787 are you able to switch to that aircraft if you want to.

And also how long would it take to be accredited(if that is the right word)to fly either of the A380 and then jump into the 787

In years past, the rules basically are that you can't bid to a lower aircraft. A 787 is smaller than a 380 (and would most likely fit into the sequence under a 330). The rules of previous years may not apply any more...we simply do not know what management have planned. In my case, the 380 will be the last conversion.

How long is the course? Well, for an Airbus person, the A380 course will be around 3-4 months. A month of ground school, a month in the sim, and then it will take about 1-2 months to get the sectors on the line. For Boeing people it will take around a month longer. The time is a bit flexible depending upon background, etc.

The 787 conversion, from a Boeing type is advertised as being about two weeks. Reality would have that at about 2-3 months. I don't expect it would present any difficulty from any of the Boeing types.

 

[Simo]

In years past, the rules basically are that you can't bid to a lower aircraft. A 787 is smaller than a 380 (and would most likely fit into the sequence under a 330). The rules of previous years may not apply any more...we simply do not know what management have planned. In my case, the 380 will be the last conversion.

How long is the course? Well, for an Airbus person, the A380 course will be around 3-4 months. A month of ground school, a month in the sim, and then it will take about 1-2 months to get the sectors on the line. For Boeing people it will take around a month longer. The time is a bit flexible depending upon background, etc.

The 787 conversion, from a Boeing type is advertised as being about two weeks. Reality would have that at about 2-3 months. I don't expect it would present any difficulty from any of the Boeing types.

Thanks JB, I am doing the 787 walk through in BNE tomorrow afternoon

 

[jb747]

Thanks JB, I am doing the 787 walk through in BNE tomorrow afternoon

Enjoy. It really looks like a delightful aircraft.

 

[smeacs]

Thanks for that very interesting to hear. Especially the comments regarding returning to work.

Whilst having a moment gazing out the office window the other day I was considering some earlier comments regarding fuel types and consumption etc. Does the turbine respond on a more fuel = more thrust relationship with varying levels of efficiency or are there more settings that can be altered to affect the power produced?

 

[jb747]

Whilst having a moment gazing out the office window the other day I was considering some earlier comments regarding fuel types and consumption etc. Does the turbine respond on a more fuel = more thrust relationship with varying levels of efficiency or are there more settings that can be altered to affect the power produced?

I'm sorry, but that one I can't answer. I've always worked on a more fuel equals more push theory, and I really haven't seen the equivalent of the miserly fuel/huge power equation that seems to now work in the motor industry. I think we need an engineer...

 

[smeacs]

Thanks anyway, Ill try to find an engineer sometime

 

[jb747]

Thanks anyway, Ill try to find an engineer sometime

I think we have a couple of power plant engineers here.....

 

[MichaelD]

I have often wondered why in the flight safety video they always mention the oxygen masks dropping but do not mention that a descent to a lower flight level is highly likely to occur immediately thereafter. Surely mentioning this would lead to a little less panic amongst the passengers in such events.

Pax: sees oxygen masks fall
Pax: feels plane go into descent
Pax: "We're all going to die as the plane is falling out of control!"

 

[jb747]

I have often wondered why in the flight safety video they always mention the oxygen masks dropping but do not mention that a descent to a lower flight level is highly likely to occur immediately thereafter. Surely mentioning this would lead to a little less panic amongst the passengers in such events.

Pax: sees oxygen masks fall
Pax: feels plane go into descent
Pax: "We're all going to die as the plane is falling out of control!"

Valid comment.

After QF30 there were lots of discussions about this.

I think part of it is that very few people listen (though telling people how to buckle a seat belt is wasted attention).

Do we tell you about engine stalls....which will give lots of flames, but are mostly harmless.

What about fuel dumping?

You get the drift. They tell you about the couple of things that you need to do instantly...and which might make a difference.

I don't worry about the oxy mask bit...but I always have a look at where the exits are........

 

[Mattg]

Thanks JB, I've thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread. You mentioned that you chose to land on Runway 6 in MNL because of good visibility etc. What would you have done if it was night time and/or poor visibility in Manila, considering an autoland wasn't an option?

 

[jb747]

Thanks JB, I've thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread. You mentioned that you chose to land on Runway 6 in MNL because of good visibility etc. What would you have done if it was night time and/or poor visibility in Manila, considering an autoland wasn't an option?

I don't think I'd have let the aircraft autoland, even if it had been an option. Better to have a bit of a hand fly, and make sure it feels ok.

We had plenty of other options. One of the first things we do on reaching the cruise is to update the actual weather at any airport we might be interested in (and we keep doing that all flight), so even before anything happened, we had a good idea of what Manila was like. The aircraft could still be flown in IMC, but I wanted to limit it as much as possible. As for approach aids, we still had multiple VOR/DME and NDB installations, and even without them the single FMC remaining would have allowed us to fly a GPS overlay (basically flying the approach for another aid, by using the GPS).

It would have been harder if it had happened on the previous sector, (night, high terrain, diversion into a Chinese airfield), but again it would not have been overwhelmingly so.

There was some jibberish printed in one of the media outlets to the effect that if it had happened on the way to LA, things might have gotten a bit wet. From the aviation writer concerned, I'd have expected better, as we always carry sufficient fuel to go somewhere (there are nominated fields) even after a depressurisation (at the worst point) and the subsequent low level flight.

 

[mjt57]

They've got plenty of inbound lines, so I can't imagine you'd ever have to wait.

Ah, outsourcing...

"Your call is important to us. However, all of our operators are busy. Please hold for the next available operator...."

 

[Awesom Andy]

Ah, outsourcing...

"Your call is important to us. However, all of our operators are busy. Please hold for the next available operator...."

I can so see this in a flight emergency scenario in a comedy skit.

 

[FlyboyAl]

I've watched this forum since it started and love it - thanks to ALL who contribute.

2 Questions.

Is there any aircraft in the QF fleet that is considered the "sports car" of the fleet? I'm thinking in terms of performance, "flyability" etc?

And number 2 - do the different aircraft endorsements have different levels of seniority? In other words, is a 767 captain, more senior than than a 738 captain, who is more senoir than a 734 captain? If my logic follows through, is a 380 captain more senior than a 747 captain? - Just curious while I'm sitting in the QP in Melbourne.

 

[mjt57]

JB has answered this in detail earlier. But basically, yes, the bigger the aircraft the more senior you have to be to fly it.

Qantas, as I understand it, has a rather complicated promotion path. But it's done because it works (and not, as some have intimated, to give the older guys first dibs at the next promotion).

There are some industries, particularly union dominated ones, where seniority is an absolute. Regardless of whether you're competant or not, if you're at the top of the pecking order you're next in line for the job. Thankfully Qantas doesn't follow this rule. The guys who are next in line have to prove themselves worthy.