If so, do you talk a lot of shop, or is that the last thing you want to discuss?
We normally complain about our respective managements!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoingAway
Can a plane like the BA 777 that just crashed at LHR fly again for commercial passenger use, or is it more likely it'll be used for parts and that's it?
Can it be repaired to fly again? Yes. The question is if doing so is economically viable. My first impression of the BA 777 is that it will not be economically viable to repair.
So how does that schedule mesh with your corporate flying? What are the reserve requirements and do you just need to do it during your time off or does UA allow additional time w/o penalty (which I imagine would be law/contract).
I'm not still in the reserves, so that isn't a problem for me. As for corporate flying, United doesn't give me time off to do that, it's on my own time if I do any. Usually I only do it for a day every couple months or so just to stay current in that field and help out a friend. So time wise it's a non-issue.
For active reservists with United, they just take time out from their lines of flying with United to do their military duty.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Do you have much occasion to interact, personally or professionally, with pilots from other carriers?
If so, do you talk a lot of shop, or is that the last thing you want to discuss?
I used to interact with other pilots with my reserve unit a lot. We'd talk about our airlines or military stuff or politics. Now, when I run into other pilots on layovers, we pretty much talk about the same stuff. Airlines, mergers, politics, contracts, all the same stuff really.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Can a plane like the BA 777 that just crashed at LHR fly again for commercial passenger use, or is it more likely it'll be used for parts and that's it?
Judging by what I saw on TV, I'd be surprised to see that plane fly again. Like LarryJ said, the economics of it may not justify repairing it versus using the insurance to just buy a new one. Once a plane has been in an accident, it is very hard to be certified airworthy again.
<<Originally Posted by dhammer53
Do you prefer to fly:
Daytime?
Evening?
Redeye?
Is one of the above preferred?>>>
I'm a strange one, but I prefer the early morning flights versus the late flights. I'd just as soon fly and get done with it for the day and then enjoy my layover somewhere. I find that flying in the early AM I encounter a lot fewer delays and thus schedule interruptions. At United on the Airbus or 737 fleet, we have very few schedule protections now, so I don't like having problems or I lose money.
I'm a commuter, so I come up the night before most times anyways. I like ending up my trip earlier on the final day so I can get home versus late and having to stay another night. Everyone likes different things, so I guess that makes for more happy pilots with their schedules.
I don't like the redeye all-nighters though. Kind of the reason I got off the widebody flying since that is a lot of the flying.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Yesterday afternoon flying into IAD in a snowstorm, tower was announcing "RVR 3,500 feet from touchdown" or occasionally 4,000 feet. One pilot said he needed 5,000 feet and would wait, so I guess they sent him to a holding pattern. It may have been a private aircraft, but I can't recall for sure.
What role does RVR play in landings? And since every other landing aircraft seemed satisfied with 3,500 feet, under what circumstances would an aircraft need 5,000 feet?
Yesterday afternoon flying into IAD in a snowstorm, tower was announcing "RVR 3,500 feet from touchdown" or occasionally 4,000 feet. One pilot said he needed 5,000 feet and would wait, so I guess they sent him to a holding pattern. It may have been a private aircraft, but I can't recall for sure.
What role does RVR play in landings? And since every other landing aircraft seemed satisfied with 3,500 feet, under what circumstances would an aircraft need 5,000 feet?
When we shoot an instrument approach in IMC conditions, we have to have certain weather conditions. Other than a circling approach, all we have to have is visibility minimums. For a normal Category 1 ILS, we can usually go down to 1/2 statute mile (RVR of 2400') with some approaches to 1800' RVR. 5000' RVR equates to 1 mile visibiliy.
RVR stands for Runway Visual Range and it is given by a transmissometer on the runway. Visibility in statute miles is called Prevailing Visibility and is eyeball vis by the tower personnel. RVR takes precedent over prevailing vis for instrument approaches other than a circling approach. Once RVR goes below Category 1 ILS minimums, we go to Category II ILS minimums which can go down as low as 1000' RVR. If it goes below 1000', you end up in Category III ILS minimums which can go down as low as 300' RVR (less than an 1/8 of a mile vis) at United. With a Heads-Up-Display (HUD) installed like at Alaska Airlines, you can go down to basically 0-0 I believe.
