Ask The Pilot

[D747]

We used to drop 35000 pound bulldozers in the Herc - attached to a pallet. Loaded around the C of G near the main wheels. Pretty hairy to drop as if the load gets stuck on exit you can exceed the ability to fly away due to an extreme C of G and massive drag of the multiple parachutes (3 or more).

Once the load exits you get a distinct nose up pitching tendency. We used to train for platform 'hang ups' in the aircraft and sim and it was pretty full on.

When you did platform 'hang ups' training, would the loadmaster train as well?

 

[Skyring]

Maybe all this talk of ordnance release is a wee bit off-topic for the general frequent flyer, but it's fascinating, and it seems that many airline pilots have some military experience.

Would this be at all common? And is it an advantage in airline aviation? Does a head full of old A-4 mnemonics and the like detract from flying an A380 or similar, or is it an advantage to have a well-rounded aviation experience?

 

[straitman]

Maybe all this talk of ordnance release is a wee bit off-topic for the general frequent flyer, but it's fascinating, and it seems that many airline pilots have some military experience.

It's on topic enough IMHO as the thread is Ask The Pilot not Ask The Airline Pilot about Airline stuff.

Would this be at all common? And is it an advantage in airline aviation? Does a head full of old A-4 mnemonics and the like detract from flying an A380 or similar, or is it an advantage to have a well-rounded aviation experience?

I believe that most previous experience helps in rounding off the big picture aviation experience.

 

[jb747]

Maybe all this talk of ordnance release is a wee bit off-topic for the general frequent flyer, but it's fascinating, and it seems that many airline pilots have some military experience.

From my era, about half of the airline pilots are from the military. That number has slowly been reducing over the years, as the supply from the military has dwindled, and airlines around the world have decided that they prefer 'customer focused' rather than 'machinery focused' pilots. Touchy feely, has no place in a coughpit, but even within airlines, there is very little understanding of what the job actually is. I'm comfortable with issuing commands, but I'm also well aware that there are times for discussion, and also for taking advice. But the buck stops with me, and it's not a democracy.

And is it an advantage in airline aviation? Does a head full of old A-4 mnemonics and the like detract from flying an A380 or similar, or is it an advantage to have a well-rounded aviation experience?

Military flying is often described as being the best training that money can't buy. It normally isn't constrained by budget as the first priority, and the military have no hesitation in removing people from training, even after they've completed most of a course. I don't know what the pass rates are now, but in my day, about 50% was the pass rate (and that was after the hurdle of actually getting to start). Now, it's common to find the people pushing the MPL training for new cadets as saying they have pass rates in the 90% range. It's not because they are such great instructors, it's just a case of positioning the bar. Having said that, many people who miss out on the military courses go on to have good airline careers.

Having flown something like the A4 means that I've experienced a dramatically wider part of the flight regime than virtually any directly trained airline pilot. You don't need to have flown fighters for that to be the case though. RAAF C17 pilots would do things with their big aircraft that no airline would dream of. The wider that pool of experience, the more you have to draw on when your day eventually goes wrong...

It's been discussed before, but I'm not a fan of any form of direct entry training/cadet courses. Even if it doesn't involve the military, pilots doing apparently simply jobs like flying tourists around NT, or doing bank runs, are adding to their experience. In an ideal world, an airline would source it's pilots from many places...military, GA, other airlines. All of those backgrounds add up, and have the effect of giving the entire airline a rounded level of experience.

 

[mjt57]

F
It's been discussed before, but I'm not a fan of any form of direct entry training/cadet courses. Even if it doesn't involve the military, pilots doing apparently simply jobs like flying tourists around NT, or doing bank runs, are adding to their experience. In an ideal world, an airline would source it's pilots from many places...military, GA, other airlines. All of those backgrounds add up, and have the effect of giving the entire airline a rounded level of experience.

How much solo flying do these cadets do?

If very little, then surely that has to impact on their ability to make decisions. What I mean is if their entire training is done with others on the flight deck with them and pretty much leaving the decisions to the captain, by the time that they get the opportunity to progress how well positioned are they to make crucial decisions with no-one to turn to?

Those guys who do overnight mail runs in twins in all weather by themselves would have to have some of the more useful flight experience, surely?

Or the guy who's in a single seater fast jet.

 

[Boris spatsky]

Have there been actual cases of hangups?

Whats the usual time to eject a load?
Usual Aircraft speed at the time?
Does the aircraft position according to prevailing winds at altitude?

Yes, a UK Herc was lost in Scotland doing just that and we had a few in the RAAF in the 80s/90s that led to some interesting moments but they all recovered.

Speed is around 140 knots indicated, height varies with load and parachutes but normally 1000-1300 ft AGL.

Yes, the drop point varies with wind and aircraft speed/height. You work out a CARP (Computed Air Release Point) which is the point that you press green light for load release. This allows for exit time of the load, parachute type, load weight, drop height/speed, ambient temperature and wind at altitude and on the ground.

