Easy question.. why do United pilots keep the seatbelt sign on until (usually) several minutes after reaching cruise altitude? I notice other airlines, particulary European airlines, where the sign goes off 5 minutes, or even less, after takeoff.
United tends to train pilots to wait until we get up to the upper altitudes and we know that the rides are smooth. Our sterile cockpit goes up to 18,000' as well, versus 10,000' for Delta, so that is why you will wait longer on United to turn on your computers or get the seatbelt sign off. Waiting until cruise altitude has tended to drop our turbulence related injuries over the years, so I guess that's why they teach us that technique.
It appeared to be a clear evening, possibly some wind though. Thanks for your thoughts, I've always wanted to know what happened that night- but didn't feel it was appropriate to ask the pilots once we landed. On that note, if it was indeed wake turbulence and a similar situation had occurred on your flight, would you have let the passengers know what had happened?
Sure, I would have if I had time. Not while we were airborne since I'd have been busy, but maybe after landing. Just depends on the mood I'm in that day. End of a long trip, busy doing checklists, might slip my mind. But keeping passengers informed is a priority for me.
As others have stated, many thanks to all the pilots who are answering our questions!
I wanted to know how the pilots liked or disliked flying into and out of LHR? In my last flight there, we were 2 hours late leaving ORD (due to ATC) and then didn't have a gate when we landed in LHR, so we deplaned and then took a bus over to the terminal. For an international flight like ORD to LHR, what is the typcial layover? I assume you would fly out the next day?
Location: ORD - All opinions expressed on this forum are my own and in no way represent the views of United Airlines or its affiliates.
Programs: Marriott Silver
Posts: 522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liz
Wait! Did you have a different FT name??? I can only think of one pilot I was with in SEA at the airport, good times, good times.
Really Liz? Care to elaborate more about those good times in SEA at the airport?
BTW, I think the "Ask Liz" thread is an excellent idea!!
Thanks to all the pilots participating, we are all learning so much - yes, even those of us who get to hang around with you guys on a regular basis.
Now which one of you guys buys the 3rd and 5th drink? Identify yourself!
Not sure if this is a pilot question...I notice in Europe they appear to have deicing pads for all planes but in the US each airline deices at each gate. I fly out of ORD and always thought it would be easier (and safer due to the time it takes to get to the runway) to have one or two deicng pads for all airlines, similar to a car wash, much closer to the runways, eliminating the need to ever return to the gate for a second coat. Why isn't this done?
Programs: UA 1P (soon to be 1K) SPG Gold, Hertz 5*Gold
Posts: 200
Sna
Since SNA is my home airport, I must ask pilots on this board their opinions of the landing and take-off procedures at Orange County Airport. Everytime I land (particularly in the 757) I wonder how there's ever enough room to stop! If you have had experience with SNA, do you like landing/taking off here? Any close calls?!
Not sure if this is a pilot question...I notice in Europe they appear to have deicing pads for all planes but in the US each airline deices at each gate. I fly out of ORD and always thought it would be easier (and safer due to the time it takes to get to the runway) to have one or two deicng pads for all airlines, similar to a car wash, much closer to the runways, eliminating the need to ever return to the gate for a second coat. Why isn't this done?
DEN has deicing pads that the planes taxi to, get deiced, and then taxi to the runways. The problem with deicing fluid is it's toxic and bad for the environment, so they can't just go out and spray planes close to the runway if there isn't catchment areas for the fluid. Chicago is limited to doing deicing at the gates, and if you end up out at the runway in a long line, sometimes you have to come back to a gate to be deiced.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Since SNA is my home airport, I must ask pilots on this board their opinions of the landing and take-off procedures at Orange County Airport. Everytime I land (particularly in the 757) I wonder how there's ever enough room to stop! If you have had experience with SNA, do you like landing/taking off here? Any close calls?!
I really don't fly there anymore now that I'm in the Airbus, but when I flew the 757, it was always an adventure flying in and out of there. It is a quick stop on landing.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Since SNA is my home airport, I must ask pilots on this board their opinions of the landing and take-off procedures at Orange County Airport. Everytime I land (particularly in the 757) I wonder how there's ever enough room to stop! If you have had experience with SNA, do you like landing/taking off here? Any close calls?!
SNA has one of the shortest runways that we fly to. I've flown into and out of there in 757s, 737s and A-319s and A320s, as well as Cessna Citations, which are 10 passenger bizjets, and though short, the runway is quite long enough for all of them.
We have a lot of factors that determine runway length required; a few are aircraft weight, outside air temp, wind conditions, approach speed (which is determined by these factors), runway condition (dry, wet, standing water, frozen precipitation such as hail, snow, etc, but snow hasn't been a biggie lately) runway visibility, and level of autobrakes, or brake application level if autobrakes aren't used. There are more, but I'm on vacation
Like everything else in aviation, these things are all evaluated for as many conditions or combinations of conditions, and charts & graphs are available for us to use. We generally evaluate landing runway requirements whenever the runway is short, or if we have any question about it.
