https://www.buzzfeed.com/amberjamies...5r2#.pxzvMG4eR - service dog gave birth to 8 puppies right before a 2 hour flight. Had the dogs been born during flight, this could of turned out a lot differently.

Passed LOE last Thursday. Seven years and tens of thousands of dollars but I'm gonna be an airline pilot!

Congrats Wondercall!

Jammed / disabled controls is very rare, and usually "does not end well" :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight...abled_controls

Look up "737 rudder failure"

What's the biggest change in aviation since you stared this thread years ago?

https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unit...-way-gate.html

OP - have you ever denied boarding and would you have done the same in such a case?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/do...cid=spartandhp

W0X0F, I recall you saying that if pets/animals are being transported in the cargo area that you are given that information but that you do nothing differently in your operations of the plane. Is it possible that the cargo hold environment differs sufficiently enough from the cabin environment that something might lead to the death of an animal below deck that would not have happened if it were riding in the cabin?

There is a chance I might need to take an international flight in 2019 and I would be taking my dog with me but not if there is even a remote possibility that she could suffer a similar fate to the dog in the article. I know how many feel about ESA or SA animals on planes but if I go and I cannot buy the seat next to me to fly with her I would either do go that route or probably not fly.

What an amazing near decade it has been for this thread, it took me a few months to read it and definitely one of my favorites on the interwebs. It's even rekindled thoughts from 20+ years ago on getting my PPL. Thanks!!

I find it hilarious that this is such a valid (great!) question.

It really is a very good question, and there have been a lot of changes. The biggest? Probably the level of automation, which presents itself in many different areas. I'm not talking about flight automation (the autopilot); believe it or not, that hasn't changed much since the 70s. But there have been great advances in navigation and communications.

When I took my first lesson back in 1977, ADF (automatic direction finder) equipment was a standard instrument in an IFR airplane. This piece of gear had a pointer which would show the direction to an NDB (non-directional beacon) which operated in the KHz spectrum. AM radio stations could also be dialed up and the big ones (like WMAL in the DC area, a 50,000 watt station at 630 KHz) could be tuned and tracked from over 100 miles away.

Planes today still have ADF capability, but it's going the way of the dodo. We don't even practice NDB approaches in the sim anymore and that used to be a rite of passage for instrument students because of the inherent problems that arise from homing to a station rather than tracking to a station. (Here's a link to video about this issue, if you're interested.)

VOR was the gold standard when I started flying, although LORAN was making its way into GA flying. I installed a Marine LORAN in my Grumman Yankee (N6107L, which now apparently lives in Georgia according to FAA records). This wasn't IFR certified, but it was pretty nice to have.

LORAN lost the battle to the much more accurate GPS, which was only a pipe dream when I started flying. The accuracy of GPS allows for increased flight volume in the approach environment, flying precise arrival procedures, and across the North Atlantic Track System (NATS).

(They use to have several flight tracks across the Atlantic, separated by 60 miles, but now they've cut that separation in half. Of course, GPS is much more accurate than 30 miles, but the separation of tracks has more to do with providing adequate airspace in case of weather avoidance or emergencies requiring a departure from the track. I'm getting off on a tangent...)

TCAS only came to the cockpit in the early 90s and, oddly, it was initially resisted my some pilots for reasons I can't explain. Now, if I get a plane with the TCAS deferred, I consider it a very real reduction in the safety level of the flight. It's really great in the approach environment, where aircraft separation is reduced and volume of aircraft increases. It's a great tool for providing in-trail separation when cleared for a visual approach.

VHF communications haven't changed at all since I started flying, but now we have additional tools in the comm department. Perhaps foremost among these is CPDCL, Controller-Pilot Data Link Communications, which provides a means to obtain clearances via the ACARS without using voice communications. CPDLC first appeared in overwater flights, on the NATS (trans-Atlantic) and WATRS (offshore U.S. and Caribbean) routes, when out of reach of VHF communications. Now, we use it a little bit in domestic flying. On the 737, I receive all of my initial route clearances by logging into CPDLC and the clearance is sent directly to us.

We also have SATCOM on all of our international planes, and that makes it possible to make a phone call to anywhere in the world from the airplane. On my TOE (Trans Oceanic Experience), when I first started on the 767, the check airman let me phone home from somewhere near Iceland at 38,000'. "Can you hear me now?"