In the C130 E/H it was computed mathematically and adjusted on the run in by the navigator; in the J model it was entered into the FMS and checked mathematically before flight.

 

[Boris spatsky]

When you did platform 'hang ups' training, would the loadmaster train as well?

Yes, it was an entire crew simulated event in the aircraft; in the sim, the loadmaster calls/actions were simulated by a pilot instructor.

 

[jb747]

Those guys who do overnight mail runs in twins in all weather by themselves would have to have some of the more useful flight experience, surely?

It doesn't matter all that much what they've been flying. Simply being out there, and running an operation, is a learning experience. And, as you've said, it's not one that necessarily exists in the large airline world. Smaller airlines, like Rex and it's ilk, operate in a very different, and difficult, environment.

Or the guy who's in a single seater fast jet.

One of the myths about the fast jet world is that they are operational loners. Whilst they are alone in their aircraft, they almost invariably operate as part of a team...so most of the issues of a crew exist for them too.

 

[Quickstatus]

Smaller airlines, like Rex and it's ilk, operate in a very different, and difficult, environment.

Whats comparatively difficult for the likes of Rex

 

[jb747]

Whats comparatively difficult for the likes of Rex

Lots of short sectors (good training in itself). Aircraft of much more limited performance, which puts them into the weather. Nav aids and general aircraft capability not in the same league as the big stuff (for instance automated RNAV approaches, or GLS auto landings). Operations to minor airfields without much in the way of ATC. Mixing it with the uncontrolled light aircraft.

Those I've flown with who came from that background have all been very good.

 

[mjt57]

Yesterday someone posted an article onto Facebook about an Asian carrier (allegedly a B777) dumping the contents of its toilets over the Pacific, only for it to rain "frozen blue matter" down on an unsuspecting cruise ship.

Of course the claims of fake news and so on followed. But it does beg the question; when do jets dispose of their waste products?

 

[andmiz]

Of course the claims of fake news and so on followed. But it does beg the question; when do jets dispose of their waste products?

Well, not over the Pacific. It's done during turnarounds, dependent on the length of the turnaround, the quantity of waste and prediction of future waste creation.

 

[Captain Halliday]

...and prediction of future waste creation.

I can picture the ops guy with his clipboard and pencil:
6 infants + 68 passengers who ordered the curry + footy team on end of season trip... "Benny we're gonna have to pump out before this one goes."

 

[Boris spatsky]

Yesterday someone posted an article onto Facebook about an Asian carrier (allegedly a B777) dumping the contents of its toilets over the Pacific, only for it to rain "frozen blue matter" down on an unsuspecting cruise ship.

Of course the claims of fake news and so on followed. But it does beg the question; when do jets dispose of their waste products?

We can't dump the lavatory contents overboard anyway in the 73. Has to be pumped out - i reckon this might be fake news, certainly for modern aircraft.

 

[Himeno]

Yesterday someone posted an article onto Facebook about an Asian carrier (allegedly a B777) dumping the contents of its toilets over the Pacific, only for it to rain "frozen blue matter" down on an unsuspecting cruise ship.

They covered this on Mythbusters a few years ago. It is not possible for the crew to dump the toilets in flight. You can only access the tanks from outside.

In order to get it to work, the mythbusters had to cause 3 sets of valves and seals to fail and it had to be a slow leak. If the entire tank was dumped at once, the contents atomized in the wind (like the fuel in a fuel dump). If the leak was slow, it iced up on the plane, then snapped off during descent.

 

[jb747]

Yesterday someone posted an article onto Facebook about an Asian carrier (allegedly a B777) dumping the contents of its toilets over the Pacific, only for it to rain "frozen blue matter" down on an unsuspecting cruise ship.

I suspect it's fair to say that the b/s is strong with this one.

 

[Saab34]

JB
Any reason why ULH flights in A380 or 777 don't use R27 at Melbourne for landing?

I noted last week the first time I have seen a long haul land on 27 in a while, (Qatar DOH-MEL) when 34 was an operational runway also.

I have heard on ATC before Etihad A380 and Emirates A380 pilots refuse 27 and will hold until 34 was available (Emirates even said they would head to SYD!)

I assume it's all to do with weight and landing distances/weather etc?

 

[andmiz]

I assume it's all to do with weight and landing distances/weather etc?

It's too short. At 7500ft long, I can't speak for the 380, but for the 777, you'd be wanting a honking headwind and low weights before it's suitable.

 

[docjames]

It's too short. At 7500ft long, I can't speak for the 380, but for the 777, you'd be wanting a honking headwind and low weights before it's suitable.

For "normal" routine ops (eg. landing after LAX-MEL or SIN-MEL say, and not "emergency" landing), what would be the minimum landing distance required for the 777?

(I realise specifics around max landing weights versus "typical" etc will come into it).

 

[defurax]

Do freighter pilots tend to try and avoid weather systems in the cruise as much as airliners pilots (carrying PAX)? I'm asking because I saw that QF and Eva Air aircraft clearly avoided some weather while the FedEx aircraft flew straight through it.