Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general
I wasn't even aware of OOT until someone recently suggested I start this thread here. (I had posted a question about Vegas on B&M).
I have been flying since 1977 and have accumulated a little over 15,000 hours of flying time. Besides an Airline Transport Pilot license, I also have a CFI (Certificated Flight Instructor), and Flight Engineer license (not much use to me now since 727s no longer fly passengers in the U.S.).
Through the 80s I was strictly a light airplane pilot, accumulating hours wherever I could: Saturday junkets to Atlantic City in a twin engine Piper Seneca; flight instructing; flying a politician around Virginia; flying HAZMAT out of Dulles airport (Stinger rocket motors for the army).
I've had ownership (or part ownership) in 3 different airplanes: Piper Cherokee 180; Grumman Yankee; and Piper Turbo Arrow. I lived in Hawaii for 2 years and flew to all the islands out there, renting aircraft from the Hickam Aero Club. I also spent 3 months in Japan and flew with the Yokota Aero Club. At that time I was a computer programmer and engineering manager providing on-site support to the military (CINCPACAF, and PACFLT in Hawaii; 5th Air Force in Japan).
In early 90s I finally decided to fly full time and took about a $65k pay cut to go fly for a regional airline, Atlantic Coast Airlines, out of Dulles airport in Virginia. I flew the Jetstream 32 (19 seat turboprop), the Jetstream 41 (29 seat turboprop) and the Canadair Regional Jet (50 seat jet) while at ACA. I also did simulator instruction, line checks, and gave new hires their Initial Operating Experience (IOE) while there.
I got hired by a major airline in 2000 and 'flew sideways' for about 6 months (flight engineer on the Boeing 727) before moving to the McDonnell Douglas MD-88, configured with 142 seats. In early 2007 I moved to the Boeing 767-300ER (the ER stands for Extended Range...it carries more fuel than the standard model) and began flying international routes. Most of those have been to Europe, but I've also been to Africa and South America.
My older brother flies for the same company, on the same airplane, and at the same base as me. We've actually had 2 flights together (Amsterdam and Nice).
I love the job, but the profession sure ain't what it used to be. Now that I finally made it to a major airline (the "Bigs") after 20+ years of building time, pay has been slashed at most airlines and we've lost our pensions. At 54 years of age, I am pulling down about $110k. I say "about" because we are paid by the hour -- it's not a salary.
I do like the fact that the job affords me a great deal of leisure time. This month I was flying on the 1st and 2nd (completing a 3 day trip to Nice) then had a day off and flew a 3 day trip to Moscow (Nov 4-6), followed by my current trip to Sao Paulo (Nov 7-10). After that, I'm off until Nov 25th when I fly a 3 day trip to Vegas, my first domestic trip in over 2 years. That's 14 days off...pretty nice.
I also like the fact that I never dread going to work. I couldn't say that in my previous life as a Systems Engineer. The worst part about my job now is that I live in D.C. area but fly out of JFK in NY. That means that I have to go hop a flight to NY to get to work. Commuting is a fact of life for many airline pilots; very few of our NY based pilots actually live in the NY area.
Anyway, that's a basic intro and I'd be glad to try to clear up any questions/misconceptions about flying in general (either GA or Airline flying) or day-to-day aspects of the job.
BTW, let me say that when it comes to PAs to the passengers I absolutely hate the hackneyed phrase that so many pilots and flight attendants use: "Now sit back, relax, and enjoy the flight." So trite and to me it almost sounds like a cruel taunt.
Can't remember if this has been talked about. How far from the airport to flights "turn around" to go the direction they really want to?
Details: You've mentioned that planes always take off into the wind. I live about 18 mi WNW of DEN; when I see flights go over the neighborhood, they continue in a more-or-less westerly direction until they're out of sight.
So, I'm assuming the eastbound flights have taken off to the west, and have already arced around (or these flights took off east, and turn
18 miles is a pretty good distance from the airport and by the time you see any planes, they're most likely heading in the direction of their route of flight.
