I was on a 767 which had an inop APU and the flight crew (thanks, Chan 9) requested permission to start one engine at the gate before push back. I was seated on the right of the aircraft and the huffer cart was on the other side so I couldn't see what they connected up to start the engine. They did have a big fat yellow hose connected to the belly - I assume that was for air conditioning.
So my question is... is the external pneumatic(?) pressure to start the engine fed directly into an inlet on the engine itself or is there a spigot somewhere on the fuselage that is piped to the engines?
The big yellow hose is the air conditioned air being pumped into the aircraft.
The puffer cart air is pumped directly into the air manifold under the belly of the aircraft. We'll normally start the left engine using the puffer cart air. After that one engine is started, we disconnect the air, push back and start up the # 2 engine using a cross-start procedure with # 1 engine air.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Thank you for your speedy reply. It seems only happen to Airbus, not Boeing. It is so annoying when it happens. I have then to switch channel from 2 to 9 and turn up the volume.
Thank you for leaving Ch 9 on. 12 of 13 segments of my recent flights (both domestic and international) all have Ch 9 on.
Yeah, sorry about that. I guess the French really liked CH 2 and so they just assumed everyone else did too!!
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Those are fins like sharks. That way, if we belly into the ocean, the rescuers can find us whether right side up or upside down.
Actually those are antennaes for radios onboard the jet. VHF, VOR, ADF, all the different types of radios onboard.
Right...shark fins
That got me thinking about the "unlikely water landing..."
Assuming you were able to keep the wings level (unlike the Ethiopian 767) during a water ditching, what effect would the engines have on the ditching? Are they designed to shear off? How much time does UA give to this possibility during training? Is it something practiced in simulators?
That got me thinking about the "unlikely water landing..."
Assuming you were able to keep the wings level (unlike the Ethiopian 767) during a water ditching, what effect would the engines have on the ditching? Are they designed to shear off? How much time does UA give to this possibility during training? Is it something practiced in simulators?
Actually, from what I've heard from Boeing, there has actually never been a successful water ditching from wing mounted engine aircraft. We spend some time talking about ditching in our yearly training, but we don't practice it in the sim since it is so far fetched and we have limited time to practice things that might actually happen. As for what would happen, I'd venture to guess that the wings and engines would most likely separate after impact with the water. You'd then go through a water evacuation.
There are so many variables in a water ditching, from landing in swells, to water depth/conditions etc.. so it would be a lucky landing in the water. A land crash landing is much easier to predict and accomplish.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
There are so many variables in a water ditching, from landing in swells, to water depth/conditions etc.. so it would be a lucky landing in the water. A land crash landing is much easier to predict and accomplish.
So let's say that you would lose both engines at altitude (unlikely, I know) how far can an aircraft like a 777 actually glide?
Programs: AS MVP (withering away due to insane fares), UA, AA, AGR, NPS passport, Costco Exec
Posts: 5,179
Wow. What a story! (And a great writing job by Wikipedians!)
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_to_drag_ratio, airliners' L/D (and therefore, glide) ratios range from 12:1 (for the Gimli Glider) to 17:1 (for a Boeing 747), and other models (maybe the 777, with its computer-designed wings, or the 737 NG models, may be even better). (I did some flight training in a Diamond DA-20, which had an 11:1 glide ratio--pretty fun to do simulated engine failures in those...)
But taking the top of that range, an airliner at 41,000' would be able to glide 697,000', or over 136 miles. That's in the absolute best conditions, of course--I'd be curious what real-world situations are...
The SFO/LAX - SYD flights are flown with the 744, and are about 14 hours long. Since it's over 12 hours, there are four pilots, and on a 14 hour flight, each would get approximately a 6.5 hour break. The pilot rest facility is a set of bunk beds in the back of the cockpit - there is also a chair in the cockpit for reading.
Thanks for the reply, gumpfs. I have been on the SYD LAX flts but didnt notice the (spare) pilots going to take their break when I was on the UD - I was probably asleep myself . Or do you mean the bunks are part of the cockpit? It must be huge in there!
Thanks also to LarryJ for answering my oxygen mask question .
So let's say that you would lose both engines at altitude (unlikely, I know) how far can an aircraft like a 777 actually glide?
I always use two times your altitude as a quick wag, but I'd have to check the manuals to figure out the exact number. So, 41K, about 85 nm in no wind at best glide speed.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Programs: UA Mileage Plus 2P; VX Elevate; DL SkyMiles; WN Rapid Rewards
Posts: 222
I've got an ATC question. I was listening to SFO Tower the other day on Live ATC. It was the morning departure push with a ton of traffic. A Japan Air 744 was landing; followed by a UA 319. The UA captain asked what the separation was for the 744 and the controller said that the 744 was lined up for the parallel runway so "its' no factor." The UA captain was livid and concerned about wake turbulence even though it was the parallel runway. The controller told the UA flight that if they didn't like it they'd have to go around. The UA captain said "I'll accept it, but tell your buddies at Norcal they screwed us." My question: (1) how difficult is to land with wake turbulence ahead of you and (2) can you get in trouble with the FAA for making comments like the UA pilot did?
I've got an ATC question. I was listening to SFO Tower the other day on Live ATC. It was the morning departure push with a ton of traffic. A Japan Air 744 was landing; followed by a UA 319. The UA captain asked what the separation was for the 744 and the controller said that the 744 was lined up for the parallel runway so "its' no factor." The UA captain was livid and concerned about wake turbulence even though it was the parallel runway. The controller told the UA flight that if they didn't like it they'd have to go around. The UA captain said "I'll accept it, but tell your buddies at Norcal they screwed us." My question: (1) how difficult is to land with wake turbulence ahead of you and (2) can you get in trouble with the FAA for making comments like the UA pilot did?
1) Wake turbulence can cause a plane to crash, so it is a big deal. The runways at SFO are very close together and wake turbulence from a heavy just in front of you can be a big deal, especially if the winds will blow it down on your runway. ATC will attempt to give you 5 miles spacing behind a Heavy aircraft, but if one plane slows down early or you are going fast or ATC just messes up, that can end up being shorted.
2) No, you can't get in trouble. They could take offense and just send you around and set you up in line for the approach again if they took offense, but you can't be violated. Especially if they know they screwed up, they wouldn't say a thing.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Thanks for the reply, gumpfs. I have been on the SYD LAX flts but didnt notice the (spare) pilots going to take their break when I was on the UD - I was probably asleep myself . Or do you mean the bunks are part of the cockpit? It must be huge in there!
Thanks also to LarryJ for answering my oxygen mask question .
Yes, the bunks are in the cockpit, along the left side wall. Next time you're in the upper deck, you can see where they are. They are actually behind the cockpit door on the left side.
Yes, the bunks are in the cockpit, along the left side wall. Next time you're in the upper deck, you can see where they are. They are actually behind the cockpit door on the left side.
I actually got to see this in SYD on 1/31 - Captain Rider (Ryder?) and his crew were just hanging out on the upper deck before takeoff, I asked for a cockpit picture, and got a cockpit tour and picture with me in the left seat before taking off for MEL. I hadn't realized the bunks were in the cockpit before - although I wouldn't call them roomy.
How ofter do Pilots have "time to kill" before a takeoff? I thought my picture request would be handled after we landed in MEL.
How ofter do Pilots have "time to kill" before a takeoff? I thought my picture request would be handled after we landed in MEL.
Ideally, before every flight.
You want to have the preflight completed with time to spare so that if any problems are encountered there will be time to get their resolved without causing a delay.
. I have been on the SYD LAX flts but didnt notice the (spare) pilots going to take their break when I was on the UD - I was probably asleep myself 
