The great big "ask an airline pilot" thread!

martinsvi

Dubhaltach wrote: »

Weren't the tubes to tell the speed and altitude blocked with ice?

pitot tubes, yes they were blocked with ice. you don't really use pitot tubes to tell the altitude - altitude is measured by static port, but it's a combined system anyway...

reason why I suggested to watch that documentary once more is my assumption that if a person asks whether there is a speedometer on board - mentioning pitot tubes or static ports etc. will bring more confusion than answers. If documentary in question was from Air Crash Investigation (nat geo) series or anything with similar quality they're usually very good with explaining how stuff works so that even a child can understand

LeftBase

There is a very good documentary about the Aero Peru guys who had their combined static/pitot ports covered with tape so cleaning could take place and it was never removed before flight.

They had stall, overspeed and a terrain warning. If memory serves the altimeter was working fine but everything else was so all over the shop they didn't believe when it was giving the "too low terrain" and "pull up" it and they more or less slowly descended into the water.

View Profile

crazygeryy wrote: »

if the pitots on an airplane fail.is there not a dial in the cockpit showing the speed of the plane like a speedometer.?I'm asking this because i was watching the documentary on flight af 447 that went down. their pitots failed and they couldn't tell air speed, part of the reason it crashed.

If all pitot tubes are giving inaccurate speed readings the only non affected speed indications are given by the GPS(and possibly the IRS). However this is a ground speed indication and therefore not that useful.

We have in the flight deck a table showing what pitch attitude and power setting to fly when airspeed indications are erroneous. These are quite accurate and give information for all stages of flight, cruise, approach etc.

The problem with a blocked pitot/static problem is you'll get stick shaker and stall warnings combined with overspeed warnings which will confuse the pilots. This confusion is what often leads to a crash.

crazygeryy

martinsvi wrote: »

pitot tubes, yes they were blocked with ice. you don't really use pitot tubes to tell the altitude - altitude is measured by static port, but it's a combined system anyway...

reason why I suggested to watch that documentary once more is my assumption that if a person asks whether there is a speedometer on board - mentioning pitot tubes or static ports etc. will bring more confusion than answers. If documentary in question was from Air Crash Investigation (nat geo) series or anything with similar quality they're usually very good with explaining how stuff works so that even a child can understand

lol was that meant as a dig at me?
why didnt you just answer the question instead of telling me to watch it again like a school teacher would.lol and if i asked a dumb question just say so but excuse me ive never been in a cockpit before so i said id ask it anyway.

as far as i can see in the documentary the pitots are widely used to measure airspeed on a plane.they failed and it was one of the reasons the plane went down.they needed them to measure airspeed.my question(maybe i worded it wrongly) was isnt there another way to tell airspeed on a plane.

LeftBase

crazygeryy wrote: »

lol was that meant as a dig at me?
why didnt you just answer the question instead of telling me to watch it again like a school teacher would.lol and if i asked a dumb question just say so but excuse me ive never been in a cockpit before so i said id ask it anyway.

as far as i can see in the documentary the pitots are widely used to measure airspeed on a plane.they failed and it was one of the reasons the plane went down.they needed them to measure airspeed.my question(maybe i worded it wrongly) was isnt there another way to tell airspeed on a plane.

Only way to measure airspeed is measure the dynamic pressure on the airframe..there is no other way that it can be done effectively. There are several pitot sources on an aircraft however that allow one source to step in if another is damaged or blocked.
On the Nav display of a modern aircraft you get a readout of the current wind with respect to the aircraft and the groundspeed. You could roughly deduce the airspeed from that but it wouldn't be exact

View Profile

LeftBase wrote: »

On the Nav display of a modern aircraft you get a readout of the current wind with respect to the aircraft and the groundspeed. You could roughly deduce the airspeed from that but it wouldn't be exact

Yes but if your IAS readings are inaccurate due to a blockage, the current wind read out will be wrong as this is based on your ground speed(IRS/GPS) versus your IAS.

