|
Just had MIA approach lead a departure push with an EclipseJet at the front.
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:54 |
|
|
MrYenko posted:Just had MIA approach lead a departure push with an EclipseJet at the front. Just tell the guy to pedal harder next time because the King Air behind him is catching up, it's what Edmonton Centre did once 
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
fknlo posted:No, it will be posted in their remarks as 250kts max. I've asked them about it on frequency as well as a guy I know that flies for them, and I'm pretty sure they've told me it's because of an APU door. There's also something that's constantly wrong with them that limits them to FL250 as well. FL250 is a single pack operating limit. As for 250 knots.... I still dunno, we do not have that limitation. Of course, our pilot group refuses no APU and Single Pack aircraft often so it tends to get fixed.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
So CRJ's are limited to 250 IAS at FL 250? What's that equate to in true? I'm guessing pretty slow compared to everything else?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:What's that equate to in true? I'm guessing pretty slow compared to everything else? About 375kts depending on temperature. Many jets will climb at 280KIAS after leaving 10,000ft, or ~420kts true at FL250, assuming a standard temperature lapse rate.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:So CRJ's are limited to 250 IAS at FL 250? What's that equate to in true? I'm guessing pretty slow compared to everything else? The Q400's I fly can pretty easily cruise at 250kt at FL250, and I'm guessing we're burning less fuel (about 1200PPH per engine) while doing so. Once we get below FL200, we can speed up to 285kt (some kind of flutter issue limits our max speed to 255kt any higher than that), but we'll burn slightly more fuel doing so.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:The Q400's I fly can pretty easily cruise at 250kt at FL250, and I'm guessing we're burning less fuel (about 1200PPH per engine) while doing so. Yeah, the King Air I fly is limited to 185 at FL250  I don't know if thats beechcraft limited or Navy limited. Either way at that point you're usually ITT limited first.I have my last flights of flight school tomorrow! Low level vnav to KSAT and then a VFR sectional low level vnav back to Navy Corpus. Heads up if you here some formation pairs out there ferret, it may be me!
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Yeah, the King Air I fly is limited to 185 at FL250 Have you selected a final platform yet? If not, when do you find out?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Have you selected a final platform yet? If not, when do you find out? V-22's out of MCAS New River.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:V-22's out of MCAS New River. Neat - so how does that work? Do you have to do any helicopter training beforehand or are they going to throw you straight in?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:Neat - so how does that work? Do you have to do any helicopter training beforehand or are they going to throw you straight in? My training was this-- 'Primary'- T-6B Texan II, about 70 hours worth, mostly VFR flights, some instrument time. My scores from this determined my platform pipeline. Other options include strike (AV-8, EA-6, F-18), C-130, or rotary (53, UH-1, AH-1). 'Intermediate'- TH-57, civlian equivalent Bell 206. 30 hours, all VFR flights. 'Advanced'- C-12, civilian equivalent King Air 200. 100 hours, mostly all IFR flying. Scores at the end of this will determine my duty station. Choices being Miramar, CA, Okinawa, and New River. Since the training pipeline for the V-22 is pretty new there is still a lot of discussion on how to structure the training. This is made even more difficult by the fact that the higher ups determining it, if they are even pilots, did not fly it. By that I mean that a helicopter pilot will want the V-22 pipeline to include helicopter flying. This is kinda pointless because the V-22 will hover itself (i.e. the manual inputs required to hover a helicopter, constant cyclic and collective changes, aren't required) and can't autorotate. I've been told to think of it as an airplane that takes off like a helicopter, not the other way around. C-130 pilots want it to be more multiengine specific, which is also kind of a waste because the majority of the flight training in advanced is single-engine emergency scenario training, of which the Osprey physically can't do. The word is in the future, to save money, the intermediate stage will be cut and the advanced stage will be modified essentially to be more of an instrument training stage as opposed to single engine scenarios/instrument training stage. This is also made even more complex by the fact that the younger half of the V-22 are purebreads, ie haven't flown another fleet platform, and the older half that is in charge are all converts from CH-46's or C-130s, meaning they are trying to bring over the tactics and ways of flying from those two very different communities.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
No, you can't bring your 19 y/o girlfriend To your very first flight lesson when it's 5pm and 95 degrees in Texas! They had Chili's minutes before hand.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:V-22 training You'd think the Harrier training path would translate fairly well to the Osprey. VTOL, no built-in semi-parachute like a helicopter, etc.. Of course, good luck getting the strike fighter jocks to even acknowledge the existence of the cargo plane. Speaking of which, what's an autorotation landing like? Just a hard landing, or high risk of shattering your spine/being crushed by the engines? (Because, as we've seen from the Skycrane, the heavy/strongly built part of a helicopter is on top.) Is it different for, say, an MD500 vs. a CH-53E? If so, which one's worse? I could see it going either way. Another tangent, I want an Xbox 360 helicopter sim that uses the two thumbsticks as the two helicopter sticks, and I guess the bumper buttons for the pedals. I'd bet I could do a better job of that than Gavin Free does with the GTA V helicopter controls  .
