Lately there has been some talk around pilot hours on type, especially after the Lion Air and Ethiopian incidents.
When a new type is introduced eg. 787 / A380 how do pilots get their hours up prior to flying revenue flights. Is it mainly sim based (do these hours count) or hours in the sky and just build them up as you go.
For pilots like me, converting from the 747, I did about 60 hours of sim time (which is what happened to my hair), and then around 100 hours in the aircraft before being let loose.
Was the 60 hours sim time done in quite a condensed period of time? That would be approx 15 sims? 2-3 or more a week?
This is an example of a Sponsored Post, one of the many ways you can advertise on the Australian Frequent Flyer.
Other options include banner advertisements on our content and forum pages or our newsletter. You can also purchase an audio message on our podcast - or if you just want to try it out, you can sponsor a thread.
If you'd prefer not to see any advertisements (including these sponsored posts), you can become an AFF Supporter from just $6 and instantly remove all advertisements from our website!
Ex-Emirates pilot Byron Bailey says in 'The Australian' (page 27, the usual Friday aviation section) today that he obtained some fuel consumption figures from a 'pilot colleague', commenting that neither flight (see below) 'could carry full passenger load' (although he doesn't say by how many seats this was reduced).
I gather the latter is quite normal (seasonally) for DFW to SYD but on AFF, while MEL_Traveller and others may have asserted passenger numbers were reduced for PER - LHR nonstops (northbound only?), the hard evidence seems to have been lacking as I don't believe anyone has quoted specific figures.
He then discusses how much more efficient (fuel wise) a twin-engined aircraft is, saying that QF ought have purchased B777s/B777Xs.
...The 380 is probably not the ideal aircraft for the Dallas flights...two 787s would probably be better. With decent loads it (380) would be better than the 777....
The 787 multiplied by two consumes less fuel per passenger than an A380 for lengthy sectors, yet carries a similar number of travellers (although not an identical split between classes).
However wouldn't the high costs of staff (flight, and cabin crew) engaged at Australian salary or wage levels be a disincentive for any Australian-domiciled airline to operate two x B787-900 flights (say per day) in place of one A388?
There's many other considerations (including that having two differently timed flights may attract more passengers who like a choice in flight times) but aren't staffing costs fairly hefty for airlines, maybe 20 per cent of costs at least on longer flights?
...It's a cost. If you don't like, then don't run those flights. Are you suggesting that the staff should bear the cost?
Possibly a very small question, but as they say, the only stupid question is the one you don't ask, so...
A while back I travelled in an Emirates A380 - roughly mid-plane, in economy, bottom floor (only a trans-Tasman, so no issue with the seat, but I digress...)
When accessing the overhead bins I noted on several occasions a noise coming from behind/above them, sounded for all the world like hydraulics or servos cycling back & forth. This was when the plane was on the tarmac at both ends.
Must admit, I'd assumed there wouldn't be much 'infrastructure' within the space between the cabins, perhaps cabling, etc - but this sounded like more than that. What would this have been, pumps of some description?
Maybe it was electric cargo doors?There’s nothing of any consequence between the floors. There’s a/c ducting in the overhead of both levels. On the tarmac, the hydraulics are shut down, and all that would be running is the a/c. There could possibly be some noise from the APU bleed travelling to the packs, but I don’t think you’d be able to differentiate that from the normal a/c noises.
You can hear the flaps when they run through the early stages of their motion. The aircraft actually has a surprisingly limited hydraulic system, so there’s a lot less plumbing than earlier aircraft.
During shutdown, you sometimes get a momentary thumping noise from the hydraulics, but only for a couple of seconds.
I've sure that if they thought cabin crew costs on a given route were too much and the end point of the route allowed for lower rates, they wouldn't have many issues opening up a new overseas crew base.I assume that you worked in Australia for Australian wages. Perhaps if we could have a cheaper country's tax rate, you wouldn't need to pay as much. The 787 contract is not one that I'd want to work under, so it is already substantially cheaper. Two 787s have the same number of cabin crew as a 380...the only difference is in the number of pilots required. Anyway, the MCAS programmers are currently working on pilotless..
Maybe it was electric cargo doors?
With Qantas putting on seasonal flights to Sapporo in the A330, what, if any extra training will the pilots get to learn about the extreme winter conditions? And noting it will need to be current, what would the timeline be to have the training and commence flying.
Also, do they get issued additional uniform items to keep them warm?