Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is it time for another "ask the pilot" thread?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:09 PM
Original message
Is it time for another "ask the pilot" thread?
I did this a year or so ago, but we have a lot of new folks now.
There are also some other pilots on the board and I'd welcome any comments they have too.
Me: 7 years Air National Guard fighter (sorta) pilot and 30+ years commercial, mostly with the late, lamented TWA.

So...what have you always wanted to know about flying but were afraid to ask?

Disclaimers:
1. I know a lot of stuff, but I don't know EVERYTHING.
2. There are no dumb questions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Were you the nutball that landed a C-130 on the birdfarm
the USS Forrestal in 1963? }( And if so, what were you thinking?!?!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. jaysus!
Unbelievabobble.
Nope, I got my wings in '64.
I think there was a JAG episode based on that the other night.
I thought it was pure BS.
I guess not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Here is the rest of the story - "Look Ma, no hook!"
You flyers are crazy. If mother nature wanted you to fly you would have been born with wings. I'll take my submarines anyday..snort..

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0097.shtm...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. WOW and thanks.
Did you read the one about the U-2?
'mazin'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #9
106. "And it's STILL there, till this day."
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CanuckAmok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. That's bonkers!
WHo would land a Herc on a carrier--what's the story behind this? Was it planned, or was it an "unscheduled" landing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DS1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. those little safety cards with
crash positions and post-water landing procedures are really just a cynical joke, aren't they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. yes and no
Edited on Sun Oct-26-03 02:27 PM by trof
I'm 6'2" and the post-crash position would probably just give me a broken neck and/or concussion.
The most important things on the card (and I read it every time) are the location of ALL the exits, how they operate (and which one is closest to you), and how to operate the over-wing exits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nlighten1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. I have a question...
What would you do for a Klondike bar?


:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Nothing
but I'll blow you for the Peanut Butter Cup.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ratty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. About this "Mile High Club"
Is it all just a joke?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. nope
It happens.
Passengers and crew.
And that's all I have to say on the matter.
I plead the fifth.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ratty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #10
37. *Grumble*
No details, eh? Okay, at least tell me this ... Pilots and stewards/stewardesses? Or pilots and girlfriend/boyfriend?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. I've heard of both.
And not confined to hetero, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ratty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #42
51. Why those naughty stewardesses!
So all those porno movies are TRUE after all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #42
116. My question: How? I can't even turn around in those holes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #116
121. You're assuming this only happens in the lavs?
Au contraire.
Next time you see a couple under a blanket, check to see if the blanket's moving.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #10
56. LOL
I left my glasses at work and read "I PLEAD THE FILTH"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #56
58. that, too
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrotherBuzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
11. Why is the cabin air so dry?
Seems that I always get a dry sinus sore throat thingy when I fly. Why can't you guys put a pan of water on the radiator or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. altitude and pressure
It's generally much drier as you go to altitude and the compressors/air conditioners that pressurize the cabin squeeze most of the remaining moisture out. I don't know why a humidifier wouldn't work, but I don't think I ever heard of one.
What I'd do is periodically breathe through a wet cloth. That seemed to help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
13. B-52's
Is it just me, or do those suckers look like prehistoric birds flapping their wings when they take off? Why do the wings have that vertical motion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Wings flex.
A certain amount of flex is built in. Otherwise they'd snap off in turbulence or wing loading in climbs and turns.
The B-52 does seem to have a lot of flex.
The flex on the B-747 was very noticeable if you watched for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Submariner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
16. trof - you missed this thread from the other day
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. thanks
got a tale for that thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. Woops, it's archived. Here's mine:
Fully loaded and fueled 747, Athens to JFK. Heavy, heavy mutha.
Right at v-1 #2 engine failed. FULL reverse on the other 3, lots of rudder, and two guys STANDING on the brakes. Tower says all wheels smoking and looks like one or more blown tires. Managed to clear the runway and stopped. Called for tug. About 15 minutes later, still waiting for the tug, we rather gently lost about a foot of altitude as all 16 fuse plugs in the main wheels melted. No tug needed now. Just some stairs and busses to get the peeps off.
Got an extra 2 days in Athens (very nice) while they flew in wheels & tires from Rome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Droopy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
17. Do pilots have hours of service regulations?
Or are us truckers the only ones in the transportation industry that have restrictions. I think they are a good thing, btw, they keep companies from abusing drivers with potentially harmful delivery schedules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Sure do.
There are FAA regs, but our union (ALPA) rules were more restrictive.
I think you guys have them because somebody in DOT thought if they were a good idea for us they'd be a good idea for you too, and I agree. Don't want no 18 wheeler falling asleep and making mincemeat out of my minivan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfecap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. Yes.
The FAA mandates duty and flight limits, depending on the type of operation (domestic/international), and regulations that the airline is flying under, (Air carrier, supplemental, charter, etc.)