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 23:53
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
I've only ever been in autos in a teeny little schwezier 300C (full down) and seen videos of many other aircraft doing either power recovery or full downs - And I've always been kind of  after seeing an H-53 and S-92 do a full down.Bell's, MD's and EC's: whatever, it's not a hard landing as long as they keep airspeed and rotor energy and don't ball it up. Seeing the fat bastards autorotate and land is neat, though: they have to flare pretty hard. I've kind of always wanted to see a Chinook do it, though. There's tons and tons of autorotation vids on ye olde youtube.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2014 00:35
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:You'd think the Harrier training path would translate fairly well to the Osprey. VTOL, no built-in semi-parachute like a helicopter, etc.. Of course, good luck getting the strike fighter jocks to even acknowledge the existence of the cargo plane. In a H-57 it was pretty benign. The landings were as smooth as any hovering landing. For most of them, we'd cut power at 800, bottom the collective, turn from downwind towards the landing area. It requires a heavy amount of right pedal because the tail rotor still works yet there is no torque on the main rotor. As you descend, you pull a little bit of collective to keep the main rotor RPM in the proper range for most energy. As we hit 50 feet, throttle max. At about 10 feet, the turbine would have spooled up and you'd pull collective and foward cyclic and cushion it into a slow 5 foot taxi. Scary at first, but very fun after the first few. We'd also practice full autorotations to the deck by not adding throttle at 50 feet. Those are more or less the same, it just stresses the rotor more because any addition of collective decays rotor RPM, allowing it to fall and hang out in a specific 'avoid' range. I may be wrong but my assumption with autorotating is the heavier the harder. IE a fully loaded 53E would be extremely tough to safely auto. I may be wrong. I'll ask some of my instructors-- they're 53E pilots.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
Just finished my Master's and am starting to explore job options, so here come some stupid rookie questions. -At a regional, is there much difference in "competitive pay"/lifestyle/job description (beside the obvious) between a crew scheduler and a dispatcher? The one I'm looking at describes 4 on-3 off-3 on-4 off, 11 hour days for crew schedulers but doesn't talk about the schedule for a dispatcher other than the department is only open from 5am to Midnight local, which seems to indicate you're not going to be sitting in a cubicle at 2:25am with nothing to do. -The application for the dispatcher gig allows you to fill it out even if you indicate you don't currently have the ticket (the first question on the app, requiring a Yes/No answer to continue). Will recruiters offer different positions that may not necessarily have spots listed as open on job sites if they see something they like on a resume or in an interview? -Given the questions above, is it worth the extra effort to get the dispatch license right away? One accelerated school offered a program reduced to four weeks because I'm instrument-rated. -The company offers flight benefits and I'd have two airports (maybe even three if I wanted to make the  ) from which I could theoretically hop on their flights, but all three are RJ-only (one gets an A319 occasionally if the airline is feeling nice). Is non-revving a nightmare into hubs on 50 or 70 seaters?