For most fleets, once you go below Category I ILS mins, you end up letting the airplane land on the autopilot, known as an Autoland. Some fleets will let you still fly a Cat II approach and then take over and hand fly the landing, that is known as a "Monitored" approach and the minimums are higher than 1000' if I remember correctly (we don't do monitored approaches on the airbus, but we did on the 737). So, if you hear on CH 9 that the weather is below 1800 RVR, you most likely will be doing an autoland with the autopilot. Tower is required to give RVR readings for your runway when it goes below 5000'. Cat II and CAT III ILS's also require more RVR readings on the runway, and more stringent aircraft maintenance requirements, which I won't go into here.
Some planes can't do autolands since they have only one autopilot, or they don't train their pilots to do them. Most regional airline pilots are not qualified for CAT II and CAT III approaches, so that is why they may be diverting from a field that United mainline is still landing at.
Hope that briefly answers why some planes are able to land with less than 1/2 mile visibility and others have to divert. If the plane you were listening to needed 5000' RVR at IAD, he probably had a maintenance issue that required him to have higher minimums, say a Localizer approach, or he might have been a new captain who had higher minimums for his approaches (this happens until you have so many hours in the jet as a captain). Hard to know why exactly.
Hope that answered the question.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Last edited by aluminumdriver; Jan 19, 08 at 8:34 am.
Thanks again for making this such an interesting thread and for taking the time to answer these questions!
A few posts ago, you mentioned your preference on flying nights, and the differences between the narrow body flying vs. the widebody flying. I'm curious as to what systems and/or procedures are in place to keep both FO's from accidently falling asleep while cruising? I found this article about a Airbus crew that fell asleep on the way to DIA: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...737464,00.html
United says it wasn't them, so it sounds like Frontier to me...anyway, does the aircraft require some kind of input periodically to keep this from happening? Also, in your opinion, does UA "push" the pilots to fly, as the article suggests?
Thanks again for making this such an interesting thread and for taking the time to answer these questions!
A few posts ago, you mentioned your preference on flying nights, and the differences between the narrow body flying vs. the widebody flying. I'm curious as to what systems and/or procedures are in place to keep both FO's from accidently falling asleep while cruising? I found this article about a Airbus crew that fell asleep on the way to DIA: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...737464,00.html
United says it wasn't them, so it sounds like Frontier to me...anyway, does the aircraft require some kind of input periodically to keep this from happening? Also, in your opinion, does UA "push" the pilots to fly, as the article suggests?
Thanks again!
I don't really know what is on the 777 or 747, but on the 737, there is no aircraft system to keep you from falling asleep that I know of. I have heard on the Airbus if you don't actuate some switch within a certain time period, it will actuate an alert for you to comply with, but I've never seen this before so I'm not sure it really exists.
The buzzer the flight attendants use to call us is very loud and annoying, and I've heard that was put in there so as to startle the pilots during long cruise flights. During redeyes (which I avoid), the flight attendants will call us every now and then to check up on us and see if we need anything. I also try to talk with the F/O during the flight to keep us both involved and awake.
I too have heard it was Frontier
United is pushing its pilots to fly more and more. That said, we do have a Fatigue Policy and any pilot can call in fatigued and get off a trip and get rest if he feels he is not safely rested for his next leg. This is non-retributional to the pilot and because of that, makes for a much safer operation.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
"RVR 3,500 feet from touchdown". One pilot said he needed 5,000 feet
RVR is runway visual range--visibility measures right at the runway. It is more accurate, and supersedes, the prevailing visibility for the airport which is otherwise controlling. A runway that is less than 8,000' long will have two RVR transmisometers, one in the touchdown zone and another at the opposite end's touchdown zone which will be called "rollout". When the runway is over 8,000' they add a third RVR transmisometer in the middle which is called "mid-point". For very long runways (I don't remember the break point) they'll have two middle RVR's so you'll have Touchdown, Mid-point, Rollout and Far End RVR readings.