New York is kind of special in this regard because of three major airports dividing the airspace (LGA, JFK, EWR), as well as Teterboro and White Plains. There are departure and arrival corridors for each of these airports and we often go well out of our way around the airspace of one of the other airports. For example, if I'm flying JFK-LAS and departing Runway 22R, it would be nice to just takeoff and turn 50 degrees to the right and get heading westbound. Instead, we make a left hand 180 degree turn and fly out Long Island to the east before being turned westbound and passing over White Plains.
I recall the few times I flew LAX-BOS, as we taxied out, I could see a sign saying something like * No turning before the coast* or something like that. Probably noise mitigation for coastal communities.
OTOH, taking off from BOS or PVD, I notice we would begin the turn very soon after getting airborne.
Probably varies by location.
Definitely true about LAX and they use a westbound pattern over 90% of the time, so we take off and head over the ocean before making a lefthand turn back to the east. Nice view of Catalina Island. If flying the red eye, it's not uncommon to be cleared direct to Wilkes Barre PA (a feeder fix into JFK) once we contact LA Center.
More than once I've taken off out of Las Vegas heading southwest on 19L or 19R and instead of turning the ~140 degrees left to head back ENE we went the ~220 degrees to the right. Why the longer turn?
I don't know if I've ever taken off from the 19s. Most of the time, we takeoff on 25R or 1R. But it wouldn't surprise me that they turn you to the right (the long way around) in order to stay clear of the arrival flow into 25L.
Departing from 25R, we usually get one of two departures: the CWBOY or the TRAILR. The CWBOY departure has us turn right with a great view of the strip off the righthand side of the plane. The TRAILR is a left turn out with a much more distant view of the strip from the left side of the plane.
the **** happened here.
people are saying this model has a common issue with ice and it probably froze the wings. but specialists also say that it's not that common...
When I saw how he spun down like that and then hearing there was severe icing in the forecast, IMO this crash was most likely due to icing.
The wings have de-icing boots on the leading edge which is basically a strip of rubber that inflates with air to push the accumulating ice off, otherwise it disrupts the flow of air which is needed for lift, so this looks like either the pilots didn't pick up the weather properly, forgot about the icing or maybe the boots didn't work. I think this will likely end up being pilot error.
the **** happened here.
people are saying this model has a common issue with ice and it probably froze the wings. but specialists also say that it's not that common...
When I saw how he spun down like that and then hearing there was severe icing in the forecast, IMO this crash was most likely due to icing.
The wings have de-icing boots on the leading edge which is basically a strip of rubber that inflates with air to push the accumulating ice off, otherwise it disrupts the flow of air which is needed for lift, so this looks like either the pilots didn't pick up the weather properly, forgot about the icing or maybe the boots didn't work. I think this will likel
I'm impressed that you could deduce all of that from this short (and distant) video. I am loath to suggest a reason or even a probable cause based on what I see. This looks like a flat spin and while icing can certainly be a factor in a stall/spin incident, it's certainly not the only way to stall.
Depending on the aircraft type, a fully developed spin could be unrecoverable. I used to own a Grumman Yankee (AA-1B) which had a placard in the cockpit that said SPINS PROHIBITED. This was due to the fuel tank design which was essentially a long tube running the full span of each wing. Upon entering a spin, the fuel in the tank will rush to the wingtips (the "dumbbell effect"). After about two turns in the spin, it is unrecoverable.
I never took my chances with spins in that plane, though I used to routinely do barrel rolls in it.
While it is too early to determine with any certainty what caused a devastating airplane crash in Brazil last week, air disaster experts say the incident bears similarity to a landmark crash 30 years ago that triggered major safety reforms.
Friday’s Voepass 2283 flight from Cascavel, near Brazil’s border with Paraguay, to Guarulhos in São Paulo state, crashed after flying through an area where “severe icing” was forecast between 12,000 and 21,000 feet, according to a publicly available alert to pilots.
The flight was cruising at 17,000 feet, according to data from FlightAware, when the pilots appeared to lose control.
The wreckage of an airplane that crashed with 61 people on board in Vinhedo, Sao Paulo State, Brazil, on August 10, 2024. An airplane carrying 57 passengers and four crew crashed on August 9 in Brazil's Sao Paulo state, killing everyone on board, the airline said. The aircraft, an ATR 72-500 operated by Voepass airline, was traveling from Cascavel in southern Parana state to Sao Paulo's Guarulhos international airport when it crashed in the city of Vinhedo.
