So far north that Runway 11 actually points north of due east? Lol Canada.

Have you had any delays related to FAA staffing issues yet?

Not yet, but I just heard that there are ATC delays for New York. I'm getting ready to commute up there in a couple of hours, so I might find out more.

The company, however, is being affected. We have a new aircraft, the Airbus 220, that was set to begin service right around now, but there's no one working in the FAA offices to put the finishing touches on the necessary approvals. So all of the pilots that have been trained for that aircraft over the past few months will sit around not flying and collecting pay. And, of course, this creates headaches for the marketing guys who decide on our route structure.

Considering you’ve stayed in hotels a lot, have you ever encountered bedbugs? Or perhaps a bedbug infestation in one of the planes?

More generally, have you ever checked into your hotel room after flying and found it to be unacceptable sanitarily?

I must live a charmed life because that has never happened to me. When I was flying at a regional carrier, we stayed in the lower tier hotels and, while they weren't as nice as the Hyatts, Sheratons, etc. that I'm accustomed to now, they were fine.

I've never had a run in with bed bugs either...never even seen a bed bug. I know they exist but, for me, they're still somewhat mythical, like yeti or chupacabra.

Is there a temperature where the fuel could start to gel up? Or once the engines are running, they give off so much heat this could never occur.

Do aircraft have windshield fluid sprayers, like on cars?

My guess: no, for a few reasons:

• Going too fast to be effective, the fluid wouldn't stay on the windshield
• Flying above the level of bugs etc for the most part
• Windshield so large that bug splatters wouldn't make a difference in pilot's ability to see

Although they do have wiper blades, for the periods of going through the level where it's actually raining, right?

I'm not a pilot at all and I haven't even pretended with Microsoft Flight Simulator 2018 or whatever, but I'm guessing the wipers are more for when taxiing. when you're flying through rain 1) you're going fast enough that the wind pretty much takes care of it and 2) you can fly on instruments only anyway so you don't really need to see that much.

Any insight on why a Cessna breaks up in mid-air?

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2019...ome-killing-5/

I wanted to share this one. Not sure if it was posted, but it's pretty mind-blowing (and only 6 minutes).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aQ2E0mlRQI

It never occurred to me that planes over the ocean have no communication. Granted, I understand there is no radar, but is there any other thing?

Also, the way points seem pretty brilliant, though I have no way of wrapping my head around how those really work. Can you give some insight into all of this?

I surmised as much when on one of my rare stays at Caesars Palace I saw a flight crew checking in.

Of course, when I was checking out and everyone around me was getting their stays comped, I really felt like lower crust.

[I'm on a layover in San Jose, California right now (New Orleans tomorrow night; Santo Domingo the next night) and I'm going to catch up on this thread...]

The fuel we use, Jet A, does have a freezing point and it's about -40° (F or C? Doesn't matter... They're the same), I've never known of any problems with fuel freezing. Seems odd when you consider that the outside air temperature up at altitude can be much lower. Just recently, I recall seeing an air temperature of -56°. There are a couple of reasons for this. The wing itself actually experiences some heating due to aerodynamic friction and never really gets as cold as the ambient static air temperature. In fact, we actually reference TAT (Total Air Temperature) in flight to determine when to turn on the engine anti-ice while flying in clouds or precipitation. TAT will always be greater than SAT (Static Air Temperature) in flight.

Additionally, most planes have some form of fuel/oil great exchangers. Fuel cools down oil and oil warms up the fuel.

I suppose there could be an issue during a long overnight with temps like they were a week ago in Minnesota, but I haven't heard any stories of fuel freezing.

The only plane I've ever flown that had windshield fluid was the Boeing 727, and by the time I got on that plane (2000) they had stopped using it. I heard from pilots who used it that it would make the cockpit smell of oranges, so who knows what they were spraying. I'm not sure why it was discontinued, perhaps because it wasn't effective. It wasn't for the purpose of cleaning the windshield; it was for more effective rain removal and improving visibility.

All of our planes have windshield wipers and they usually have two speeds. The high speed is very annoying to use and we only use it for a short period (if needed) on takeoff and landing. If used for takeoff, the non-flying pilot will turn them off after becoming airborne. For landing, I'll call for them only during the last 200' or so of descent because of the annoyance. But they do make a big difference in forward visibility during heavy rain.

The low speed is useful during taxi, just to clear accumulated rain. In very light rain, I won't use wipers at all. As long as I can make out the centerline, I don't need them.

You're right about when we're in cruise flight. We never use the wipers except on takeoff and landing and, even then, it's for as short a duration as needed.

I would only have idle speculation. Can we rule out foul play (a bomb on board, for example)? If it's just a matter of the plane disintegrating, it would have to be due to either (1) the pilot overstressing the aircraft structure (excessive speed and/or g forces) or simple (2) structural failure due to metal fatigue on an old plane. It could also be some combinination of the two.

This takes me back. I few those North Atlantic Tracks for seven years and I'm going back to the 767 in May, so I'll get to make some more crossings. It's true that as we "coast out" we lose radar contact. At this point, we go by position reports that include an estimate for the next waypoint on the track. The waypoints are almost always on the multiples of 10° longitude; thus we have points at 50W, 40W, 30W and 20W. After 20 West, we come back into radar contact with Shanwick Oceanic control.