The 5000 RVR requirement sounds like a high-mins Captain. For most airlines/fleets, a new Captain will have higher weather minimums for his first 100 hours as Captain in a new airplane. The 5000 RVR requirement would be a high-mins Captain on an otherwise Cat I runway. Some airlines, mine and probably UAL as well, have a training program in place which will often allow a high-mins Captain to fly to regular Cat I minimums if he uses the CatII/III procedures for the approach. It all gets pretty complicated and generally causes a lot of headaches when covered in ground school. We're pilots, after all, not lawyers!
Quote:
Originally Posted by aluminumdriver
I think SWA pilots are not even CAT II and CAT III approach trained since they don't want to deal with the costs
SWA has HUDs (Heads Up Displays) in all of their aircraft which allow hand-flown, lower than Cat I, approaches to Cat I runways. I don't know the details of their authorized minimums with the HUD but they are generally at least as low, if not lower, than what's authorized for the best equipped non-HUD airliners. I know that ASA does HUD takeoffs down to 300 RVR, SWA might as well. Don't know... Again, I get enough headaches trying to remember all of the OpsSpecs that apply to MY airline!
RVR is runway visual range--visibility measures right at the runway. It is more accurate, and supersedes, the prevailing visibility for the airport which is otherwise controlling. A runway that is less than 8,000' long will have two RVR transmisometers, one in the touchdown zone and another at the opposite end's touchdown zone which will be called "rollout". When the runway is over 8,000' they add a third RVR transmisometer in the middle which is called "mid-point". For very long runways (I don't remember the break point) they'll have two middle RVR's so you'll have Touchdown, Mid-point, Rollout and Far End RVR readings.
The 5000 RVR requirement sounds like a high-mins Captain. For most airlines/fleets, a new Captain will have higher weather minimums for his first 100 hours as Captain in a new airplane. The 5000 RVR requirement would be a high-mins Captain on an otherwise Cat I runway. Some airlines, mine and probably UAL as well, have a training program in place which will often allow a high-mins Captain to fly to regular Cat I minimums if he uses the CatII/III procedures for the approach. It all gets pretty complicated and generally causes a lot of headaches when covered in ground school. We're pilots, after all, not lawyers!
SWA has HUDs (Heads Up Displays) in all of their aircraft which allow hand-flown, lower than Cat I, approaches to Cat I runways. I don't know the details of their authorized minimums with the HUD but they are generally at least as low, if not lower, than what's authorized for the best equipped non-HUD airliners. I know that ASA does HUD takeoffs down to 300 RVR, SWA might as well. Don't know... Again, I get enough headaches trying to remember all of the OpsSpecs that apply to MY airline!
I know what you mean, I hardly remember my mins and rules
I checked with my buddy and you're right, they do have HUD's in all their 737's. They hand fly their planes, so no autolands. They can go down to Cat IIIa minimums of 600' RVR. On our Airbuses we autoland at CAT IIIb mins of 300' RVR.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Last edited by aluminumdriver; Jan 18, 08 at 9:04 pm.
I moved to DC because I speak German and wanted to fly more to Europe. After I got bumped back to the A320 and was having 32 hour DTW layovers, I decided to move back to SF and fly to Hawaii for a while on the 767. I much prefer the west coast to the east coast.
So if a pilot base needs more drivers for a particular type of aircraft, and there are no volunteers/transfer possibles, do they just junior you into that aircraft? To transfer to a different pilot base as you did, do you have to waitlist and hope an opening will occur?
I hope your dad's back on the line soon. That raises another set of questions. How many pilots make it to retirement age? I would imagine that there are any name of chronic conditions (or perhaps the medications for those conditions) that could sideline you permanently. I'm thinking here of elevated blood pressure or BPH for example, where the medications might be problematic from a flying perspective.
