Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general

05-25-2021 , 09:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FellaGaga-52
Any reputable UFO evidence in the industry?
[I just noticed that I missed this one from a few weeks ago.]

I'm not sure what you mean by reputable. There are certainly reputable people who have claimed UFO sightings and I have no reason to doubt their experience. But sighting a UFO just means you saw something in flight that you couldn't identify.

I had my own experience in the early 80's. I was out flying at night in the Manassas, Virginia area in my Cherokee 180. The area I was in was 10-15 miles south of Dulles airport. As I was flying back toward the Manassas airport to enter the pattern, I was faced with three very bright lights shining right at me. Concerned that this might be the landing lights of a large aircraft on arrival to Dulles, I maneuvered to the right. There was no change in the orientation of the lights; they still appeared to bearing down on me and heading directly at me.

I got low enough (1200' agl) that I figured I would be safe (arriving aircraft wouldn't get that low until about 4 miles from Dulles) and continued to Manassas. The lights never changed their appearance, though it did appear that the UFO was getting lower.

I began to realize that any large aircraft would have surely reached me by that time. Was it hovering? By the time I got to the landing pattern at Manassas, I began to piece it together. Quantico MCAS is only about 10-20 miles to the WSW of Manassas airport. I looked into it the next day and found that they do night exercises there and use extremely bright para-flares (magnesium, I think) that were amazingly bright even from 20 miles away. Those flares were slowly descending and gave the illusion, due to their relative geometry, of being the landing lights of a large aircraft.

This story is obviously not earthshaking, and I'm not trying to say that the recent UFO stories of experienced fighter pilots are so easily explained. But the term UFO is loaded. To many people the term implies extra-terrestrial origin, when it simply means the object has not been identified or explained. Humans have a rich history of looking to super-natural or extra-terrestrial explanations for things they can't explain (and I'm not just talking about UFOs). To date, no such explanations have been proven.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric_ca
As a pilot, how would you handle a situation like what happened over Belarus? Suppose you are nearing your destination, flying over another country when you are instructed to land, accompanied by a fighter jet. Who is your authority at that point? Does the country you are flying over get to dictate such commands?
I think the bolded part should answer your question. The fighter jet is the authority. Faced with that, I'm landing. Let the diplomats sort it out later.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by W0X0F
The fighter jet is the authority.
This reminds me of the time I was sailing with my nephew in Newport, RI. There was a CNG tanker coming in and we had to alter course to avoid it. I was just learning and said I thought we had the right of way. He agreed that we did but that the "law of gross tonnage" took precedent.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 10:11 AM
Re: your UFO story...yeah, but are you reputable?

No idea what caused me to think of this when waking up this morning. Is it possible for an aircraft to lose communication entirely? If so, how would that be handled?

Seems like you'd want to get down as soon as possible. At the same time, without communication with ATC, one couldn't necessarily safely get into the landing pattern, I imagine.

My guess is this is a academic question, that it never happens. Communications are probably right after engine power in terms of priority andd being redudant.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 10:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didace
This reminds me of the time I was sailing with my nephew in Newport, RI. There was a CNG tanker coming in and we had to alter course to avoid it. I was just learning and said I thought we had the right of way. He agreed that we did but that the "law of gross tonnage" took precedent.
Thanks for a rare, genuine LOL! I'll remember that one.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 10:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golddog
Re: your UFO story...yeah, but are you reputable?

No idea what caused me to think of this when waking up this morning. Is it possible for an aircraft to lose communication entirely? If so, how would that be handled?

Seems like you'd want to get down as soon as possible. At the same time, without communication with ATC, one couldn't necessarily safely get into the landing pattern, I imagine.

My guess is this is a academic question, that it never happens. Communications are probably right after engine power in terms of priority and being redundant.
Yes, it is possible but, as you correctly guessed, extremely unlikely. But we do have procedures to follow in such circumstances. Assuming we still have electrical power, we would set our transponder code to 7600, which lets every ATC facility know that we have no communications ability.

Beyond that, there are procedures outlined in the AIM (Aeronautical Information Manual, formerly known as the Airman's Information Manual).

