Ask The Pilot

[jb747]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

JB, probably a bit of a silly question but I'll anyway...
Who / what /why determines the route a plane travels on take-off (apart from the obvious of flying into the wind to get extra lift)? On the weekend, I was watching planes take off from BNE on FlightRadar24 and they were departing on runway 01 out over Moreton Bay. Domestic flights going to places such as Cairns, Townsville, Gladstone etc seemed to do a left turn on take-off and then follow the coast line but international flights to Singapore and points in that general direction turned right heading south and did a big loop to the north west taking the 'scenic route' over Brisbane. I would have thought it would have been more fuel efficient to go the same route as the domestics and then turn north-west a bit further north...

No question is ever silly. The answers may be, of course.

I haven't operated through Brisbane in close to a decade (!), so I'm not familiar with the current SIDs and STARs. Brisbane airspace may be affected to the west by that of Amberley, so perhaps there is a height requirement that the aircraft on long haul can't reach than the short haul can.

 

[Boris spatsky]

The Standard Instrument Departure (SID) off 01 for jets heading West starts with a turn upwind at 600 feet to the right, continues around through 270 degrees and effectively overflies the runway heading west. I assume it is to deconflict with arrival traffic from the North (Maleny) descending for a visual left base or even ILS from the North for 01.

 

[Robbi]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

For more than one occasions where a choice was available, I have made the decision to fly QF feeling secure that its pilots are at least as competent as you are, JB.

I have admit that when the pilot comes over the PA with the usual chit-chat I always feel relaxed when it is an Aussie or British accent I hear.

Mostly it is a QF Aussie accent

 

[markis10]

The Standard Instrument Departure (SID) off 01 for jets heading West starts with a turn upwind at 600 feet to the right, continues around through 270 degrees and effectively overflies the runway heading west. I assume it is to deconflict with arrival traffic from the North (Maleny) descending for a visual left base or even ILS from the North for 01.

Spot on, sending all the traffic north only for a left turn to be required would put the departing aircraft in direct height conflict with north origin arrivals tracking DAYBO FLYNN on essentially a left downwind. As the right hand side of the circuit mostly gets its traffic on a right base with Oceanic arrivals via AMITY there is rarely traffic at height not laterally separated.

 

[WheelieBagWanderer]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

Hi JB,

Like others have said - "thank you" for all you contribute here.

Just wondering, how much reserve do aircraft have in regards to fuel?

Imagine this scenario if you will:
An aircraft such as a UA or QF 744 flew into SYD from LAX (or SFO as well in UA's case). At about top of decent SYD is suddenly closed due to fog or another incident and the aircraft has to divert.

Is it always GUARANTEED that an aircraft would have enough fuel left to divert to MEL, BNE or CBR if the decision to divert needed to be made very late at the end of a long-haul flight? Let's say CBR was closed due to fog as well. Would there ALWAYS be enough fuel to cover a diversion of an hour or so to BNE or MEL?
Is there ever a case where an airport could be closed and an aircraft doesn't have enough fuel to divert somewhere with a strip big enough to land on?

Also, (and sorry if this is a really inane question - but it seems to happen quite often - on various airlines!), do the flight crew sometimes "forget" that they've turned the FASTEN SEAT BELT sign on whilst in cruise? Last week coming back from BKK it came on about 4 hours into the flight during some mild chop - and was still on 3 hours later despite the chop only lasting 4 or 5 minutes! Wouldn't the CSM or member of the cabin crew notify the flight deck that it's still on? Or is that not the done thing? After about 30 mins or so no one was taking any notice of it and getting up to use the loo, get a drink from the galley etc.

(This is different to ALL Chinese carriers I've flown where the FASTEN SEAT BELT sign is left on for the WHOLE FLIGHT - regardless of flying conditions!)

Finally, are the ever any questions here that leave you a bit stumped at first reading of them? I notice in one post previously you have said that some questions mean you need to reach for flight manuals etc, but do you find you sometimes "get a refresher" on some things here that you might not have had to think about for quite a while? (Given that the knowledge necessary for your to fulfil your role is so vast). Hope that makes sense! I was just curious.

Thanks in advance!

 

[jb747]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

Just wondering, how much reserve do aircraft have in regards to fuel?

Probably not as much as you think.

Imagine this scenario if you will:
An aircraft such as a UA or QF 744 flew into SYD from LAX (or SFO as well in UA's case). At about top of decent SYD is suddenly closed due to fog or another incident and the aircraft has to divert.