Union rules are usually more restrictive.

Nonetheless, crew fatigue is perhaps the most ignored element in airline safety today.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. Boy, did you ever hit the nail on the head.
Launching a max grossed 747 at 2 a.m. after no sleep, no matter how hard I tried, and thinking if the slightest thing goes wrong me and these other 2 zombies are dead meat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
20. Why do they store the lavatory seats in the deep freeze?
Do airlines have special freezers for that? I swear, my last trip home to Ireland, I had frostbite of the arse after using one. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. It's an FAA reg.
;-)
The lavs always seem to be the coldest place on the airplane. Could be location, insulation, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldSoldier Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #20
107. It gets you the hell out of there, doesn't it?
You got 400 people and six johns on the plane. The last thing you need is some schmuck sitting on the pot, reading his entire copy of War and Peace, because the lights are off for the in-flight movie.

To motivate people to do their business and leave, they pump refrigerant through the seat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfecap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
22. What makes lift?
And why when I pull back do the houses get smaller, but if I keep pulling back they get bigger? :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Early accident investigation
of a crunched-on-landing JN-4 (I think) stated that due to the high number of take-offs and landing on the field that all of the lift had been used up.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
23. Why Do The Flight Attendants MUMBLE...
... or speak too loudly into the microphone (which causes their voices to be garbled an unintelligible)?

-- Allen

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #23
27. I've Always Hated This... "We'd Like To Thank You For Flying With Us" or..
Edited on Sun Oct-26-03 03:07 PM by arwalden
"We would like to welcome you to Baltimore."

I feel like answering them with "You would? Well why don't you?" It's a minor thing, but sometimes using a passive voice and passive phrases doesn't sound right.

Instead, I'd like to hear "On behalf of Grits Airlines... Welcome To Baltimore! The temperature in Baltimore is a cool and comfortable 68 degrees."

Okay... rant over. That's all I had to say.

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DS1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #27
40. and how can someone welcome you to a place
you both got to at the same time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. Excellent Observation...
... the welcom-er can welcome the welcome-ee, they ought to be there ahead of time.

"I was here first. Now you're here too. So WELCOME!"

makes much more sense than

"Well, we're here. WELCOME!"

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #44
97. Except that
...From a lateral perspective, the pilot and flight crew do arrive first, followed by the passengers in row order.

But, from an up-down perspective, the passengers in the rear land first (rear wheels go down first).

It's a humdrum conundrum. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldSoldier Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #27
123. Northwest did that to me once...
Spokane to Minneapolis en route to JFK via O'Hare. Plane lands in Minneapolis.

"Northwest Orient Airlines welcomes you to Minneapolis. The temperature outside is a seasonably pleasant thirteen below zero, and there is a foot and a half of snow on the ground."

I didn't want to hear that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. For the life of me, I don't know
why they don't spend a few more bucks on a decent sound system.
If I'm sitting under a speaker I hear "grrble mmeble braaaack shtshhhh mrek merble".
I think they got a deal on these speakers from old drive-in movies.
No, even those speakers were better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
25. I personally want to thank you for...
your healthy dollop of sanity, reason and factual information into that whole loony Paul Wellstone plane-crash poll thread. :hug: :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. Wow. Was that me?
I'm usually the guy running around with his hair on fire.
;-)
You are personally welcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
32. Gotta go start the chili.
I'll check back a little later.
Meanwhile, if any of DU's other distinguished Professors of Aviation want to chime in, have at it.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
33. "Secure" cockpits, etc.
Just how secure are the new cockpits? Would you open the door for a non-crew member? Do you know any pilots who took the firearms training, and carry now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sfecap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #33
38. Very secure.
No, I would not open the door to a non crewmember under any circumstances.