You can click on the link above to see the entire discussion, but I'll excerpt a few here. Here is what you should do if you're in VFR conditions (aka VMC):

Quote:
If the failure occurs in VFR conditions, or if VFR conditions are encountered after the failure, each pilot must continue the flight under VFR and land as soon as practicable.
NOTE-

This procedure also applies when two‐way radio failure occurs while operating in Class A airspace. The primary objective of this provision in 14 CFR Section 91.185 is to preclude extended IFR operation by these aircraft within the ATC system. Pilots should recognize that operation under these conditions may unnecessarily as well as adversely affect other users of the airspace, since ATC may be required to reroute or delay other users in order to protect the failure aircraft. However, it is not intended that the requirement to “land as soon as practicable” be construed to mean “as soon as possible.” Pilots retain the prerogative of exercising their best judgment and are not required to land at an unauthorized airport, at an airport unsuitable for the type of aircraft flown, or to land only minutes short of their intended destination.

And this is what you should do if the failure occurs while in IFR conditions (aka IMC):

Quote:
If the failure occurs in IFR conditions, or if subparagraph 2 above cannot be complied with, each pilot must continue the flight according to the following:

Route
By the route assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
If being radar vectored, by the direct route from the point of radio failure to the fix, route, or airway specified in the vector clearance;
In the absence of an assigned route, by the route that ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance; or
In the absence of an assigned route or a route that ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance by the route filed in the flight plan.
Altitude. At the HIGHEST of the following altitudes or flight levels FOR THE ROUTE SEGMENT BEING FLOWN:
The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received;
The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in 14 CFR Section 91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.
NOTE-

The intent of the rule is that a pilot who has experienced two‐way radio failure should select the appropriate altitude for the particular route segment being flown and make the necessary altitude adjustments for subsequent route segments. If the pilot received an “expect further clearance” containing a higher altitude to expect at a specified time or fix, maintain the highest of the following altitudes until that time/fix:
(1)  the last assigned altitude; or
(2) the minimum altitude/flight level for IFR operations.
Upon reaching the time/fix specified, the pilot should commence climbing to the altitude advised to expect. If the radio failure occurs after the time/fix specified, the altitude to be expected is not applicable and the pilot should maintain an altitude consistent with 1 or 2 above. If the pilot receives an “expect further clearance” containing a lower altitude, the pilot should maintain the highest of 1 or 2 above until that time/fix specified in subparagraph (c) Leave clearance limit, below.

EXAMPLE-

A pilot experiencing two‐way radio failure at an assigned altitude of 7,000 feet is cleared along a direct route which will require a climb to a minimum IFR altitude of 9,000 feet, should climb to reach 9,000 feet at the time or place where it becomes necessary (see 14 CFR Section 91.177(b)). Later while proceeding along an airway with an MEA of 5,000 feet, the pilot would descend to 7,000 feet (the last assigned altitude), because that altitude is higher than the MEA.
A pilot experiencing two‐way radio failure while being progressively descended to lower altitudes to begin an approach is assigned 2,700 feet until crossing the VOR and then cleared for the approach. The MOCA along the airway is 2,700 feet and MEA is 4,000 feet. The aircraft is within 22 NM of the VOR. The pilot should remain at 2,700 feet until crossing the VOR because that altitude is the minimum IFR altitude for the route segment being flown.
The MEA between a and b:
5,000 feet. The MEA between b and c: 5,000 feet. The MEA between c and d: 11,000 feet. The MEA between d and e: 7,000 feet. A pilot had been cleared via a, b, c, d, to e. While flying between a and b the assigned altitude was 6,000 feet and the pilot was told to expect a clearance to 8,000 feet at b. Prior to receiving the higher altitude assignment, the pilot experienced two‐way failure. The pilot would maintain 6,000 to b, then climb to 8,000 feet (the altitude advised to expect). The pilot would maintain 8,000 feet, then climb to 11,000 at c, or prior to c if necessary to comply with an MCA at c. (14 CFR Section 91.177(b).) Upon reaching d, the pilot would descend to 8,000 feet (even though the MEA was 7,000 feet), as 8,000 was the highest of the altitude situations stated in the rule (14 CFR Section 91.185).
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 11:16 AM
So how do you get clearance from the tower when you have no comms? The tower has a light gun which they can aim at you to show a light, signifying various clearances. I've never had to use this in real life, but I've requested a demo from the tower, so I've seen it.