Hmm! I'm interested in a personality question. For the pilots posting here, what was your undergraduate degree in? And if you know what other pilots have gotten theirs in in your small talk while over the north Pacific, do you find that most pilots gravitated towards the maths and sciences or is there a roughly equal mix of BAs to BSes?
My hypothesis is that most pilots are concrete and procedure-minded thinkers and would be more into the sciences than the arts, but I have no data to back that up...
B.S. in Aeronautics, minor in business, civilian background. I paid for most of my flight training working as a drummer in a local (Bay Area) rock band, paid my way through college teaching flying, charter, cargo, traffic watch for a radio station, playing a gig here 'n' there, then ended up at United, somehow, 9 weeks after graduation.
It was a little disheartening in college wondering if I'd ever get paid more than $8.50 an hour for flying, but it finally panned out at 31 years of age.
Music was initially my goal in life, and I was a member of the musicians' union long before I'd ever heard of a pilots' union. Turns out there are an awful lot of exceedingly talented, starving musicians out there, and knowing I wasn't exceedingly talented at playing music, I opted for another thing.
There are a lot of talented musicians flying airplanes for a living! I currently play in a jazz trio in the Denver area with a bass player who is a United 767 First Officer. I haven't flown with him yet, but I've done a ton of gigs with him. He also is a singer, and sang on a few tracks of an album that I and another United guy recorded a few years ago. A former U.A. Flight Attendant also did some vocal tracks for us. She opted to not return after furlough, and is currently singing professionally in Las Vegas.
I just did a gig last week that the bass player couldn't make, so I got a friend (and chief Pilot from another crew base) to sub on the bass for us. I'd played in a Motown Revue band with him and another pilot, a 777 Captain.
Point is, you can't stereotype us!
Freshairborne
__________________
These are my own observations and/or opinions, and not necessarily those of the Air Line Pilots Association or UAL Corp.
Hmm! I'm interested in a personality question. For the pilots posting here, what was your undergraduate degree in? And if you know what other pilots have gotten theirs in in your small talk while over the north Pacific, do you find that most pilots gravitated towards the maths and sciences or is there a roughly equal mix of BAs to BSes?
My hypothesis is that most pilots are concrete and procedure-minded thinkers and would be more into the sciences than the arts, but I have no data to back that up...
I was a meteorology major, but I'd rather talk politics and international affairs than meteorology. I'd say there is no real specialty that you would find in airline pilots. You have engineers and political science majors. Lawyers and nurses. We run the gamut.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
So if a pilot base needs more drivers for a particular type of aircraft, and there are no volunteers/transfer possibles, do they just junior you into that aircraft?
They are given to newhires. Let's say San Francisco needs more 777 F/Os. There are plenty of 767 F/Os, A320 F/Os, 737 F/Os and even A320 and 737 captains wanting to take the spots, so they never go unfilled (and sometimes go very senior). The same is true of every other fleet and seat, with the exception of 737 F/Os and A320 F/Os.
Quote:
To transfer to a different pilot base as you did, do you have to waitlist and hope an opening will occur?
Recently, there have been bids every month (there were no bids in December while the company evaluates the change in retirement age). Each retirement will generate a number of open positions, especially from senior captains. For example, if a 747 captain retires, that position will likely be filled by a 767 captain, whose position will be filled by a A320 captain, opening up a position for a 777 F/O, which opens up a position for an A320 F/O, which goes to a newhire. Each time we get a new bid, we are "frozen" into that bid for three years, in order to reduce training costs (there are some exceptions, but then it gets really complicated).
Quote:
I hope your dad's back on the line soon. That raises another set of questions. How many pilots make it to retirement age? I would imagine that there are any name of chronic conditions (or perhaps the medications for those conditions) that could sideline you permanently. I'm thinking here of elevated blood pressure or BPH for example, where the medications might be problematic from a flying perspective.
I hope he's back soon too... the FAA is dragging its feet. There are a good number of people who don't make it to 60, and that percentage will certainly increase now that the age is 65.