CBJSprague24 fucked around with this message at 05:14 on May 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
Most 50-70 seaters I'm on are pretty loving empty usually although occasionally they can be entirely full but.. in my limited experience, they're usually pretty loving empty. YMMV. Also, crew scheduling? Are you the devil? Because that's how you become the devil. A buddy of mine dispatches for Skywest, he used to be an Endeavor dispatcher but Skywest pays a lot more, I guess. Seems happy enough but it's his first year. I don't think he makes too much $.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 08:54
|
|
|
CBJSprague24 posted:Just finished my Master's and am starting to explore job options, so here come some stupid rookie questions. Every operation I have been at pays dispatch better than schedulers, but you pretty much need to have a license to go in externally. If you want to do ramp/scheduling or another entry level position, I have seen carriers occasionally train their own people and pay your costs in training for dispatch licenses, but those are pretty uncommon, and they always seem to require an 18-24 month employment commitment. This is usually in response to not being able to find qualified dispatchers for what the carrier is paying. As far as schedule, dispatch is usually 24-7, but most domestic operations have only a few overnight shifts, compared to the bulk being early morning/afternoon shift starts. 121 domestic and flag dispatchers can't be scheduled for more than 10 hours, and at the regional level 4-on 3-off is pretty standard. Feel free to PM if you have more questions.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
From what I understand, dispatchers are the second or third highest paid labor at my airline, pretty much tied with mechanics. E: People don't hate most dispatchers, but they do hate many schedulers.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
The Slaughter posted:Most 50-70 seaters I'm on are pretty loving empty usually although occasionally they can be entirely full but.. in my limited experience, they're usually pretty loving empty. YMMV. Not in the Delta system. My flights are full more often than not.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
It's Otto Lilienthal's birthday! Built the first serially produced aircraft, a glider of which he sold at least 9 (photo is a replica): A pioneer of aeronautical engineering, he went beyond the "Lets glue some stuff together so that it looks roughly like a bird, then hurl down a cliff" approach. Using proper engineering techniques lead to great advances in heavier-than-earth flight. Yet in the end he still died in a glider crash  He got this awesome looking grave though  That reminds me, I need to get myself into a glider this summer, if I can muster up the courage to do it.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Pop quiz time! Take a look at this picture of KELP:  You'll notice that runway 4 has a displaced threshold. Meaning you can use that section of runway for takeoff, taxi, and roll out but not for touchdown. You'll notice that runway 8R has a similar piece of concrete leading up to the start of the runway proper, except in this case it's labeled as a taxiway and not a displaced threshold. Are you allowed to use this taxiway for takeoff? If you aren't, how do you determine if you're still taxiing or if you're on the T/O roll? If you're in a small airplane can you just taxi at Vr and pull back as soon as you cross the threshold?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:You'll notice that runway 8R has a similar piece of concrete leading up to the start of the runway proper, except in this case it's labeled as a taxiway and not a displaced threshold. Are you allowed to use this taxiway for takeoff? If you aren't, how do you determine if you're still taxiing or if you're on the T/O roll? If you're in a small airplane can you just taxi at Vr and pull back as soon as you cross the threshold? I'd say no, you can't just taxi at Vr then takeoff. If it were me, I'd taxi at normal speed until I hit the threshold, stop request clearance for takeoff and then would initiate the takeoff roll after being cleared and crossing the threshold. If you were allowed to use it for an actual takeoff, I'd imagine they'd make a displaced threshold in the first place. e: looking at my jepp charts, it says "Do not cross without approval" meaning they don't want anyone on taxiway Echo without approval almost like an active runway but I stand by my original response. It's a taxiway for all intents and purposes but they just don't want aircraft loitering there I'd imagine. i am kiss u now fucked around with this message at 03:10 on May 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
There are hold short bars all over that taxiway, so you wouldn't get onto it without clearance anyway. The taxiway (up to the yellow chevrons) is for taxi only. I wouldn't apply takeoff power until I rolled onto the white runway.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
If you wouldn't apply takeoff power on any other taxiway - and I assume you wouldn't - then you probably shouldn't apply it on that one either (whether you're in a Cessna or anything else).
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
Only if it's properly labelled as a taxiway like this one, otherwise game on. (Think that marking went up at KPHL shortly after the Continental pilot landed on the taxiway up the road at KEWR. Plus I suspect the staggered runways of 26, 27R and 27L are asking for trouble with large taxiways servicing them.)