Here is a table showing the light signals and what they mean for various phases of flight: Light Signal Table.

(I can't seem to find the way to get the link from Imgur for embedding the graphic here in the post, so I've just put a link to the graphic I saved.)
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 11:55 AM
NORDO (No Radio) used to be a common issue in military aviation, and it's still emphasized in the procedures pretty heavily. IIRC, there were physical signs the pilots could give the tower to indicate that they were NORDO and request light-gun instructions. I don't remember what they were, exactly, but something along the lines of waggling your wings on the downwind, or some such.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 11:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by W0X0F
(1) Navigation
When I started, all navigation centered on the use of VOR (VHF Omni-Directional Range). VORs superseded the low-frquency radio range which my father used flying in the Navy, and before that there were actual visual beacons across the country for use by the airmail pilots. You'd fly towards one and the idea is that the next one would become visible allowing you to continue on your route.
I ran across an old visual beacon site near a relative's house in Georgia. Not only did they have the bright lights you describe, but they had these large concrete arrows on the ground that pointed the pilot towards the next station. Apparently you can still find these gigantic arrows in the ground in many places, especially out west although most of them are no longer visible from the air.

It is interesting how much is in common between sailing and flying in terms of navigation changes, LORAN was all the rage for a minute in sailing too, only to get completely replaced by GPS.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 01:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSoup4U
I ran across an old visual beacon site near a relative's house in Georgia. Not only did they have the bright lights you describe, but they had these large concrete arrows on the ground that pointed the pilot towards the next station. Apparently you can still find these gigantic arrows in the ground in many places, especially out west although most of them are no longer visible from the air.

It is interesting how much is in common between sailing and flying in terms of navigation changes, LORAN was all the rage for a minute in sailing too, only to get completely replaced by GPS.
Similar to the arrows, it was fairly common in the first decades of flying to have an arrow painted on a town's water tower or the roof of a prominent building that pointed the way to the local airport. I think they also included a number with the arrow to indicate distance in miles. This was back in the days of low, slow airplanes.

Regarding the light beacons, the airport at Harrisburg, PA had a display of old aerodrome equipment in the terminal and included one of these beacons. Pretty cool that you found one in its original location.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick
NORDO (No Radio) used to be a common issue in military aviation, and it's still emphasized in the procedures pretty heavily. IIRC, there were physical signs the pilots could give the tower to indicate that they were NORDO and request light-gun instructions. I don't remember what they were, exactly, but something along the lines of waggling your wings on the downwind, or some such.
I have the same recollection. The one time I actually saw the light gun was at Dulles airport when I was doing pattern work there in my old Cherokee 180. That was in the days when Dulles was still a ghost town and the controllers welcomed a GA plane with open arms, just to increase their traffic count and justify their jobs. I could go there and fly closed patterns between the north/south runways, turning downwind right over the tower. I asked them once to show me the light gun and they were very accommodating.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 01:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didace
This reminds me of the time I was sailing with my nephew in Newport, RI. There was a CNG tanker coming in and we had to alter course to avoid it. I was just learning and said I thought we had the right of way. He agreed that we did but that the "law of gross tonnage" took precedent.
This reminds me of "Here Lies John. He had the right of way."
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 02:21 PM
Thanks for the details, W0X0F. I like how they made it abundantly clear in the first cut that getting down isn't immediate, but as soon as is practicable.

I'm sure there are life-or-death emergencies that require getting down ASAP like Captain Sullenberger's bird strike though.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golddog
Thanks for the details, W0X0F. I like how they made it abundantly clear in the first cut that getting down isn't immediate, but as soon as is practicable.

