|
KodiakRS posted:Whoever designed the new layout of ORD needs to be slapped in the face. Hard. The "Standard taxi" from runway 10R involves talking to no less than 5 separate controllers between the runway and the terminal. Just talking with my friend who works approach control up there and he said they're also rolling out changes to the way arrivals come in. Something to do with simultaneous close parallel approaches, but he said it also had to do with speed control and none of it made any sense to me. Chicago airspace is a crazy place.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Just talking with my friend who works approach control up there and he said they're also rolling out changes to the way arrivals come in. Something to do with simultaneous close parallel approaches, but he said it also had to do with speed control and none of it made any sense to me. My dad worked approach there for 26 years and somehow he's still sane? I could ask him if he knows anything about it. He used to ask for my flight number whenever I'd fly commercial (as a passenger) in/out so he or one of his buddies could give me, if not priority handling, then at least "not back of the line" handling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
overdesigned posted:My dad worked approach there for 26 years and somehow he's still sane? I could ask him if he knows anything about it. He used to ask for my flight number whenever I'd fly commercial (as a passenger) in/out so he or one of his buddies could give me, if not priority handling, then at least "not back of the line" handling. I somehow doubt this being possible... Wouldn't this be terribly obvious to other planes/pilots? Note I am not doubting he said it rather how realistic it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
DaRealAce posted:I somehow doubt this being possible... Wouldn't this be terribly obvious to other planes/pilots? It's possible in a variety of ways. Not necessarily shuffling the 1-2-3 sequence, but maybe more direct routings to shave some miles off the route or other considerations. It's done with priority aircraft all the time (like medical flights) and it doesn't always mean a jump to the front of the line, so to speak. Also, a lot of the time there is a dead rear end tie (DAT, pronounced "dat") and you're already flipping a coin as to who goes first. In this case it would be the plane you have an affinity for, but you don't exactly broadcast it to the world. So the help could be anywhere from non existent, to very minor, to a huge shortcut.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:It's possible in a variety of ways. Not necessarily shuffling the 1-2-3 sequence, but maybe more direct routings to shave some miles off the route or other considerations. Speak French to a French controller - go direct. Speak English fight plan route. And we never speak French because its banned (honest Guv)
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 10:52
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:Whoever designed the new layout of ORD needs to be slapped in the face. Hard. The "Standard taxi" from runway 10R involves talking to no less than 5 separate controllers between the runway and the terminal. Each one ready to scream and put you in a penalty box if you so much as stop and double check an instruction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Animal posted:Each one ready to scream and put you in a penalty box if you so much as stop and double check an instruction. Ohare comes up a lot in aviation threads (elsewhere) when newbies ask about vacating a runway after landing and taxiing when the tower doesn't get to them promptly. Someone points out the AIM and PCG guidance on exiting the runway at the first available taxiway, clearing the hold bars, and stopping until further instructions are received. Inevitably someone brings up Ohare, where I hear if you stop moving you get chewed out like crazy because you're probably blocking someone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Ohare comes up a lot in aviation threads (elsewhere) when newbies ask about vacating a runway after landing and taxiing when the tower doesn't get to them promptly. Someone points out the AIM and PCG guidance on exiting the runway at the first available taxiway, clearing the hold bars, and stopping until further instructions are received. Inevitably someone brings up Ohare, where I hear if you stop moving you get chewed out like crazy because you're probably blocking someone. It's not only after vacating a runway, its also during the loop for taxiing to your gate. If you are unfamiliar with the layout, or there is a gate change, or whatever reason to slow down or stop and ask, don't stop. Keep moving even if you miss your turn, and then talk when you get a chance to put a word in and be brought around to the right place. Its all compounded by the complicated airport layout. This goes against how most people have been trained so it leads to mental DOES NOT COMPUTE moments when pilots go blank trying to figure out what the right choice is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
It's almost as if O'Hare is a poorly designed hodgepodge of runways and terminals slapped together haphazardly over the course of 50+ years...