Believe it or not, the takeoff is more critical than the landing, not just there, but everywhere. Too bad people don't ever say "nice takeoff!"
Here is my question which I didn't see asked on the previous pages.
Is the person talking to ATC the person driving or is it the other person doing the talking?
We generally split the workload into PF (pilot flying) and PNF (yep, pilot Not flying) duties, although the Captain and First Officer roles are never exchanged.
The PF will fly the plane and the PNF will do all the air traffic control communications and airborne checklists, and P.A. We both will be doing traffic watch, navigation and system monitoring, etc.
In theory, the F/O does almost everything but steer the airplane when on the ground, but there's a ton of stuff going on while taxiing, and the Captain will do some radio stuff if the F/O is on the other radio (that isn't on CH 9) talking to ramp, dispatch, load planning, etc.
Easy question.. why do United pilots keep the seatbelt sign on until (usually) several minutes after reaching cruise altitude? I notice other airlines, particulary European airlines, where the sign goes off 5 minutes, or even less, after takeoff.
I usually wait until we're above or beyond any areas of reported, forecast, or suspected lumps. That sign, though, for me, has a lot of psychological implications. I know that we all have our own personal thoughts on that particular switch. What I can say, though, is that it's on or off for reasons that we might know but you don't, and if it's on, PLEASE respect it. I truly don't want anyone to be hurt from turbulence. Flight attendants, not surprisingly, are the most commonly injured in turbulence. They know better than anyone, us included, how to deal, but in their never-ending quest to serve you, they take one for the Gipper now & then.
Contrary to popular belief, when the sign goes on, it doesn't mean it's time for a quick visit to the "blue room".
Of course, sometimes we just plain ol' forget to turn it off when things are looking smooth ahead, but why try to second-guess our memory? I, personally, have an excellent memory; short, but good
But wasn't wake turbulence a (significant?) factor in causing the crash of AA587 in 2001, and US427 in 1994? Then again, I know the official NTSB finding was "pilot error" for AA587...
For USAir 427, the 737 rudder design was ultimately found to be the prime factor, and the rudder was redesigned. Without getting into too much technical detail, the 737s of the time were the only transport aircraft certified with a single rudder panel and single rudder power control unit (PCU) combination. The NTSB found that a secondary valve jam could result in a full rudder hardover reversal (full rudder in the opposite direction commanded by the pilots). In other words, the rudder would fully deflect because of a valve jam, and the pilots would keep it fully deflected by trying to counteract the rudder (since it was a reversal, they would be holding the rudder in place). Wake turbulence may have initiated the movement of the rudder and precipitate the valve jam, but it wasn't the cause of the accident.
AA587 flew through a significant wake event, but that actually happens quite often. It looks like the cause of that accident was essentially the design of the Airbus rudder system, coupled with American's upset training program and some overcontrolling by the first officer. What I mean by the rudder design is the force required to fully move the rudder and the distance the pedal moves for full defection. The accident airplane had a significantly lower force required to fully move the rudder and less pedal travel than any comparable aircraft. On the accident airplane, 32 pounds of force and 1.2 inches of rudder travel was all that was required to fully deflect the rudder, compared to 125 pounds and 4 inches on even previous versions of the A300. In short, this aircraft design had an extremely sensitive rudder that would be easy to overcontrol. American's upset training program stressed the use of the rudder, and there is some evidence that the F/O had a tendency to overcontrol.
As far as I know, there has never been a transport category aircraft accident caused by wake turbulence. That's not to discount it's importance, but the best way to avoid it is distance behind the previous aircraft, and even that is not a guarantee. We delay takeoffs to allow the wake to dissipate, and we maintain a safe trailing distance. I tend not to go high on the glideslope, since in the 777 we are producing a pretty significant wake for the airplane behind us. If I go high for the 757 in front of us, that puts the wake right into the path of the guy behind us going high for the 777. Or if he goes even higher, now you're starting to create stabilized approach problems, which are just as serious a concern.
Quote:
You should join us at one of our (many) SF- or EasyBay DOs, then! I'm sure your drinks, and possibly meals, will be more than covered by the rest of the attendees! Keep an eye on the CommunityBuzz! forum for DO announcements, including the (soon-to-be) upcoming East Bay DO 3.
Maybe I'll stop by someday. I almost went to one in September at the invitation of a friend who reads FT as well, but I was just off an airplane from Paris and doubt I would have been good company.
Quote:
I guess that makes Channel 9 fairly boring on the 777, doesn't it? Or is there still sufficient radio traffic?
It's interesting enough when we're over land, I suppose, but that's why we turn it off over the water. There's no ATC to hear.
Keep an eye on the 