Is it always GUARANTEED that an aircraft would have enough fuel left to divert to MEL, BNE or CBR if the decision to divert needed to be made very late at the end of a long-haul flight? Let's say CBR was closed due to fog as well. Would there ALWAYS be enough fuel to cover a diversion of an hour or so to BNE or MEL?

On long haul flights it's more a case of rarely having sufficient fuel to go anywhere other than a very close divert field. For many destinations, if you draw a circle of about 150 miles radius from the top of descent point, you'll find a number of airfields that are capable and within reach, using approximately the same fuel load as the destination. At isolated airfields (Tahiti for instance), you may have an extra 90 minutes or so of fuel, but it's extremely unlikely that you'd have sufficient fuel to divert anywhere. Australia is a little unusual in that it's big, and there aren't many decent runways.

Is there ever a case where an airport could be closed and an aircraft doesn't have enough fuel to divert somewhere with a strip big enough to land on?

Well hopefully it isn't closed on a whim. Generally weather based issues arise slowly through the night, and diversion decisions can be made early. But, if the weather changes, without warning, and you've already passed your last point of safe diversion, then you have no choice but to continue.

Also, (and sorry if this is a really inane question - but it seems to happen quite often - on various airlines!), do the flight crew sometimes "forget" that they've turned the FASTEN SEAT BELT sign on whilst in cruise? Last week coming back from BKK it came on about 4 hours into the flight during some mild chop - and was still on 3 hours later despite the chop only lasting 4 or 5 minutes! Wouldn't the CSM or member of the cabin crew notify the flight deck that it's still on? Or is that not the done thing? After about 30 mins or so no one was taking any notice of it and getting up to use the loo, get a drink from the galley etc.

(This is different to ALL Chinese carriers I've flown where the FASTEN SEAT BELT sign is left on for the WHOLE FLIGHT - regardless of flying conditions!)

Any time I forget, the cabin crew tell me soon enough.

Finally, are the ever any questions here that leave you a bit stumped at first reading of them? I notice in one post previously you have said that some questions mean you need to reach for flight manuals etc, but do you find you sometimes "get a refresher" on some things here that you might not have had to think about for quite a while? (Given that the knowledge necessary for your to fulfil your role is so vast). Hope that makes sense! I was just curious.

Many of the questions about the 747 and 767 I look up. 380 not generally, but any that get too technical I'll check, just to make sure any other pilots can't catch me out.

 

[WheelieBagWanderer]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

Brilliant answers - as usual, JB! Thank you.
It would be an honour for me to fly with you one day!
Safe travels to you.

 

[WheelieBagWanderer]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

Hi JB,

Me again (!)

Just cruising YouTube and came across this 767 landing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x85YYLuCY4&feature=youtu.be
In your opinion, was there some windshear just prior to touching down? The aircraft seemed to hit the runway REALLY hard! Then bounced!
If not windshear, (even minor), would the pilot have intentionally "thudded it down" like that?

Or is this just a pretty normal cross-wind landing on a blustery day, and because we're normally inside the aircraft we don't even realise this is what it looks like from the outside?

Also, as an ex-767 pilot, now that a lot of them are being fitted with winglets, does this make any minor difference to the handling of the aircraft at all from a pilot's perspective?

Thanks in advance once again.

 

[Flying Fox]

Wow, that left landing gear really gets a hammering!

JB, would that particular truck (hope that's the correct term) need some form of engineering inspection?

 

[jb747]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

Hi JB,

Me again (!)

Just cruising YouTube and came across this 767 landing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x85YYLuCY4&feature=youtu.be
In your opinion, was there some windshear just prior to touching down? The aircraft seemed to hit the runway REALLY hard! Then bounced!
If not windshear, (even minor), would the pilot have intentionally "thudded it down" like that?

I don't think it's all that hard. Replaying in slow time can make some pretty normal arrivals look bad. It's certainly quite solid though, and I think he's fighting not just a strong crosswind, but a blustery headwind component as well. The pitch down a couple of seconds before landing is possibly a partial response to an increasing speed (he needs to lower the nose to hold the aim point, and keep it going down)...that's followed very quickly by an increase in the descent rate, and a return to normal pitch. At touchdown, the wheel truck seems to have been 'rotated' into contact, the gear is aft of the point that the aircraft rotates around in pitch changes. The pitch attitude is still increasing, so the aircraft 'skips' back into the air..