At each point, we make a position report. In the old days of ocean crossings, these reports were accomplished using HF radios which don't have the line-of-sight limitations of VHF. Unfortunately, HF is also full of static and subject to atmospheric interference. Luckily, with the advent of satellite communications, most modern aircraft are able to make position reports automatically, with HF still there as a backup. One of the things we do as we coast out is establish HF comm with Gander (or Shanwick if flying west) and get a SELCAL check. Every plane capable of ocean crossing has a unique four character alphabetic identifier (26^4, or 456,976 combinations) which acts as their "phone number." It's always somewhere on the front panel along with the airplane's registration number. Thus, I might make this call: "Gander, Delta 201 for SELCAL check, Alpha Kilo Yankee Sierra." That controller enters our code, a chime rings in our cockpit along with a blue light on the comm panel, and I reply "Good SELCAL check." And now we're done with radios while we cross. If Gander needs to talk to us later, they will ring us up and we will then go to our HF radio to answer them. This relieves us of monitoring that annoyingly static-filled frequency all the way across the ocean (as they used to once do).

By the way, since we're not in radar contact, it's important that we arrive at each fix on time, or at least within two minutes of our estimate. If we're more than two minutes off, that will constitute a "gross navigational error" and nobody wants that on their permanent record! So, we watch each fix and if we see that we're going to vary from our estimate (perhaps winds have changed from the forecast), we call on HF with a revised estimate.

Do you think the British Airlines pilot going just below the sound barrier had a "gross navigational error?" I would guess there are checks to ensure everyone is safe (and presumably still employed) coming in 30+ minutes early. It also makes me wonder what would have happened if that plane actually cracked the sound barrier. I'd guess the plane would be okay after breaking, but I'd imagine the flight was bumpy as hell the whole time they were edging.

Do the way points over mid-America exists because there is nothing but cows and mountains for 1500 miles between Omaha and LA? Do the smaller airports, the ones that serve the farm sprayers and hobbyists, for example, ever talk to the major flights, or are you mostly restricted to talking to larger airports? What happens over the Rockies?

So many questions...

When Occasional Cortex gets her Green Deal through and fossil fuels become obsolete in a couple decades, what will happen to air travel? Will there be a day when rail gun technology shots passenger vehicles into the air and pilots land these gliders? What are airlines doing in anticipation of these changes?

That was a very misleading statement when they said he was traveling at a speed close to the speed of sound. His ground speed was close to what the speed of sound is through the air at sea level, but you can rest assured that he was traveling at a normal cruise speed for that type of aircraft. He was nowhere near going supersonic. Also, he arrived 30+ minutes before the normal schedule for that flight, also due to abnormally high jetstream winds pushing him along. I'm sure his estimates for each reporting point along the way was fine...no gross navigational error just because the fixes were clicking by like fenceposts.

The VOR, which has long been the navigational workhorse, is a ground installation which is used to define airways. The country is blanketed with these facilities and there are plenty of them in rural America. The waypoints historically existed at airway intersections, or sometimes just as fixes used for position reports or for reference in arrivals or departures.

With the advent of area navigation and GPS, virtual airways and fixes (waypoints) have been defined to increase the efficient use of the airspace. When you ask about smaller airports "talking" to flights, the communications take place with aircraft departing or arriving at that airport. We don't randomly communicate with airports as we fly over them.

What happens over the Rockies? Not exactly sure what you're asking here. Other than the phenomenon of mountain waves (occasional upper level atmospheric disturbances), there is not much difference. We do, however, have to keep in mind the quickest route to lower elevations in case of a loss of pressurization.

You should ask President Drumpf. I'm sure no one knows more about aviation and the future of the airlines than him.

I don't have any insight on this.

If the entire plane was going just below the sound barrier the airflow over most surfaces would be exceeding the sound barrier.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Mach_number

If the plane could somehow power itself to those speeds without losing control or breaking apart there would be significant drag. Assuming the fuel tanks were filled just enough to reach the destination at subsonic speeds (+ a reasonable safety margin) you would run out of fuel at near sonic speeds.

Leaving LaGuardia the other day there were heavy winds and a long line of planes waiting to leave. Shortly after we pushed back the pilots told us there was a ground stop at our destination and our estimated time for being allowed to leave was well after the limit of the crews duty time. We waited half an hour before calling it and returning to the gate to get a new crew.

It made me wonder if air traffic control gives any consideration to individual factors like duty limits. Like if the ground stop was lifted and we just had a few minutes to take off - would they have put us in front of other planes waiting? Are there other cases where they might rearrange planes or is it mostly just the order you ask for permissions?

A similar sort of situation happened a bit ago where we had to wait at the gate because of a backlog at the de-icing stations. Then when it was ready for us there were planes behind us that we had to wait for. I assume managing any sense of strict ‘fairness’ is impossible, but was still curious about any considerations pilots might get in these situations.

I have seen planes moved forward in line because of an impending "wheels up" time, which is an ATC constraint. But I don't think ATC would care about pilot duty limits, though they might expedite a flight if the crew makes their case.

The company, otoh, might juggle their own flights because of duty limit considerations. If we have a bunch of flights heading to the de-ice pad, it's quite possible that company operations will set the order and priority of the flights. At many airports, de-icing is a company operation and ATC is not involved except to clear you to and from the pad.

In your case, the 30 minute delay in actually having the flight return to the gate could be a combination of (a) the company working to expedite the flight before giving up and (b) an inability of ATC to get you back to the gate immediately due to confessing on the taxiways.

Thanks, that makes sense.

I think it made sense to wait and see if we could take off because I think they’d already figured out the relief crew was going to be from an inbound flight coming in that was still about an hour out. Might as well wait and see what happens?

On an unrelated note the new LGA terminal is really nice. I’ve always enjoyed flying out of LGA because I find the Air Canada agents there super nice and accommodating. The fact that it’s now a modern terminal with space and restaurants is some nice icing on the cake.

I just re-read this post of mine and noticed that autocorrect has struck again. This was supposed to be "due to congestion on the taxiways."

Confession has no place in aviation.