No. Guns in the cockpit is s dumb idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. Great answer!
I'm not a pilot, but I always thought that a secure cockpit and getting the plane on the ground a.s.a.p seemed the most likely, ligical way to save lives, rather than getting into a cowboy shootout with a hijacker. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #38
43. Gee, somebody who agrees with me.
I am (was) a pilot, not a cop.
We {our union(s)} have been trying to get a truly secure, bullet-proof cockpit since the 60s. If you knew that you couldn't get control of the aircraft, would you get on board anyway, just to see how many passengers you could kill before they killed you?
No big headlines there. Small ones, but not big.

Many of my friends (still in the business) want to be armed. I kinda think it's more of a self-preservation thing than anything else.
If you want a cop on board, hire a cop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. Yeah
I always thought that was the purpose of the 'sky marshals'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #43
49. and another thing...
There's a saying in aviation that you can't remedy a potentially unsafe situation until you kill enough people.
On 9-11 we killed enough, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
34. I Never See People Actually Reviewing The Safety Card Info...
why? (How stupid is that? Their ignorance when it comes time to quickly exit the plane has a direct affect on MY PERSONAL SAFETY.)

And... where is the safest place to ride on an airplane. Front? (first impact) Middle? (highly flamable wings) Rear? (slow exit).

-- Allen (the alarmist)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. I read it every time.
I also listen to the attendants when they do their demo; my only objection to the card is that it doesn't include a section on "How to Claw Your Way Over The Dummies Who Didn't Read This Card". :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. You sir! Yes YOU! The man with the red sweater in seat C-42. Please...
pay attention! This plane will not take off until we go over these procedures. You're just going to delay the flight and ruin it for everybody if you don't sit down and be quiet and listen to me while you read along silently.

-- Allen


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. LOL!
I actually told this moron next to me on my last flight home to "Be quiet! Some of us are interested in finding out how to survive a crash, evn if you aren't!". My bad... :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #34
46. Sometimes I had to deadhead.
Ride as a passenger on my airline while on duty and in uniform.
Usually to get me to where an airplane was waiting for a crew.
Especially when in uniform, I always made a bit of a production out of getting out reading the emergency info card, even if I was on the aircraft I was fully qualified in and could quote you chapter and verse on ALL the emergency precedures.
I hoped passengers would see me and think "Gee, even the pilot is reading this thing. Maybe I better take a look."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #34
47. oh yeah...safest place
All other things being equal (whatever THAT means), and depending on the aircraft...the tail.

I have seen crashes where the tail section broke off and most just walked out of it while everyone forward of them died, usually from "smoke" (actually toxic gasses) inhalation. I wish they'd make interiors out of non-flammable, non-toxic materials, but that would cost more so I guess it won't happen. The old U.S.S.R. state airline, Aeroflot, had many of their first class sections in the tail.

However, my first choice is by an over-wing exit. I like to have as much control as possible when it's time to deplane. Usually has more legroom too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Hot meals
Why do the hot meals served invariably taste like cat food and look like Alpo over chow mein noodles?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. The answer to almost every airline problem
or shortcoming is $$$$$$$$$$$$$.
If it cuts into the bottom line, they don't want to hear about it.
I actually remember way back when the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) ran the pricing end of flights. If 3 airlines flew from Chicago to New York, they all had to charge the same price. The only ways they COULD compete was amenities like quality and variety of food, frequency of service (although the CAB controlled much of that too), free magazines, beauty of flight attendants (it's true!), etc.

Even uniforms. For a while, TWA f/a's changed into paper dresses after take-off. Everybody carried a pair of scissors and we had competitions for the shortest mini. I am NOT making this up. These were the good ol' days when flying was fun. At least the first class meals were gourmet creations, and the coach vittles weren't bad either.