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
overdesigned posted:It's almost as if O'Hare is a poorly designed hodgepodge of runways and terminals slapped together haphazardly over the course of 50+ years... Almost. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
I've wanted to fly as far back as I can remember and I've been trying to budget for flying but life keeps vomiting in my lap. I almost got there this year until we bought a house instead (market and timing was right.) and the money got sucked into initial improvements and closing costs. I've read a lot that consistency is key with getting your hours in so you don't have to repeat too many lessons by having them spaced out too far. I might get a windfall next year though and would be able to pay up-front and fly as often as my schedule allows each week. Being life though, if that isn't the case, what could I do to keep myself "in the game" between lessons? I've been looking at flight simulators because I've read that people like them for at least going through the motions in their head even if they don't have an advanced setup or the controls aren't realistic. Should I just wait until I can pay all up front? I thought about getting a personal loan but when I mentioned that to my other half the room dropped thirty degrees instantly. Once I'm licensed I should be able to fly every other weekend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Don't pay upfront. Have the funds, absolutely. Unless I misunderstood you. Also: Whatever amount you think you need, add at least 30 percent. Anyway, I had some of the same issues with availability the first half or so of my hours to my check ride. I joined a flying club, and for a while, my schedule didn't mesh with my cfi. So, I brought the subject up and asked if there was someone he trusted to fill in when needed. He was happy to recommend a couple of guys. It proved to be a really good thing as they were able to spot things or give different advice which gave me more exposure. So, one of the biggest things I learned was have a primary cfi but also have back ups to keep you fresh and on your toes. I liked my cfi, but felt I got just as much or more from the other guys. One is an ex marine aviator who is now working with me on my progression to IFR, multi, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
Caution: wake turbulence http://i.imgur.com/532t5X0.gifv
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
sleepy gary posted:Caution: wake turbulence Those light craft clearly need larger control surfaces.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
sleepy gary posted:Caution: wake turbulence lol what made that wake?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 08:01
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:Whoever designed the new layout of ORD needs to be slapped in the face. Hard. The "Standard taxi" from runway 10R involves talking to no less than 5 separate controllers between the runway and the terminal. Welcome to Cincinnatti. I used to fly there occasionally during the old Delta hub days and sorta understood why you had to talk to fourteen different ATC and ramp controllers on the way to our gate, but I went back a couple of years ago and STILL had to talk to 14 people who had exactly zero to do. Tower refused to let us land on 18L which put us right by the FBO.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
DaRealAce posted:I somehow doubt this being possible... Wouldn't this be terribly obvious to other planes/pilots? I have a friend in the tower at ORD. I haven't had the chance to see him use his dark arts, but the day the raving rear end in a top hat tried to set fire to himself and Chicago Center, another friend of ours did. He was on a flight to PHX with a new puppy in a carry on and texted our friend that his US Airways flight was all buttoned up and ready to go, but the pilots said they were about number 21 in line for clearance (had to shrimp-boat all the departures). About three minutes later the Captain came on the PA and said "I don't know what happened, but we just jumped the line and have our clearance to depart". I plan to only use this evil power when I really need it. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
quote:ORD insanity Oh man, where to start...People complain about landing and getting to the gate, but how about getting out of the ramp and to runway? I once worked with an ex AA captain who was ORD-based, he and his FO one day had a helluva time trying to go from ramp to ground and get a taxi clearance. So what did they do? They gunned their 737 into an opening between two other AA aircraft taxiing by and followed them all the way to the departure runway without speaking to ANYONE on ground. Switched to tower, and rather than being reprimanded for getting all the way there without a clearance, they simply get cleared for takeoff with nary a fluster from the controller.  Earlier this summer flew into Chicago and it was a shitshow, apparently some new controllers were training on ground frequency. Captain was already impatient and irked at the longer-than-usual delays, so he makes things worse by snapping at one of the controllers for a taxi clearance to the gate. Pissed, the controller gives us the long way around the airport as punishment, but it ended up being a shorter time to the gate since our original taxi route was a complete cluster. Oh yeah, and the captain thanked the controller for the "shorter" routing  Most days I don't, but some days I do miss the absolute beautiful SNAFU O'Hare can be when you're flying in/out of there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Quick question; it seems like a lot of parts of flight are getting automated (takeoff, landing). What bits of a pilots job are safest from machine? Also why are there still two pilots on a lot of flights (even short flights!) Cheers!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
froward posted:Quick question; it seems like a lot of parts of flight are getting automated (takeoff, landing). What bits of a pilots job are safest from machine? Haven't seen an airplane take itself off yet and only a few can competently autoland. Two pilots is really about redundancy, every system in the plane has a backup (and sometimes another backup). Plus, its a lot easier to catch a mistake when there is two of you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