Most notable is the fact that no attempt is made to align the aircraft with the runway track. That's a real positive of the 747 and 767...the alignment phase is when most crosswind landings go wrong...Boeing simply made the gear strong enough that you don't need to if the conditions call for it (it's the recommended method on a wet runway, and optional at any other time).

Or is this just a pretty normal cross-wind landing on a blustery day, and because we're normally inside the aircraft we don't even realise this is what it looks like from the outside?

On a very windy day...yes. And you can bet that someone had a go at the crew for the firm landing....

Also, as an ex-767 pilot, now that a lot of them are being fitted with winglets, does this make any minor difference to the handling of the aircraft at all from a pilot's perspective?

Winglets reduce induced drag...it may make them a little harder to slow. I wouldn't expect the difference to be all that noticeable.

This video is from the same source, and is actually more interesting...let's see if you can tell me why? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjamSDt4SZU

 

[jb747]

Wow, that left landing gear really gets a hammering!

JB, would that particular truck (hope that's the correct term) need some form of engineering inspection?

If the landing didn't exceed (approx) 1.8g (and I expect that it didn't) then no. The 767 is built like the proverbial brick outhouse...way tougher than much of what has replaced it.

 

[RooFlyer]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

<snip>

This video is from the same source, and is actually more interesting...let's see if you can tell me why? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjamSDt4SZU

If its what I'm thinking, he did it twice (so hopefully not the correct answer) ....

 

[tgh]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

I guess the obvious answer is that he had more crosswind /gust component than he was expecting, second approach aborts when atc tell him it's getting worse not better.
Based on your question there is probably a lot more to it than that.

 

[jb747]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

There's possibly a little tale in the video, especially the first approach and go around.

Anyway, I'm off to LA now, so you've got some time to look at it.

 

[petercr]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

JB is driving the QF93 bus? One thing I noticed in both videos is the amount the outboard portions of one wing flexed during the aborted landings... I guess that's why they do those wing flex tests...

 

[flychrisfly]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

There's possibly a little tale in the video, especially the first approach and go around.

I'm wondering if JB is giving us a hint... Which is kinda what I thought might be the problem: a gust pushed the pitch up just at the wrong moment causing a potential tail strike during landing.

 

[flychrisfly]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

How integrated are flaps and slats? I ask as slats are always (?) extended for take-offs and landings but you never hear any coughpit chatter asking for slats, but there are requests for flaps. Does this vary by aircraft model?

Thanks!

 

[WheelieBagWanderer]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

This video is from the same source, and is actually more interesting...let's see if you can tell me why? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjamSDt4SZU

Gee, JB! This is supposed to be the "Ask The Pilot" thread! Not "Ask the Complete Amateur Who Loves Flying But Really Has No Idea About Being A Pilot" thread!

No pressure or anything... LOL.

Anyway - I've watched the video you posted a link to a few times now.
All I can tell from my layman's eyes are:

1. Didn't appear to be "crabbing" into the wind too much on the first approach. Seemed to be heading on a *reasonably* straight track
2. After deciding to go-around and starting to regain altitude, it seemed to be a VERY long time until the crew retracted the landing gear. Much longer than on a "normal" take-off for example. Wouldn't this increase drag a lot?
3. Really hard to tell as you can't see the ground in the second attempt to land, but seemed to retract landing gear whilst still decending.

I know all 3 of those are 99% WAY wrong - please spill the beans and tell us what is what's more interesting about the second video.
(And sorry if my "guesses" made you shake your head at my stupidity!)

 

[tgh]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

Pity to clog this wonderful thread up with the kind of banal brainstorming about flying that I'm likely to produce…
Better if the mods made a linked sub thread called the pilot asks…..
We would then actually have a mini "pponaff".. a sub thread where jb set us puzzles.

I think the tale strike is the best guess so far.. but it doesn't address the second approach.
The camera angle seems to confuse our perception of the approach line such that he may have been drifting too far cross track downwind to get back on line.

 

[Tortuga]

Re: QF510 SYD-BNE Aborted take off Tues 18 Feb

There's possibly a little tale in the video, especially the first approach and go around.

Anyway, I'm off to LA now, so you've got some time to look at it.

I only noticed 2 things. The first was the lack of rudder being used on the vertical stabilizer on the first Etihad approach compared to the landing with the 767. The second was the Etihad approach applies up movements to elevator on the horizontal stabilizer which would push the tail down and nose up I think - maybe this was a mistake? I am just guessing.