LeftBase

View Profile wrote: »

Yes but if your IAS readings are inaccurate to a blockage, the current wind read out will be wrong as this is based on your ground speed(IRS/GPS) verus your IAS.

Very true...didn't think of that!

martinsvi

crazygeryy wrote: »

lol was that meant as a dig at me?
why didnt you just answer the question instead of telling me to watch it again like a school teacher would.lol and if i asked a dumb question just say so but excuse me ive never been in a cockpit before so i said id ask it anyway.

as far as i can see in the documentary the pitots are widely used to measure airspeed on a plane.they failed and it was one of the reasons the plane went down.they needed them to measure airspeed.my question(maybe i worded it wrongly) was isnt there another way to tell airspeed on a plane.

I do apologize, I didn't mean to offend you in any way! I do realize now that my choice of words was bad - and to make things worse - I misunderstood your question. What I meant was - if you are interested of finding out how aircraft works in a more in-depth way, these nat geo series I mentioned are really good! if not, then short answer is no - pitot tubes/air speed indicator are the only reliable indicators.

once again - my apologies

DeltaDev

I have been following the thread; very interesting. I have a few questions:

1. Is there likely to be a shortage of pilots in the next ten years or will supply likely always exceed demand?
2. Are pilots in US better paid than here?
3. Will PPL flying scratch the itch or are the big jets really that much more exciting to fly?

smurfjed

There is a shortage of EXPERIENCED pilots, not 200 hour pilots. A lot of the recruitment in countries like India and China was based around getting experienced pilots while their own nationals trained.

In the beginning they are paid less than a McDonalds worker, about $18-$20 per flight hour for some commuters, flag carriers. They used to end up with great salaries at the majors, but these are rapidly being eroded by bankruptcy etc.

Depends on the person, some will be happy to have their lifestyle defined by their job, and then fly for fun. Some want to fly regardless of how it impacts their lifestyle.

smurfjed

crazygeryy

what are the good things, the perks, the advantage s of being a commercial pilot?

smurfjed

Good salaries, travel to exotic locations, great travel benefits, good time off..... and you get to fly :)

Oh yea, you also get to buy a big watch

smurfjed

DeltaDev

I remember a few years ago (2005 I think) a FR flight into Derry landed at Shackleton Barracks instead of City of Derry airport.Exactly how big a boo-boo was that and is it likely the pilots are still flying commercially??

IngazZagni

DeltaDev wrote: »

I remember a few years ago (2005 I think) a FR flight into Derry landed at Shackleton Barracks instead of City of Derry airport.Exactly how big a boo-boo was that and is it likely the pilots are still flying commercially??

That was on an Eirjet A320 which was wet leased to Ryanair. The company is bust now so if they are flying it's with a different company and I'd hazard a guess that they wouldn't be with FR either! It is a pretty big boo boo alright. Some airports like Derry have military airfields close by but you should be aware of these threats before making the approach and therefore be double checking that it isn't indeed that close by military field.

hidinginthebush

IngazZagni wrote: »

That was on an Eirjet A320 which was wet leased to Ryanair. The company is bust now so if they are flying it's with a different company and I'd hazard a guess that they wouldn't be with FR either! It is a pretty big boo boo alright. Some airports like Derry have military airfields close by but you should be aware of these threats before making the approach and therefore be double checking that it isn't indeed that close by military field.

Would ATC not have told them on approach that they're flying to the wrong runway, or do the pilots not have some sort of check to ensure they're landing in the right place? It can't be as simple as "ah we're near the airport, there's a runway, we're cleared to land so lets go"?

LeftBase

hidinginthebush wrote: »

IngazZagni wrote: »

Would ATC not have told them on approach that they're flying to the wrong runway, or do the pilots not have some sort of check to ensure they're landing in the right place? It can't be as simple as "ah we're near the airport, there's a runway, we're cleared to land so lets go"?