One advance that I'm really enjoying is the HUD on the 737, which is only on the Captain's side. I'm not sure if HUDs were around in 1977, but if they were, it was only on military planes. What a great device. It makes it possible to hand fly the plane to a landing in visibility of less than 1/8 mile and ceilings of 50'.

Lastly, the automation with respect to charts is fairly recent and seems long overdue to this humble airman. Just a few years ago, it was common to walk into the pilot lounge before a flight and see pilots all over the place updating their paper airport charts with the bi-weekly update we received from Jeppesen. This was no small task, especially when I was on the 767 and had charts covering literally the entire world (using the classic meaning of the word). An update would come in a plain manila envelope and contain anywhere from a dozen to over a hundred gossamer-thin paper charts (approx 5"x8"). Great care had to be taken to follow the replacement guide that came with every update and replace an old chart, sometimes simply delete old charts, and sometimes add new charts. Easy to screw it up and that's why we always cross-checked the date of each chart when using them for a briefing in the cockpit.

We now have iPads which contain all of the charts and company manuals, along with built-in update capability so that we are always current. It makes everything so much nicer, and now I don't have to carry a flight bag with 40 lbs of airport and navigation charts, as well as company manuals. Next time you fly, take note of the fact that not many pilots still lug the classic flight kit along. Now, most guys have their roll-aboard along with a smaller bag for their iPad, headset and other incidentals.

So a lot has changed, but basic aerodynamics remain the same: pull back, houses get smaller; push forward, houses get bigger.

Flight control malfunctions are among the most serious issues we could face, perhaps only rivaled by in-flight fires or smoke. It is extremely rare and I've never encountered such a problem. It is much more rare than once in 100,000 flights. A known flight control issue is enough to ground an entire aircraft type until the problem is resolved.

One of our first checks after engine start is to confirm free and correct operation of the flight controls, and it's an item on the taxi checklist. This is Aviation 101 and goes back to any pilot's very first flight.

Congratulations! What aircraft, base?

I'm not sure I would have had the balls to deny boarding based on what occurred, but I admire this guy making the decision to do so, and it was probably the right decision. My hesitation would have been based on the culture we live in where everyone seems to get a big settlement in a lawsuit.

Just two weeks ago, I had a case where the lead flight attendant wanted me to remove a passenger. This man, approximately mid-50s, boarded our full 737 in Las Vegas, went to his seat in row 23 and proceed to vomit over three seats. According to the FA, he made no attempt to use a sick sack or even make a motion to limit the area affected.

We were about 15 minutes from departure time. We called cabin service to come out and clean the area and then I went to talk to the man myself. My thought was to ascertain if he was either ill or drunk. If he was drunk, he's not going. The same is likely if he is ill, though that would require more detail and a discussion with our STAT-MD resource over the radio.

The man was very apologetic and said he had had two whiskeys at about 7 pm because of nervousness about the flight (it was now almost 11 pm). He seemed perfectly sober to me. The cleaners did a good job with the vomit, but of course other pax didn't want to be near him. And the FA still would like him off the plane.

I do have the authority to have him pulled off, but I also don't want to open the company up to any kind of lawsuit. So, I do what we're trained to do when faced with passenger related issues: widen the decision team. I talked to the gate agent and then I called my dispatcher to discuss the issue. I presented the event in a simple objective way, including my assessment of the individual. The consensus was that the man is sober and not a threat to safety the flight or likely to necessitate a diversion, so we decided he stays on.

The FA thanked me for taking her concerns seriously and treating it accordingly. She probably would have been happier if he had been removed, but she was ultimately satisfied that we addressed the issue.

Now, in the case you cited, I like the Captain's decision simply based on the actions of the two passengers, but I still would have at least discussed it with my dispatcher and a CRO (Conflict Resolution Officer) before pulling the trigger.


P.S. I can remember two times when I was the First Officer and we had someone removed. On the first one, 25 years ago, I can't even remember the issue, but I remember the Captain telling the man, who wouldn't get off the plane, that he could walk off himself, or be taken off in handcuffs. He still refused. Law enforcement ended up taking him off (though I don't think the cuffs were put on while he as on board, so I guess the guy had the last laugh).

In the other issue, I was on the 767 and we had pushed back for our flight to Europe. The flight attendant called the cockpit during our taxi out to tell us of two guys in the exit row who were refusing to acknowledge them and just generally being dicks (my words, not the FA's). Again, I can't remember all the details of the give-and-take, but the Captain decided to return to the gate to have them removed. Of course, at the gate and faced with being taken off the plane, they became very cooperative. But off they went.