I'm sure there are life-or-death emergencies that require getting down ASAP like Captain Sullenberger's bird strike though.
Definitely in Sully's case. That's way beyond a simple lost comms situation. The other big one calling for immediate landing is for smoke/fire on board. That is the classic "No Time" emergency.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 03:24 PM
I mentioned before as a frequent flyer I watch/read more than a healthy dose of air disasters. Smoke/fire on board reminds me of that south africa flight 295 over the indian ocean. What a nightmare for those people

How is retirement treating you
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 03:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick
NORDO (No Radio) used to be a common issue in military aviation, and it's still emphasized in the procedures pretty heavily. IIRC, there were physical signs the pilots could give the tower to indicate that they were NORDO and request light-gun instructions. I don't remember what they were, exactly, but something along the lines of waggling your wings on the downwind, or some such.
Pretty sure that is correct.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-25-2021 , 06:38 PM
Here (military flight training base) for NORDO military ac they'll enter the traffic pattern, proceed to initial (a point 2-3 miles back from the runway at circuit altitude) and rock their wings before breaking midfield for downwind.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
05-30-2021 , 10:58 AM
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
06-04-2021 , 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by W0X0F
Another reason is that when you are on approach, you are at a slower speed and the plane is more subject to the bumps. When we climb out, we accelerate to 250 kts (ATC permitting) for the climbout until reaching 10,000' and then continue accelerating. When in the approach phase, we will spend a good portion of that time at speeds below 200 kts and, once configured for landing, down to 130-150 kts.
Am I crazy or has it been said that higher speeds are worse for bumps? I am thinking of the speed bump analogy that explains why pilots slow the plane down when encountering turbulence at cruising altitudes.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
06-06-2021 , 12:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric_ca
Am I crazy or has it been said that higher speeds are worse for bumps? I am thinking of the speed bump analogy that explains why pilots slow the plane down when encountering turbulence at cruising altitudes.
Good catch Eric (although I should point out that the two choices you present are not mutually exclusive. Both could be true. ) Yes, when flying through turbulent air we often slow down for a slightly more comfortable ride. It's like driving a car on a washboard road. Slow speeds aren't necessarily comfortable, but high speeds can be bone-jarring.

What I was thinking when I answered that one is that you are in the approach phase for a longer time, due to vectors and slower speeds, and therefore exposed to the low-altitude bumps longer.

Especially at this time of year, there is often a top to the haze layer of anywhere from 4000 to 10,000 feet. You can see it when there are scattered, puffy cumulus clouds down low. They usually top out right at that level. Below those clouds, it's bumpier and on climbout (especially in GA planes) you'll notice that the ride smooths out once you climb above the cloud level.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
06-06-2021 , 12:46 PM
This is more of an airport operations question, but maybe you have some insight.


We had a long day with flight delays that ended up changing our flight from MSP-DEN-PRC on United to MSP-PHX on Delta and renting a car for the 90 mile drive to get home. We landed in PHX a little early at 10:15. The gate we were supposed to use still had an outbound aircraft at it so we had to wait a bit. No big deal, that is until we waited for over an hour before we moved. You could tell the pilot was a little frustrated when he gave updates. And of course we were frustrated because originally we should have been home by 8:30.


So the question - Delta has several gates at PHX. All the other gates were occupied by what I assume were planes in place for the next morning's flights. Could they not have moved one when they realized it was going to take so long before our gate became open?
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
06-06-2021 , 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didace
This is more of an airport operations question, but maybe you have some insight.


We had a long day with flight delays that ended up changing our flight from MSP-DEN-PRC on United to MSP-PHX on Delta and renting a car for the 90 mile drive to get home. We landed in PHX a little early at 10:15. The gate we were supposed to use still had an outbound aircraft at it so we had to wait a bit. No big deal, that is until we waited for over an hour before we moved. You could tell the pilot was a little frustrated when he gave updates. And of course we were frustrated because originally we should have been home by 8:30.


So the question - Delta has several gates at PHX. All the other gates were occupied by what I assume were planes in place for the next morning's flights. Could they not have moved one when they realized it was going to take so long before our gate became open?
A 90 mile drive home and you had hoped to be home by 8:30. From that, I'm going to deduce that your flight landed at PHX around 7:00 pm or a little earlier. At that time of day, many of the planes sitting at gates were likely on turns, i.e. they had arrived and were due to go back out within 1.5-2 hours from their arrival. In this case, it wouldn't be feasible to move them off the gate and then back on to it. They're probably getting ready to board their flights if they haven't already started doing that.

Even for planes that were actually done for the day, if there is no place to move them you're just out of luck. I've been into PHX many times but I don't know the ramp space situation, but maybe off-gate parking wasn't available.