froward posted:Also why are there still two pilots on a lot of flights (even short flights!) Every once in a while, the organic flight system controller ceases to function and the secondary organic backup system needs to take over. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34453146
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
There's still plenty for one person to do. Add in some failures or emergencies and workload multiplies very quickly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
So did pay get any better?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
AWSEFT posted:Haven't seen an airplane take itself off yet and only a few can competently autoland. Two pilots is really about redundancy, every system in the plane has a backup (and sometimes another backup). Plus, its a lot easier to catch a mistake when there is two of you. To add to this: even if the aircraft can competently manipulate its flight controls by itself, which a lot of aircraft can at this point (but not all), it's still a big leap between that and "no human intervention is required." An auto-pilot can land a plane on a properly-equipped runway, sure, but that's a long way from being able to land on one of the many, many runways that isn't CAT III ILS equipped, or being able to navigate itself to that approach without having a pilot involved. Just because a pilot isn't directly manipulating control surfaces and engine thrust and whatnot doesn't mean they aren't doing a really important job, even talking about the planes that "fly themselves."
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
AWSEFT posted:Haven't seen an airplane take itself off yet and only a few can competently autoland. Two pilots is really about redundancy, every system in the plane has a backup (and sometimes another backup). Plus, its a lot easier to catch a mistake when there is two of you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPOtDPHjW-Y Checkmate, pilots.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
sleepy gary posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPOtDPHjW-Y This is it boys, the beginning of the end 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 06:45
|
|
|
But we've had the technology since the late 70's!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
sleepy gary posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPOtDPHjW-Y Planes just want to fly! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Arcella posted:Planes just want to fly! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHhZwvdRR5c 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
fordan posted:But we've had the technology since the late 70's! Still needs human assistance to, uh, stay operational.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Quite a few of those make my balls tense up
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Brace for wall of  froward posted:Quick question; it seems like a lot of parts of flight are getting automated (takeoff, landing)? I have been a pilot for over a decade during which I've flown probably a dozen types of aircraft ranging from small single engine prop planes to full on airliners. I have spent almost half a year of my life behind the controls of an airplane. In addition to that I spent probably a few hundred hours in the cockpits of other airliners raging from small regional jets up to 777's. During all this I have seen an airplane make an automated takeoff or landing a grand total of zero times. Autopilots are to pilots what compilers are to programmers*. They do a job that the human could do and they do it better, faster, and more reliably. But they're still pretty useless unless you give them a fairly detailed set of instructions and are totally useless when it comes to higher level critical thinking. For example: We were taking off from La'Guardia, which is half built on land and half built on giant metal piers sticking into Flushing bay. The metal in these piers is notorious for messing with magnetic compass systems like the one in our airliner. Sure enough, as we began to roll down the runway our two compasses begin displaying wildly different headings. ATC had assigned us to turn to a specific heading immediately after takeoff. If the takeoff and departure had been fully automated the airplane would have followed the compass and turned to a heading about 40 off of what had been assigned and wandered into the airspace being used by aircraft landing at JFK, just a few miles away. Instead, by evaluating our current indicated heading and comparing that with the known runway heading, I was able to determine the extent of the error with the compass and add ~40 of correction to what it was indicating allowing us to turn to approximately the right heading. During cruise we noticed that our headwind was much stronger than predicted. Strong enough that our fuel quantity on landing was going to be questionable. Normally aircraft become more fuel efficient at higher altitudes but we were able to get wind reports from further along our route of flight and calculate that we would actually save fuel by descending to a lower altitude with less wind. Had we stayed at our originally planned altitude we probably would not have been able to continue safely all the way to our destination. Spoilers are devices used to reduce the amount of lift being produced by a wing, when used on both wings they help the airplane descend faster and when used on one wing they help the airplane roll by lowering that wing. A crew was using the spoilers to aid them in a descent, however when they tried to stow them only the spoilers on one side of the aircraft closed causing the aircraft to roll hard to the left. The autopilot was unable to handle the excessive roll and disconnected. The pilots were able to regain control of the aircraft using ailerons and realized that the roll had been associated with the closing of the spoilers. The then made the counter-intuitive decision to re-extend the spoilers which neutralized the roll they were causing. All of these are real situations that I was either personally involved in or have happened to pilots at my airline in the last few weeks. In every single one of them the autopilot or "computer" was unable to handle the issue or even realize it existed. tl;dr: Airplanes don't fly themselves. froward posted:Also why are there still two pilots on a lot of flights (even short flights!)
