![]() |
Originally Posted by LarryJ
(Post 36416323)
I doubt the FA was talking about a physical alarm.
OR does UA have strict thresholds that they define as "alarms" for passenger behavior and response? |
Originally Posted by eng3
(Post 36416817)
Maybe I don't quite understand other types of "alarms". I heard "set off" so it sounded physical vs saying something is "alarming"
OR does UA have strict thresholds that they define as "alarms" for passenger behavior and response? E.g. something the passenger did or said made an alarm bell (figurative) ring in the FA's head. As the extreme but aviation example if I overheard a passenger, or anyone really, saying "I have a bomb" is likely to set off alarms in my head |
Originally Posted by lincolnjkc
(Post 36416955)
"set of (mental) alarms"
E.g. something the passenger did or said made an alarm bell (figurative) ring in the FA's head. As the extreme but aviation example if I overheard a passenger, or anyone really, saying "I have a bomb" is likely to set off alarms in my head I heard "They set off the alarm" twice. If someone said that to me, my first question would be "the alarm? which alarm??" And that's what I was asking here. The only way I can think of where that would make sense is if FA's received some training or memo or previous conversation where they established the "alarm" nomenclature. Maybe that's something common in commercial aviation? |
Originally Posted by LarryJ
(Post 36416323)
I doubt the FA was talking about a physical alarm.
seriously though,when on an over water route, and you hear Whoop whoop…..Terrain, Pull up! does it get confusing as there is obviously no terrain? |
Originally Posted by LaserSailor
(Post 36417568)
seriously though,when on an over water route, and you hear
Whoop whoop…..Terrain, Pull up! does it get confusing as there is obviously no terrain? A couple of years ago, I was departing one of the upstate New York airports at dawn. Beautiful clear, calm morning. About 80 knots on the the takeoff roll we got a full windshear alert. We rejected the takeoff, and did all the appropriate procedures, even though there was no way there could have been windshear in those conditions. When we reported it to the tower they said they had a windshear alert, too, indicating a strong loss of airspeed. I have no idea what would cause both systems to give a false warning like that. |
Originally Posted by LarryJ
(Post 36417783)
Nuisance GPWS alerts happen very infrequently. Even less, now, with the more advanced systems. It gets your attention, and you immediately verify your status, but that's about it.
A couple of years ago, I was departing one of the upstate New York airports at dawn. Beautiful clear, calm morning. About 80 knots on the the takeoff roll we got a full windshear alert. We rejected the takeoff, and did all the appropriate procedures, even though there was no way there could have been windshear in those conditions. When we reported it to the tower they said they had a windshear alert, too, indicating a strong loss of airspeed. I have no idea what would cause both systems to give a false warning like that. |
Originally Posted by LarryJ
(Post 36417783)
Nuisance GPWS alerts happen very infrequently. Even less, now, with the more advanced systems. It gets your attention, and you immediately verify your status, but that's about it.
A couple of years ago, I was departing one of the upstate New York airports at dawn. Beautiful clear, calm morning. About 80 knots on the the takeoff roll we got a full windshear alert. We rejected the takeoff, and did all the appropriate procedures, even though there was no way there could have been windshear in those conditions. When we reported it to the tower they said they had a windshear alert, too, indicating a strong loss of airspeed. I have no idea what would cause both systems to give a false warning like that. As for GPWS, I'd imagine this would be more of a problem for private aviation (assuming they have the system) or military as they might need to land at an airport that isn't in the database. Or a rarely used airport that has an error. I'd assume if a major airport started throwing false alarms, the mfr would get lots of complaints. |
Originally Posted by wxguy
(Post 36418361)
If it was BUF, it's possible you encountered a "lake breeze front."
Originally Posted by eng3
(Post 36418469)
If I see something from two completely separate instruments like this, I'd conclude that there was windshear.
