Ask The Pilot

jb747

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
10,910
Points
1,770
leads to…. how much conflict arrives when the pilot inputs and the computer inputs do not sync.
In the above clip , given jb's comments about the aircraft trying to help.. one has to wonder if they were not (in sync)
Of course the long lens compression makes it all look more spectacular
The aircraft isn't really trying help. It's trying to get rid of sideslip, but a consequence of that is that it tends to cancel much of the effect of the crosswind change. You shouldn't get into conflict with the FBW over this, as you simply shouldn't be using the rudders at this stage anyway. They are footrests for 99% of the time, and even in non FBW aircraft, most rudder activity comes from the aircraft itself (from the yaw damper). If you watch the video, you'll see that early in the piece the rudder activity is only with the lower part of the rudder; that's the FBW system. When both upper and lower rudder move, that's the pilot. The FBW may add or subtract from the input, but only to a limited degree, and never in the opposite direction.
He confirms that the pilot in the left seat was on his first line sector on the A380, upgrading. So "The first time actually really flying a stick with his left hand." is how he put it.
FO going to 380 command. A fair leap.
The company's immediate action was to blame the pilot. Both the Captain under training and the training Captain were pulled off the roster. "Usual airline gut reaction: blame the pilot."
Interestingly, you'd think they'd blame the training captain. Students are expected to get it wrong. Or at least you should be expecting them to. Think of Asiana at SFO.
It wasn't until the engineer responsible for the quick-access recorder analysis did an analysis and noted the exceptional wind-shifts because it did appear that the pilot had completely over-controlled with the rudder in the flare but in fact there were massive wind shifts in less than half a second, and that's what caused it. So "Both guys' skins were saved."
Once it touched down, the wind changes were much less of an issue. They didn't have the drift under control at touchdown, the aircraft geometry will start pulling it straight anyway. So, no, I think they overcontrolled, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was input from both seats, magnifying that. The QAR can't measure the wind then anyway.
The company did change its training policy so that the training Captain had to fly the first sector and the pilot under training had to observe the first landing.
QF always did this on the 380 training. Depending upon the background of the trainee, it may, or may not, be of value. For a 380 FO, I see very little value, but much more so for those from Boeings. My first landing in the 380 was in about 25 knots of crosswind, to the black hole that is 34L in Sydney. They didn't have to rebuild the aircraft, so it must have been ok, but probably not pretty.
 

JohnM

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
10,170
Solutions
1
Points
2,040
Qantas
Platinum
Interestingly, you'd think they'd blame the training captain. Students are expected to get it wrong. Or at least you should be expecting them to. Think of Asiana at SFO.

I stated 'pilot' but I think he may have said "blamed the pilots". It's tricky passing on summarised information. You would really need to talk directly with my mate to get the detailed story in language that only you blokes would understand.

He said both pilots got taken off the roster.

Anyway, it seems that the engineer pushed sufficiently to have them exonerated.

And, I am happy to report, it wasn't my mate in either seat!
 

jb747

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
10,910
Points
1,770
Anyway, it seems that the engineer pushed sufficiently to have them exonerated.
To be honest, I'd be surprised if engineering had anywhere near enough power to have any affect whatsoever. On the other hand, EK, amongst others, has been taken to task a number of times because of their blame/fire the pilot mentality, which as a safety strategy is deeply flawed.
 

jb747

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
10,910
Points
1,770
On a totally different note, there have been many articles over the years, as various theories are put up about the whereabouts of MH370. Most, even when they come from retired airline pilots, have had the smell of crackpot about them.

But, there does appear to be something interesting happening. I won't claim to understand it, in anything other than the most tenuous of ways. But, this is a link that might make interesting reading.

 

Saab34

Established Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
1,672
Points
400
That’s an interesting path. 777 FO to 380 Captain. That’s considerable workload for the Training Captain. I was speaking to one recently, his main candidates are cadets. The biggest unknown he said is he has no idea the heck they are going to do next.