Related article
Girl, 3, and boy, 4, confirmed dead in Brazilian plane crash as rescuers retrieve bodies
At least two experts CNN spoke to suggest that ice build-up on the plane may have triggered last week’s catastrophic series of events. “All the preliminary signals point toward an icing event,” said former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board Peter Goelz, who reviewed early flight tracking data.
Numerous videos posted on social media show the turboprop ATR 72 in an apparent flat spin as it spiraled toward the ground with no visible forward movement. All 62 passengers and the crew were killed when the plane crashed near Vinhedo, making it 2024’s deadliest crash of a commercial airliner.
In-flight icing can “distort the flow of air over the wing and adversely affect handling qualities,” according to Federal Aviation Administration documents, triggering an airplane to “roll or pitch uncontrollably, and recovery may be impossible.”
“Icing is perhaps the leading theory,” said former NTSB co-chair Bruce Landsberg. “As we progress through the investigation, things will start to solidify.”
A crash in 1994
The French-Italian ATR 72 has “checkered record” Goelz said. On October 31, 1994, an ATR 72 crashed in Roselawn, Indiana; the American Eagle flight 4184 had encountered severe, in-flight icing from freezing drizzle.
All 68 people on board were killed.
Significant testing followed that crash, and the Federal Aviation Administration mandated a modification to the deicing system on the front edge of ATR 72 wings as well as more training for pilots on severe ice encounters.
Today, and in the light of the Voepass incident, Goelz says, “I think the question of whether this plane is safe in icing is worth a serious revisit.”
what is known so far
Reading a book by a space-shuttle era astronaut about his experiences. Of course, he talked about the Columbia tragedy.
Any idea how much heat stress is put on the plane descending from the relatively thinner flight atmosphere down to landing?
Reading a book by a space-shuttle era astronaut about his experiences. Of course, he talked about the Columbia tragedy.
Any idea how much heat stress is put on the plane descending from the relatively thinner flight atmosphere down to landing?
These things are radically different orders of magnitude: a space shuttle travels at something in the order of 25,000 km/h, while a plane travels at something in the order of 800km/h.
Of course they are. Hence the question.
There really isn't any heat stress put in an airplane. The higher up in the air it goes, the colder it gets out side (and the air is also less dense). When the shuttle enters the earth's atmosphere, that's where the heat danger is because it's coming from a much higher speed (which is why space debris and small meteors burns up upon entering the earth's atmosphere). Descending and increasing the OAT 100 degrease probably puts stress on the airframe over time, but it's nothing like a space shuttle entering the earth's atmosphere.
Oh, sorry - the heat stress on a space shuttle or other space vehicle is mostly caused by compressing air: the thing is travelling many times faster than sound, and by definition, the air can't get out of the way fast enough (also, hence, the sonic boom). This causes the air to compress, making it hot.
You can see a much smaller version of this yourself when you blow up a bicycle or car tire - you can feel the nozzle get hot. In a space shuttle, the air is being compressed very tightly by the high speed of the vehicle (Mach 20? 30?) hence the very high temperatures.
In a plane, the wing is designed to have the air flow smoothly over it (to generate lift etc) and thus there isn't much compression of air. There'd be some heat on a plane's wing (ie, not literally zero) but not very much by comparison. The heat you do get from the plane flying through the air is more caused by friction (air sliding on the wing) rather than by compressing the air like a space shuttle or asteroid etc.
(this is just my layman's understanding of physics from high school, don't rely on this to build your own space shuttle or aircraft etc)
Oh, sorry - the heat stress on a space shuttle or other space vehicle is mostly caused by compressing air: the thing is travelling many times faster than sound, and by definition, the air can't get out of the way fast enough (also, hence, the sonic boom). This causes the air to compress, making it hot.
You can see a much smaller version of this yourself when you blow up a bicycle or car tire - you can feel the nozzle get hot. In a space shuttle, the air is being compressed very tightly by the hig
I like the bolded a lot. 😀
Also, I imagine the difference between the temps at flight altitude and ground level are much greater than any heat generated by the friction, for the reasons you mention. So the friction heat is not zero, but is negligible.
as the stones say
ideally PV=nRT is a gas gas gas
When going internationally, is the plane required to follow laws of the country over which it's flying?