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:Brace for wall of To play devil's advocate, there are aircraft that can take off and land on their own, they're just not airliners. The MQ-4 is pretty much autonomous other than plugging in waypoints (I don't know if they get human control to taxi around or whatever), and the XB-47 lands itself on an aircraft carrier. And for every case where a human pilot overrides a faulty sensor or outthinks an unexpected problem, you can point to humans who keep pulling back against stick shakers or pass out because they didn't set the cabin pressurization correctly. Both types have the opportunity for improvement, usually better training for the humans and better engineering for the robots. Anyway, on a different track, I'm sitting in San Francisco on a layover with a fantastic view of the runways, watching 747s and other, lesser aircraft rolling by. Interesting to see them using both sets of intersecting runways for departures. Is that common out here when the wind isn't too high? It's really cool to watch. e: ooh, Emirates A380 arriving Wingnut Ninja fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Oct 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Anyway, on a different track, I'm sitting in San Francisco on a layover with a fantastic view of the runways, watching 747s and other, lesser aircraft rolling by. Interesting to see them using both sets of intersecting runways for departures. Is that common out here when the wind isn't too high? It's really cool to watch. The air traffic system in the U.S. is largely pavement-limited. So, any opportunity to use more pavement is a welcome one. Just have to stagger everything to prevent the obvious meet-in-the-middle of the runways risks. Winds and other weather can preclude using certain runway configurations, or certain simultaneous parallel operations, so that's just one of many reasons that delays go sky-high when the weather gets crummy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:Compass Hijinks Can't you also use the heading indicator, assuming you calibrated it in a non-compass-messing-with area?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Arcella posted:Can't you also use the heading indicator, assuming you calibrated it in a non-compass-messing-with area? Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, at least in the glass G1000, the heading indicator is driven by a magnetometer tied to the AHRS system. There is no heading indicator to set, everything is magnetic. I imagine a glass airliner is the same?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, at least in the glass G1000, the heading indicator is driven by a magnetometer tied to the AHRS system. There is no heading indicator to set, everything is magnetic. I imagine a glass airliner is the same? I kinda glossed over that because I didn't want to go into details that would leave non pilots confused but: We have 2 AHRS units each of which is slaved to it's own magnetometer and as a final backup a old "whiskey compass." We can un-slave the heading indicators and use AHRS as a DG but that's not really the kind of thing you want to be messing with during the takeoff roll. Wingnut Ninja posted:And for every case where a human pilot overrides a faulty sensor or outthinks an unexpected problem, you can point to humans who keep pulling back against stick shakers or pass out because they didn't set the cabin pressurization correctly. Both types have the opportunity for improvement, usually better training for the humans and better engineering for the robots. According to ASRS there were 461 critical equipment failures on airliners in the U.S. in 2014. None of them ended up as a fatal accident. While I will grant you that there were likely many more human errors that occured during the same time you can't deny that humans a still a critical part of flying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
I and some colleagues were out to lunch today, and we decided to eat outside. I happened to glance up and saw some actual skywriting in progress: Certainly not something one sees everyday. It was pretty windy so the message dissipated pretty much as soon as it was being written, but someone decided to write 'WE ARE PHX'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:I kinda glossed over that because I didn't want to go into details that would leave non pilots confused but: We have 2 AHRS units each of which is slaved to it's own magnetometer and as a final backup a old "whiskey compass." We can un-slave the heading indicators and use AHRS as a DG So Captain and FO displays operate on independent AHRS systems? Is the ADC the same?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:So Captain and FO displays operate on independent AHRS systems? Is the ADC the same? No
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 03:43
|
|