|
Two questions:
First, I have an upcoming flight from HNL-SFO in a little under two weeks and the (admittedly very preliminary) weather models right now are showing either a hurricane or the leftovers of a hurricane directly in the normal flight path. From a pilot or dispatcher perspective, would United fly around the entire system to avoid bumps (probably adding between 30 and 60 minutes to the regular flight time) or would they instead go through (or over) it with the justification that it's just a big rain storm (assuming that it's something like a depression by that point) that poses no real threat to the flight even if it's bumpy? And who makes this call - the pilot or the dispatcher? Second, for the pilots in the room, as a nervous flyer it makes me feel a lot better to talk to the pilots prior to the flight to ask about expected turbulence and related issues such as weather. Assuming that there's not a huge rush to turn the plane around, do y'all mind a visit to the flight deck from passengers like me before the flight or is this an annoyance to you? Mahalo for the responses! |
Originally Posted by alenguy
(Post 36420338)
Two questions:
First, I have an upcoming flight from HNL-SFO in a little under two weeks and the (admittedly very preliminary) weather models right now are showing either a hurricane or the leftovers of a hurricane directly in the normal flight path. From a pilot or dispatcher perspective, would United fly around the entire system to avoid bumps (probably adding between 30 and 60 minutes to the regular flight time) or would they instead go through (or over) it with the justification that it's just a big rain storm (assuming that it's something like a depression by that point) that poses no real threat to the flight even if it's bumpy? And who makes this call - the pilot or the dispatcher? Second, for the pilots in the room, as a nervous flyer it makes me feel a lot better to talk to the pilots prior to the flight to ask about expected turbulence and related issues such as weather. Assuming that there's not a huge rush to turn the plane around, do y'all mind a visit to the flight deck from passengers like me before the flight or is this an annoyance to you? Mahalo for the responses! We left over an hour late and still made it early |
Originally Posted by alenguy
(Post 36420338)
Two questions:
First, I have an upcoming flight from HNL-SFO in a little under two weeks and the (admittedly very preliminary) weather models right now are showing either a hurricane or the leftovers of a hurricane directly in the normal flight path. From a pilot or dispatcher perspective, would United fly around the entire system to avoid bumps (probably adding between 30 and 60 minutes to the regular flight time) or would they instead go through (or over) it with the justification that it's just a big rain storm (assuming that it's something like a depression by that point) that poses no real threat to the flight even if it's bumpy? And who makes this call - the pilot or the dispatcher? Second, for the pilots in the room, as a nervous flyer it makes me feel a lot better to talk to the pilots prior to the flight to ask about expected turbulence and related issues such as weather. Assuming that there's not a huge rush to turn the plane around, do y'all mind a visit to the flight deck from passengers like me before the flight or is this an annoyance to you? Mahalo for the responses! |
Originally Posted by alenguy
(Post 36420338)
First, I have an upcoming flight from HNL-SFO in a little under two weeks and the (admittedly very preliminary) weather models right now are showing either a hurricane
Assuming that there's not a huge rush to turn the plane around, do y'all mind a visit to the flight deck from passengers like me before the flight or is this an annoyance to you? |
Question about weight & balance issues.
Just flew east coast to SFO on a Max 9. Front full but coach maybe 50% full (E+ roughly 75%, E- roughly 30-40%). I was in row 21 (because, as usual, I died #3 on the list even with PPs applied. I digress). Lead FA makes two announcements that everyone needs to be in their assigned seats for W&B issues. I look at the two guys sitting in row 20 wondering what they're doing there as the seat map shows that row totally empty. Lead FA comes back to my row, looks at me and the standby who cleared into 21C and says I need to move to the last row of the plane and I'll be compensated for my troubles. I start collecting my belongings (not saying a word) and then the lead FA apologizes, realizes I'm 1K and tells the standby pax he needs to move to the back. I told him for the right compensation I'd move - LOL. He was willing to go along but what the "computer" offered was meaningless so I declined. I mentioned to the lead FA that the two in row 20 were not supposed to be there. He asked them for their original seat assignments. One of the guys said, "They said it was OK for us to be here." That's it. Lead FA walked away. Huh?!?! You can imagine my confusion. W&B is a finicky metric and the safety of everybody on the plane is in jeopardy. Yet, it's ok for the two who were told it's "ok" to be in that row but the lead FA literally moves a single person on the plane from row 21 to row 39. That makes no sense. How is moving a single body from row 21 to row 39 fixing the W&B? W&B is calculated based on occupied seats as printed on the BP, no? Curious... -RM |
The weight and balance calculations have hard upper and lower limits. It the result is within those limits we are good, if they our outside of them then we are not. It doesn't matter how small the difference between the two, just that the final result is within limits.
It makes little practical difference when the change is that small but we still have to be within the certification limits. There is no +/- margin of error, like a political poll, that is acceptable. What happens is the load planner in Chicago sends up a message with specific instructions such as "row 7 must be empty" or "more one passenger from row 31 to for 8", etc. I've can't remember ever getting a message about moving to or from the exit row. In these cases, our final weights message is suppressed until we confirm that the change of seating has been made. |
1.) The other day I flew on a 772 from OGG-SFO. Halfway through the takeoff roll, fuel was spewing (like a lot) from the left fuel jettison tube. It lasted for probably 10-15 seconds but I've never seen it happen before. Once we were probably 100 feet in the air the flow ended. Any particular reason why that would happen? Can't imagine we were carrying a full load of fuel for only a 4.5 hour flight.
2.) On my second flight from SFO-CLE, we landed with what looked to be significant ice build up on the top of the wing. Significant as in 1/2 inch to an inch thick over probably 10 sqft of area, center of the wing (both sides of the plane). Not on any edges or anything. I'm guessing it's from cold soaked fuel, but even in the winter I've never seen so much ice built up on the wing. Does anything in the flight deck alert the crew that ice is building up? https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...49fc2b345.jpeg |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:05 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.