Anyone who have flown out of Weston may have heard the controller vectoring IFR traffic that has lined up with Baldonnel's runway by accident when they transition to VFR. I've heard it a couple of times.

A320

Can somebody tell me the name of the STAR into lanzarote for Runway 03 where you come down east of the Airfield(i think),maybe over it and turn over the sea for finals???

Bearcat

Coming in from the north east it will be a terto arrival which liases with the actual instrument approach for the the runway. The approach from memory is a tear drop entry to join the localizer but 9 times out of 10 it will be radar vectors to final or make your own arrangements. Doing the tear drop has you close to terrain whereas doing the right down wind has you over the sea.

Hope this helps.

A320

Cheers bearcat

smurfjed

Bearcat is that from the AIP or ??

Its a lot more colourful than my Jeppesen page

Its also interesting as it shows the SLP at Terto (70 nms) where Jeppesen has it at 62 nms.

smurfjed

smurfjed

Jayteecork..... there are some things that will always remain secret :)

smurfjed

Shamrock231

smurfjed wrote: »

Bearcat is that from the AIP or ??

Its a lot more colourful than my Jeppesen page

It's a LIDO chart, by Lufthansa Systems.

dman15333

For the medical for an airliner pilot, is there any height restrictions, and weight restrictions?

LeftBase

dman15333 wrote: »

For the medical for an airliner pilot, is there any height restrictions, and weight restrictions?

As far as I know it's more about BMI up to certain point. Obviously being 3ft or 9ft tall would be a problem. If you are classed obese you will fail.

globemaster1986

BMI must be below 35! Above that you may not get a class one, a battery of tests becomes necessary, cardiology etc.

pclancy

Ok a couple of complaints about the naughtiness from the general readership so Gentlemen please keep it clean

Lustrum

For those of you flying "heavy" aircraft, do you get a feeling in the cockpit of the size of what's behind you? The only thing I can equate it to is having a full boot in the car where it feels a bit heavier. If you're flying a 747, does it feel different up the front or from your point of view, are you just flying another airplane?

mikemac1

You're fairly experienced, done a route lots of times, we'll say Shannon to Gatwick and back again

The bosses says new roster, you do Shannon to Newcastle and you start tomorrow! You've never been to Newcastle, don't know it, no experience.

Do they match you up with a pilot who has done this airport before?
Or is it expected you'll be able to deal with new airports with little warning? Is there a simulator you can try?

Is it your responsibility to find out special info, we'll imagine mountains on approach or an RAF base nearby? Or is it the companies responsibility to brief you and you say I won't do it until you give me info and training?

Bearcat

airports are graded in respect to the difficulty factor. Change on roster to NCL wouldnt change anything. Change to DBV, AGP, LZE, AGD may require a internet briefing with some airlines. Likewise the experience factor is mitigating and you wont find newly promoted capts heading off to challenging destinations without some experience under their belts.

Some destinations/en route alts require simulator training....maderia come to mind....BGSF also.

CAA/IAA dictate the pace re what is required re briefings etc for tricky places.

just my 2c

View Profile

mikemac1 wrote: »

Do they match you up with a pilot who has done this airport before?
Or is it expected you'll be able to deal with new airports with little warning? Is there a simulator you can try?

Is it your responsibility to find out special info, we'll imagine mountains on approach or an RAF base nearby? Or is it the companies responsibility to brief you and you say I won't do it until you give me info and training?

No.

As a professional commercial pilot you are expected to be able to land at any airport.

Airlines generally have a briefing booklet describing operations at the airport and any unusual procedures. It is up to the pilot to read the briefing and understand it. This can generally be done in the cruise taking no more than 15 minutes.
More challenging airports or airports with complicated approaches require more study time and possibly even simulator time to qualify you to land there.

These airports are few and far between however, i.e. Innsbruck, old Kai Tak etc.