I can understand your feeling on this issue. The only plane I've flown that had any control related to the cargo compartment was on the 767. There was a knob for cargo ventilation that had two positions, labelled VENT and NORM. I think the default position was NORM and part of my preflight was to make sure it was in that position. (The VENT position must have been there for use in an abnormal situation, when directed by the QRH, but I can't say for sure.) On more than one plane I got in the VENT and NORM labels had been written over with a Sharpie and now read CATS and DOGS.

On other planes, the cargo compartment receives the same air as the cabin, so the temperature should be in the same realm. However, in the cabin we get timely feedback from the pax and FAs if it gets uncomfortable. There is no feedback from the cargo compartment and no temperature gauge. So, although it should be roughly the same, if somehow the airflow to cargo was blocked, we have no way of knowing. Seems like chances are extremely high that it's safe (and that's backed up by the fact that thousands of animals make the trip without incident every year), but I understand your concern. Also, in the article you link, isn't it possible that the dog had a medical condition and that it wasn't the fault of the airline? I know we have people die on planes too.

I can't believe it's been so long myself. What amazes me is that I still get good questions.

Get that PPL. Go slip the surly bonds. I still love it every time I fly.

I used to work at a high tech motor company. We also made linear motion controls. I had an idea with one of the engineers (he was a pilot) to use those instead of hydraulics to control the control surfaces. Electronics are generally more reliable than hydraulics, and are much easier to make redundant.

We also had an idea to put motors on the wheels to spin the tires up when landing to lessen the shock when the aircraft impacts the runway at 150 kts. and also reverse the torque to brake the plane without brake pad wear.

Never went anywhere with it, oh well.

I may have posted this story already but I sat in the jump seat for a C-17 flight once and when the pilots did flight control sweeps after engine start I almost had a heart attack. Just imagine if you called out vr on takeoff and your copilot started throwing the flight controls around in every direction. In the second or two it took to realize this was one of those times where airplanes and helicopters have practical differences it felt like that. Still got a bit uncomfortable just reading your post.

Does El Paso have the necessary equipment for this plane to auto-land, and if not, how the hell did these pilots put this on the ground safely with a shattered windscreen?

wait wut

how often does this happen??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4xuntd9Zbw

The video posted by Hero Protagonist explains it nicely, and in a very amusing way. I've embedded the video below because it didn't seem to work in his post. (Note to Hero Protagonist: you only need the ID of the YouTube post between the YOUTUBE tags.)

Some things on the plane are essential and must be fixed or replaced before the next flight if they fail. Some items can be deferred because of redundancy. An example of this would be an engine-driven generator. We can dispatch with one of these inoperative since we can run the APU as a backup generator.

Then there are things which can be deferred because they are not absolutely essential for safety of flight. TCAS is one such item. Remember, TCAS was introduced in the early 90s. We managed to fly fine without TCAS for decades. It's very nice to have, but we don't want to cancel a flight because the TCAS fails.

Deferred items do have to be fixed at some point and there are categories for deferrals which specifies the time allowed to fix or replace the item. An "A" category item must be fixed within a specified time, usually one day, but it might be required to be fixed at the next maintenance station. Category B allows up to three days for the deferral. Category C allows up to 10 days.

The MEL (Minimum Equipment List) details what items are deferrable and for how long. Then there are Non-Airworthiness Items (NAI) also sometimes referred as NEF (Not Essential for Flight). Examples of these types would be armrests, cup holders, tray tables, etc. We write these up, but we can continue to fly with these items broken or missing.

E175 Phx

In that example you cite, was it a crucial detail that they were in the exit row? (presumably part of their dickishness included refusing to provide the verbal agreement to assist in an emergency)

Or would the above circumstance have played out the same way elsewhere on the plane?

I've been in the jumpseat of that plane several times. Seems like a nice plane, very modern. Enjoy the experience.

That was definitely a key issue and was probably the main reason it got elevated to the Captain.

I sat in the exit row once, listened attentively while the flight attendant explained our responsibilities, nodding once or twice, and at the end when she asked if I understood, responded with "Que?".

She was not amused.

I recommend not joking with flight crew.

I was flying into Iceand and noticed some frost or ice forming on the wing of the A321. Is this common or a sign of a problem with the anti-ice system?

https://ibb.co/bUR4N8
https://ibb.co/kmMtFT