The gate you were waiting for was almost certainly occupied by a flight on a maintenance delay. The vast majority of the time, that's the reason a gate isn't available when we arrive. At our bases, we have maintenance hangars and lots of available ramp space. But PHX is more limited and this can affect the gate choreography, especially if the flight arrives ahead of schedule.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
06-13-2021 , 07:23 PM
Is there a thrust reverser on a seaplane, or is there a water propeller coupled to the engine that allows them to reverse?

I observed several seaplanes depart the docks near Canada Place and the ones that had to back out throttled up while reversing. I didn't see anything like a thrust reverser deployed and I've never heard of such a thing for a prop plane. I know they didn't simply run the prop backward (I'm not aware of that being a thing anyway) because when they started moving forward they didn't have to bring the props to a stop and spin them up the other way. My working hypothesis is a prop in the water that is either 1) mechanically coupled to the engine (although the more I think of that the less feasible it sounds), or 2) driven by an electric motor that is powered by a generator that is coupled to the engine.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
06-13-2021 , 09:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by STinLA
Is there a thrust reverser on a seaplane, or is there a water propeller coupled to the engine that allows them to reverse?

I observed several seaplanes depart the docks near Canada Place and the ones that had to back out throttled up while reversing. I didn't see anything like a thrust reverser deployed and I've never heard of such a thing for a prop plane. I know they didn't simply run the prop backward (I'm not aware of that being a thing anyway) because when they started moving forward they didn't have to bring the props to a stop and spin them up the other way. My working hypothesis is a prop in the water that is either 1) mechanically coupled to the engine (although the more I think of that the less feasible it sounds), or 2) driven by an electric motor that is powered by a generator that is coupled to the engine.
This was nagging me and I believe I found the answer: reverse pitch propellers. "Reverse pitch, in a variable pitch propeller or constant speed propeller, refers to a blade pitch angle that has a negative value."

Pretty cool, although I wonder if there is some kind of lock that prevents engagement of reverse pitch during normal flight operations.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote
06-14-2021 , 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by STinLA
Is there a thrust reverser on a seaplane, or is there a water propeller coupled to the engine that allows them to reverse?

I observed several seaplanes depart the docks near Canada Place and the ones that had to back out throttled up while reversing. I didn't see anything like a thrust reverser deployed and I've never heard of such a thing for a prop plane. I know they didn't simply run the prop backward (I'm not aware of that being a thing anyway) because when they started moving forward they didn't have to bring the props to a stop and spin them up the other way. My working hypothesis is a prop in the water that is either 1) mechanically coupled to the engine (although the more I think of that the less feasible it sounds), or 2) driven by an electric motor that is powered by a generator that is coupled to the engine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by STinLA
This was nagging me and I believe I found the answer: reverse pitch propellers. "Reverse pitch, in a variable pitch propeller or constant speed propeller, refers to a blade pitch angle that has a negative value."

Pretty cool, although I wonder if there is some kind of lock that prevents engagement of reverse pitch during normal flight operations.
Yes, you beat me to it. Reverse pitch is the answer. This is the same thing that allows a prop plane to achieve "reverse thrust" after landing and it's very effective.

To engage reverse thrust in the turboprops that I flew (JetStream 32 and 41), you would bring the thrust levers to idle, against a stop, and then pull up on an unlocking mechanism on the front of the thrust levers and bring them back across that stop, or gate.

It's been so long ago, I can't really remember if you could do that in flight or if it was connected to the "weight-on-wheels" logic to prevent inadvertent use while airborne.

Using reverse thrust, you could actually back up a plane on the ground (same for jets) but my company prohibited pilots from using this technique, and for a good reason. If you back up and get some speed up and then brake suddenly, there's a good chance the plane's momentum will cause a tail strike. Maintenance guys did sometimes back up a plane using reverse thrust, so I assume it was allowed for them.

American Airlines used to "power back" from the gate using reverse thrust, eliminating the need for a tug to push them back. I remember seeing that (and being on one of their planes doing it) many times. I think they ceased that practice long ago and probably for the same reason I mentioned above.
Ask me about being an airline pilot or flying in general Quote

      
m