Is there risk in the above EK landing that it could end up essentially in the grass and not in one piece? She seems like a pretty solid piece of metal however moving around like that on the runway surely the risk is elevated. It’s a very uncomfortable video to watch, id imagine you must be sweating watching that JB!
 

jb747

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
10,910
Points
1,770
What's your personal theory then? (in all seriousness) :)
I don't have one. As best I can tell, there isn't sufficient real information out there to say. But, I do know that 777s have had a couple of interesting coughpit fires.
 

jb747

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
10,910
Points
1,770
That’s an interesting path. 777 FO to 380 Captain. That’s considerable workload for the Training Captain.
777 FO to 777 captain would make more sense, as would 380 FO to 380 captain. Or any captain to 380 captain. Changing across fleets with simultaneous promotion training is a pretty big ask. It's tripped up many people within QF.
I was speaking to one recently, his main candidates are cadets. The biggest unknown he said is he has no idea the heck they are going to do next.
Being unpredictable is just about the worst crime a student can commit.
Is there risk in the above EK landing that it could end up essentially in the grass and not in one piece? She seems like a pretty solid piece of metal however moving around like that on the runway surely the risk is elevated. It’s a very uncomfortable video to watch, id imagine you must be sweating watching that JB!
There's fair chance of ending in the grass, or more likely an excursion off and then back on to the runway.


 
Joined
Sep 29, 2011
Messages
318
Points
225
Qantas
Platinum 1
Screen Shot 2021-10-06 at 10.11.18 AM.png
QF14 - EZE - DRW with a total flight time of around 17hrs 45min.... Besides the Antartica seasonal flights I'm guessing this would probably be close to the most southern flights done by QF for sometime. I've done EZE-SYD on the 744's a few times and was always interested how, given ETOPS requirements, a flight plan could be pulled together for a 787?
 

jb747

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
10,910
Points
1,770
I guess I find most of these, from non pilots, to be pretty amusing. They invariably lock on to items of relatively little importance, whilst missing entirely, or glossing over, the important. For this bloke the loss of the ILS is more notable than the damage to the right hand control runs.
Post automatically merged:

QF14 - EZE - DRW with a total flight time of around 17hrs 45min.... Besides the Antartica seasonal flights I'm guessing this would probably be close to the most southern flights done by QF for sometime. I've done EZE-SYD on the 744's a few times and was always interested how, given ETOPS requirements, a flight plan could be pulled together for a 787?
If it's a charter, the rules may not be the same.
 

NM

Enthusiast
Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2004
Messages
16,566
Points
1,295
Qantas
LT Gold
Virgin
Red
If it's a charter, the rules may not be the same.
Especially if it's an Aus Gov charger no doubt.
I believe the term being used is "Government facilitated commercial flight". So not sure if that is the same as a charter and how flight rules may differ from a regular commercial operation?
 

AviatorInsight

Active Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2016
Messages
967
Points
470
If it's a charter, the rules may not be the same.

I believe the term being used is "Government facilitated commercial flight". So not sure if that is the same as a charter and how flight rules may differ from a regular commercial operation?

Plenty of times on a BNE-CHC ferry for maintenance, the plan will be non EDTO. Even when I’ve done CHC-MEL after maintenance it would also be non EDTO.

So I would have to assume that charter would also fall into this category. (EDIT: EDTO Applies to charter and RPT flights)

Commercial just refers to the type of operation that the aircraft/crew are for hire or reward (according the regs). The other type of operation is private which would never occur in an airline as everyone whilst conducting their duty, is being paid.

Like with everything there’s a cost to doing EDTO, engineering checks pre departure, fuel requirements, etc so if they can get away without planning it they will.
 
Last edited:

harvyk

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
6,865
Points
980
Qantas
Gold
What is the difference between a ETDO and non ETDO flight for say a BNE-CHC flight?

What extra things need to happen for a flight to be considered ETDO?
 

Flying Fox

Established Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
2,879
Points
720
Saw this image -

https://www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/qf14-coughpit-view.jpg

Really beautiful photo but I wanted to know where the iPad charger was plugged into the coughpit? Do you have USB ports?

I can't imagine that you have a cigarette lighter up there :)
 
Now with contactless delivery, shop online to get drinks delivered to your door or pick up in-store in 30 minutes. Lowest Liquor Price Guarantee. Biggest Range.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

docjames

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
9,128
Points
855
Qantas
Platinum
Thanks for our pilots and their regular and very enlightening input over a long time now.

With the recent QF14 flight SCL-DRW, what provisions are made with regard ETOPS (or equivalent) zones / requirements, or diversion points (if over antarctica), and could you talk us through the planning / en-route replanning and the processes behind that? They appeared to end up a fair way south (over Antarctica) and then west (passing over ADL rather than MEL) of the GC route, which i assume is wind related +/- diversion point related although hard to know how much was pre-planned at departure vs en-route i suppose.

Thanks in advance.
 
Top