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
Haha, well I guess that takes the guesswork out of it, don't it?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
brendanwor posted:If you wouldn't apply takeoff power on any other taxiway - and I assume you wouldn't - then you probably shouldn't apply it on that one either (whether you're in a Cessna or anything else). Ok, but in the airplane that I fly ~15% thrust will have you taxiing at 50+ knots. It's not TO thrust but it's certainly well above "normal" taxi speed. fordan posted:(Think that marking went up at KPHL shortly after the Continental pilot landed on the taxiway up the road at KEWR. Plus I suspect the staggered runways of 26, 27R and 27L are asking for trouble with large taxiways servicing them.) I don't know when those markings were painted, but there was also a DAL 767 that landed on the taxiway at ATL a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:I don't know when those markings were painted, but there was also a DAL 767 that landed on the taxiway at ATL a few years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
AWSEFT posted:How do you know this? A Delta pilot could NEVER make this kind of mistake. Not like those silly NW pilots who overflew the airport a week later. Plus, Delta got the local networks to not post about what didn't happen. =P The DID have an on board medical emergency. Maybe they just wanted to be closer to the terminal when they landed to reduce taxi time and get the pax medical attention sooner?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:I don't know when those markings were painted, but there was also a DAL 767 that landed on the taxiway at ATL a few years ago.  http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20091020X05636&key=1 quote:During the flight one of the three required flight deck crew members became ill and was considered to be incapacitated. The remaining two crew members conducted the entire night flight without the benefit of a customary break period. Throughout the flight the crew made comments indicating that they were fatigued and identified fatigue as their highest threat for the approach, but did not discuss strategies to mitigate the consequences of fatigue. At the time of the incident, the crew had been on duty for about 12 hours and the captain had been awake for over 22 hours, while the first officer had been awake for at least 14 hours.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Crazy, they had the runway lighting on the lowest setting and the taxiway lighting all the way up to the maximum intensity. That's an interesting configuration, and the report states the controllers didn't have access to fine lighting adjustments. They just had preset selections that caused that lighting configuration.quote:Flight test approaches were observed from the tower cab at the south local control position. From that position it was observed that it was challenging to identify the runway lights due to the taxiway lights appearing much brighter. The airplane landing lights were visually observed from about the final approach fix and remained in sight throughout the approach. However; it was difficult to determine if the airplane was lined up for runway 27R because the airplane lights blended with city lights behind it, and because of the angle of the local controller position with respect to the runway threshold. The line of sight from the local controller position to the threshold was about 45 degrees...
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Strategies to mitigate the consequences of fatigue? Coffee?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Strategies to mitigate the consequences of fatigue? I was about to say "put that fucker down somewhere and get a full crew" but Rio to Atlanta is a fuckin' long flight with nowhere particularly convenient on the way.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
So my planned flight from Colorado Springs to Tulsa to go see a friend got cut short yesterday thanks to no oil pressure after a stop for lunch at KGCK in Garden City. At least it happened on the ground.  1.5 hour flight turned in to a 5 hour drive back in a rental car that they wouldn't let us take one way, so we had to drive two cars back to Garden City today to return it. 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:So my planned flight from Colorado Springs to Tulsa to go see a friend got cut short yesterday thanks to no oil pressure after a stop for lunch at KGCK in Garden City. Very interesting story. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 06:53
|
|
|
I want to hear more. What kind of cars did you drive? Were they comfy? Where did you stop for food?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
To chime in on the taxiway/displaced threshold thing, we have that at KMTN, where I fly.  I have been instructed to use it as a taxiway, to start takeoff once we cross the threshold onto 15. However we call for takeoff clearance at the hold short line, which is before the taxiway, circled below. Military is allowed to use that taxiway for takeoff, ie civilians have a 7000 ft runway, Maryland Air National Guard has 8000 ft of runway. Maybe your airport has a lot of military activity? 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:I don't know when those markings were painted, but there was also a DAL 767 that landed on the taxiway at ATL a few years ago. Oh wow there is no way I would have believed this one without the NTSB report below. I'm willing to believe a lot of aviation WOOPS based on anecdotes alone due to the absurd stuff I've personally seen, but a Delta pilot doing this at ATL? The situation that lead to it does make more sense though. Being awake that long is the least safe thing I can imagine flying.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:54 |
|
|
I've been doing a lot of flights for Pilots N Paws lately and I think I need to stop. I almost adopted a dog today simply because of how cool it was in the plane. Plus I'd have to name it some insufferable aviation related name.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:03
|
|
