|
fordan posted:Downside: not IFR capable so hope it's good weather while you try to build PIC hours. True, could take a 430W equipped 172N for $99/hr too.
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:41 |
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNxz2hhSXuY I love this video, I think it's the legos.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
I finally had a T-45 flight where I was ahead of the jet the whole time today. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
overdesigned posted:I finally had a T-45 flight where I was ahead of the jet the whole time today. Welp, time to move on to the next syllabus phase.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Welp, time to move on to the next syllabus phase. Literally the truth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
I always felt that way through ATC simulator scenarios. I know they don't want to waste time, but boy it'd be great to feel comfortable for a bit. Then they crank up the difficulty again and again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
Stupid Post Maker posted:Nice, how long ago was your interview? You might have been hired with one of my aerial survey coworkers. Little Mexican kid. Negative, guy I was hired with was from NJ and white as a ghost. 4 interviewed but only two of us made it past the written tests. I think my secret to success was that the gouges online had a lot of wrong answers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
Is there any reason for which side on a DC-9 derivative has 3 seats or do airlines flip a coin when they get them? Like delta's MD-88s are 3-2, and the 717s and I think MD-90s are 2-3.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
Can someone please walk me through the procedure for flying this http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1503/05222VDTZ15.PDF in a G1000
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
As long as we're on the subject of weird approach plates, gaze upon this beauty, which my friend found today: http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1503/00736HT1.PDF
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
overdesigned posted:As long as we're on the subject of weird approach plates, gaze upon this beauty, which my friend found today: That took me waaaay too long to figure out. All of our HI-TACANs are simple holds with straight in segments. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Mar 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:Can someone please walk me through the procedure for flying this http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1503/05222VDTZ15.PDF in a G1000 It's been a while since I flew a G1000, but I'd think the easiest way to fly the approach would be to just using the bearing pointer (slaved to the VOR) to fly the arc. You'd still want to load/activate the approach with SLOAF as the IAF for the extra situational awareness on the MFD, but you'd have to use the VOR as the primary navaid beyond the FAF.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:It's been a while since I flew a G1000, but I'd think the easiest way to fly the approach would be to just using the bearing pointer (slaved to the VOR) to fly the arc. You'd still want to load/activate the approach with SLOAF as the IAF for the extra situational awareness on the MFD, but you'd have to use the VOR as the primary navaid beyond the FAF. For whatever reason this approach isn't in the G1000. All our other approaches into MTN are there, but you can't select VOR/DME 15. Am I right in tuning Nav1 & 2 to BAL vor, then using the tail of NAV 2 to watch for my step down cross radials. Then what do I do with Nav 1? I'm completely blanking on how to fly the 'arc' part
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:For whatever reason this approach isn't in the G1000. All our other approaches into MTN are there, but you can't select VOR/DME 15. Am I right in tuning Nav1 & 2 to BAL vor, then using the tail of NAV 2 to watch for my step down cross radials. Then what do I do with Nav 1? I'm completely blanking on how to fly the 'arc' part You can do it all on a single nav needle (and DME). Tune Nav 1 (or Nav 2) to BAL. Keep the head of the needle on your right wing (or slightly ahead of the wing to decrease DME, slightly behind the wing to increase) to follow the arc at 14.7 DME. Watch the tail of the needle with reference to the HSI card to see when you hit your stepdown radials. Correct for wind as needed--if you have a ground track marker, see how much it's displaced from aircraft heading and take that into account--basically move your notional 3 o'clock position an equal amount in the opposite direction that the ground track marker is offset from aircraft heading, and place the head of the nav needle appropriately to maintain DME. This part's sorta confusing, do whatever mental gymnastics you have to in order to keep things at 14.7. Hope that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:For whatever reason this approach isn't in the G1000. All our other approaches into MTN are there, but you can't select VOR/DME 15. Am I right in tuning Nav1 & 2 to BAL vor, then using the tail of NAV 2 to watch for my step down cross radials. Then what do I do with Nav 1? I'm completely blanking on how to fly the 'arc' part You only need one nav to fly a DME arc. You keep updating your position (radial) and flying a heading 90 degrees to it. When you get to a stepdown radial, you step down. Is your nav 1 a HSI or a standard VOR head?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
If he's using the G1000 then it's an HSI
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
vessbot posted:You only need one nav to fly a DME arc. You keep updating your position (radial) and flying a heading 90 degrees to it. When you get to a stepdown radial, you step down. Is your nav 1 a HSI or a standard VOR head? Here's a garbagey little trick to flying DME arcs; once you establish on the arc, fly to keep the DME's speed readout at zero knots. Perfectly smooth DME arcs every time. I wouldn't do that on a checkride, but there you go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Here's a garbagey little trick to flying DME arcs; once you establish on the arc, fly to keep the DME's speed readout at zero knots. Perfectly smooth DME arcs every time. Why is that a garbagey trick? That seems like a completely logical and foolproof way to fly an arc around a point. I'm not instrument rated so I don't know what is "proper" in this case.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
DNova posted:Why is that a garbagey trick? That seems like a completely logical and foolproof way to fly an arc around a point. I'm not instrument rated so I don't know what is "proper" in this case. It's probably not "proper" because in the PTS it's based on being within one mile of the arc for tolerance, and there's no mention of DME speed. However as you pointed out there's nothing wrong with the alternative, I've been lazy enough in a G1000 (and in the CRJ during sim) to have the AP fly the arc and not switch nav sources until established on the final course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
If you're using a 430/530 you can set it to show nearest VORs and just keep the bearing to station the same as the left or right 90° on the DG. Lots of ways to cheat at arcs, but turn ten twist ten is easy enough, the PTS of +/- 1nm is more than generous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Thanks for the feedback guys. Took a safety pilot up today to do a few approaches and try the arc, but it was really loving bumpy so we just called it quits after 2 LPV approaches (Which I NAILED). Almost checkride ready, just gotta work on this drat arc, hopefully Wednesday is better