For example, if a flight goes over Saudi Arabia or Iran, are they required to suspend alcohol service while in that airspace? (I'm sure there are other countries and examples, if this is a thing).
When going internationally, is the plane required to follow laws of the country over which it's flying?
For example, if a flight goes over Saudi Arabia or Iran, are they required to suspend alcohol service while in that airspace? (I'm sure there are other countries and examples, if this is a thing).
Forgive me for answering two questions in quick succession in this thread - I do happen to have some professional expertise on this particular issue, and it relates to poker.
More than ten years ago, when I led the security team at PokerStars responsible for enforcing rules limiting where people could play (prohibited from the US and some other jurisdictions), we looked into this when in-plane wifi was beginning. It was generally the case that the laws that applied were generally the laws that applied in the place that the aircraft was registered but that there are some nations which assert sovereignty over aircraft that fly over their airspace.
For more specific answers, you need a lawyer and more specific facts.
Not really a question for w0x0f, but this is probably a good thread to hijack:
I have, for the first time, attained Oneworld Emerald which is the highest-tier status and should open all the first class lounge doors. For what it's worth, I think that all this lounge, status, etc stuff is mostly dumb. The best game-changer type thing was just hitting oneworld ruby, which is super easy to get and gets you priority check-in everywhere (skipping the types of lines with 200 people and one custom service agent... perfect). Sapphire, which is like 5x harder to achieve, didn't really add anything meaningful for me and felt poor value.
Alas, I now have Emerald due to a lot of work travels for the next 11.5 months. Anyone got tips or experiences on the best lounges or whatever else I can use this for? To paint the picture, my home airport has a sauna that I can now access before a transatlantic flight. It's really silly and vain, but this is the type of stuff I guess I'm looking to do now that I have this card.
I have scattered travel plans that take me pretty much anywhere in the world I want to go. I'm moderately tempted to do a bit of a detour to wherever the craziest first-class pampering experience type thing exists, just to get the experience. I'm probably never going to hit this status again in my life, and I usually never travel luxuriously, so I'm not used to any of the "five star service" type stuff.
You might have better resources in the travel forum here or on Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/business...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/frequent...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/10xtrave...
and others
Terrible couple of days for the airline industry but with the Korean one how could the tower be firstly so unprepared for the emergency landing on the runway (I understand they can lay down some fire resistant chemical on the runway) and/or have fire emergency there on the spot and second if the plane had already been struck by birds and they had entered the engines why make them land on a runway with a concrete wall or embankment at the end of it?
Terrible couple of days for the airline industry but with the Korean one how could the tower be firstly so unprepared for the emergency landing on the runway (I understand they can lay down some fire resistant chemical on the runway) and/or have fire emergency there on the spot and second if the plane had already been struck by birds and they had entered the engines why make them land on a runway with a concrete wall or embankment at the end of it?
They can lay down foam if they were expecting a gear-in landing, but they weren't. No one knows why he landed with his gear up and without any flaps, nor why he immediately circled back to land only 3 minutes after the mayday call for a bird strike which appeared to affect only one engine while he was going around the first time. The plane wasn't configured properly (or at all) to land which is why he came in so fast. In a perfect world he should of climbed out to be re-established on an approach while he goes through his emergency checklists, which would of also instructed him to to lower the landing gear and flaps. He should of been able to do all that very easily while flying on only one engine.
The controllers have no say in what runway to land on in an emergency like that, all they can do is advise what runways are available, it's up to the pilot in command to decide on those things. The controller's job is to clear the field and steer traffic away from the emergency but this one all happened literally within 3 minutes which is the biggest question of the whole incident. It looks like the ILS system is what he initially ran into (it wasn't a wall designed to stop an airplane). Because I'm a betting man I would bet this is pilot error instead of a mechanical failure (the bird strike wasn't the cause of this accident, unless it took out both engines but it only appeared to take out #2 engine).
Clean configuration landing video (does not show the impact)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpdGTm5Z...