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
Do you have access to a sim you can get trained on? I always found that my students learned just as well in one, so flying to learn them was a waste of money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
I suppose I could get the concept of flying the arc down in FSX and then bring it to the plane. I'm not paying 50 bucks an hour (plus instructor) for the circa-1980s-looking sim that my school has
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:I suppose I could get the concept of flying the arc down in FSX and then bring it to the plane. I'm not paying 50 bucks an hour (plus instructor) for the circa-1980s-looking sim that my school has Even PC sims are great for practicing IFR stuff assuming you have a yoke or stick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:Even PC sims are great for practicing IFR stuff assuming you have a yoke or stick. I think X-Plane can actually be upgraded to the point where it's approved for training, if you want to buy a whole bunch of extra equipment and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 05:18
|
|
|
What's the thread title about?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 05:44
|
|
|
Regional airlines whining that they can't find any FOs with an ATP that will take a salary of $17k/year
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
To be more specific, the combination of the mandatory retirement at age 65 and the economy getting better means that major airlines are having to hire a lot of pilots, and most of them are coming from regional airlines. In the past, regionals would just lower their hiring requirements for first officers to keep pace with attrition, but since all airline FO's now need to have an ATP (which requires 1000-1500hrs of flight time to get), regionals find themselves struggling to find people willing to work for a pay scale that's only slightly better than what Wal-Mart pays in many cases. As a result of those factors, regional airlines are having serious trouble finding new pilots (most of these companies are run by sociopaths with MBA's, who don't want to pay FO's a living wage), so they're whining to Congress and in various editorials about a "pilot shortage" to try and generate sympathy to change the law requiring FO's to have an ATP.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
On one hand, I hope wages go up and working conditions improve, but I also agree with them (and, I'm guessing, everyone else here) that it's pretty retarded to require 1500 hours before acting as a FO (and, it seems, this is not a requirement in Canada. Go my country!)
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
PT6A posted:On one hand, I hope wages go up and working conditions improve, but I also agree with them (and, I'm guessing, everyone else here) that it's pretty retarded to require 1500 hours before acting as a FO (and, it seems, this is not a requirement in Canada. Go my country!) e.pilot fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Mar 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
1,000 is an easy number that I would be OK with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:I think maybe half (so 750) would be an acceptable compromise, because yeah 1500 for an FO, especially in tiny RJs, is kind of silly. As is my understanding, Canada only requires an ATPL to fly as the captain of a multi-pilot aircraft, not an FO (that can be done with CPL + type rating), and we haven't seen a massive explosion in crashes caused by inexperienced FOs. Whether you will be a competitive applicant for an F/O job with a fresh CPL is another matter entirely, of course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
PT6A posted:As is my understanding, Canada only requires an ATPL to fly as the captain of a multi-pilot aircraft, not an FO (that can be done with CPL + type rating), and we haven't seen a massive explosion in crashes caused by inexperienced FOs. Whether you will be a competitive applicant for an F/O job with a fresh CPL is another matter entirely, of course. All of this in response to an incident in which the captain, not the FO, was too busy talking to the FO about cold remedies to fly the drat plane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
The 1500hr rule is crony politics of the worst kind. May or may not have anything to do with the original event that precipitated legislative action? that's a mostly no, so check. Does very little or nothing to address the issue? Check. Carved out a huge competitive advantage for certain people/businesses? Check! Profit/Get reelected!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
The FAA opened their off-the-street Air Traffic Controller hiring announcement today. Thread here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3608176 Job announcement here: https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/398409000 Closes 3/27.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:All of this in response to an incident in which the captain, not the FO, was too busy talking to the FO about cold remedies to fly the drat plane. Well, they also actively fought against the plane's best efforts to keep them out of a stall, stalled, and nosedived into a house.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
So my pilot group is finally getting EFBs on May/June. Its gonna be Microsoft Surface, the new model which is still unreleased. I can't wait to take my flight kit to the backyard light it on fire and shoot it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Trying to schedule with an ATP examiner, but they are being problematic with their availability, bah. Also what's the average cost for a 1st Class Flight Physical? Is it $80 and a docs visit or is it more in depth?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
xaarman posted:Trying to schedule with an ATP examiner, but they are being problematic with their availability, bah. Thats it. Depending on your age you may get an EKG on the spot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:41 |
|
|
Animal posted:So my pilot group is finally getting EFBs on May/June. Its gonna be Microsoft Surface, the new model which is still unreleased. I can't wait to take my flight kit to the backyard light it on fire and shoot it. We started using iPads for approach plates a couple of months ago, and they're so much easier than paper charts. We had been using them to replace paper manuals for about a year prior (which cut probably 15 lbs of paper out of my flight case), and we're still required to carry updated paper charts on trips during the validation period, but we should be able to ditch the paper Jepps in the next month or two. The only downside to the iPad is that battery life can be an issue, since we don't have an approved way to charge the devices in flight, despite having a permanent EFB (which lets us get weather, satellite phone and text messages MX/dispatch) with a USB port mounted right next to the iPads. A bunch of us have bought external battery packs that solve the issue nicely, and it sounds like the airline is trying to come up with a better solution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 23:39
|
|