You don't have to worry about that now, because I don't think anyone gets fed any more. At least not on domestic flights. Some airlines are going to start SELLING coach meals. I'd rather brown-bag it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. Yeah
Last time I flew domestically, I just bought some cheese and a couple of apples; you should have seen the steward's look when I asked him if he could give me a knife! :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueJazz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
50. Question: Do you ever get up so high that you're....
....able to see planets (bright ones) or stars during the day.
I ask this cause one of the Pilots on the Concorde said that
every so often they can.. (being that the Atmosphere is so thin and the sun's light isn't scattered )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #50
53. They flew higher than the rest of us subsonic types.
The highest I ever got (aviationally) was around 55,000 feet (military, T-38). At high noon, the sky was purple-black and I could see the moon and a few stars. If I remember correctly, I was above 95% of the earth's atmosphere. It's the air that makes the sky "blue".

You do get a lot better view of stars and meteor showers (and Northern Lights) at 35,000 feet at night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
55. why are some people such assholes in airports?
they complain about everything but you see them trying to carry on luggage the size of a mattress; dripping with metal and jewelry going thru the detecters; whining that the food doesn't taste like mom's. TOTAL IDIOTS!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #55
66. You noticed.
Edited on Sun Oct-26-03 06:17 PM by trof
Beats the hell out of me. Perfectly capable people who may even run major corporations (not necesarily mutually exclusive) seem to check their brains when they walk through the terminal doors. Not just nasty and whining, but terminally STOOPID.

The only theory I can offer is that they aren't comfortable flying and basically being "out of control" during that time and their brains can't deal with it and just lock up.

"Is there any place I can get something to eat?"
"Yes mam, right in there."
We are standing in front of one of the half dozen eateries in the concourse. There are huge neon signs in front of all of them.

"Where's the men's room?"
"Right down there."
See that BIG sign with the directional arrow that says "REST ROOMS"? Try that.

One of my favorites. The flight engineer hated to go back and replace a burned out reading lightbulb in flight because:
People would see this and now EVERYONE would check their reading light. Even if they were watching the movie and not reading or 2 seconds before had been in a deep sleep. "By God I paid for a damn reading light and I want mine!" When he went back to change one, he always took a half dozen bulbs with him.

People.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #66
86. it's a good theory
the pain in the ass passengers - ha, I remember my dad suggesting I might want to be a stewardess. I WOULD KICK THOSE PASSENGERS' ASSES SO FAST.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #86
92. You can be on my crew.
I could have used a good ass kicker a few times.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #86
120. Skittles as a stewardess--damn, I'd love to see that!
ROFLMAO at the scenario! Thank you for brightening my day already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kamika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
57. when you take kids to the cockpit
Edited on Sun Oct-26-03 05:53 PM by Kamika
is that like airplane company policy and they force you to do it or do you actually like to do it.


When i was like 5 KLM did it and it was so cool for a 5 year old girl :D I even got a pin and stuff
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. Cockpit visitors?
Aw yeah, us sky gods always got a kick out of that, at least I did.
I wish now I'd written down some of the questions and comments they made. Grown ups too. Priceless.

In his heyday, I had Johhny Carson on a red-eye from JFK to LAX. He slept the first half of the flight and then came up on the jumpseat for the last half. We pretty much got a 3 hour monologue of jokes and inside Hollywood/TV stories that he could NEVER tell on his show. He was an aviation buff and I let him sit up in my seat for a while (auto-pilot ON). I don't think that was quite within the rules, even back then.

Back in the olden, pre-hijacking days we'd leave the cockpit door open and folks could wander up and chat and have a look around.
I put Miz t. in the jumpseat (right behind me and looking over my shoulder)for a couple of landings. She was way impressed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kamika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. sucks they ruined it
i wish it was like that now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #61
63. me too
We're incorrigible show offs.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #57
65. So...Do You Like Gladiator Movies? Have you ever been in a Turkish prison?
-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #65
69. 1. some 2. no
Only been in one "prison".
They let me spend the night in an open cell when my buddy got arrested for DUI and I had no other way home.
If I had been driving they would have locked me up too.
Luck of the draw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
59. Boeing. Macdonald-Douglass, or Airbus?
Edited on Sun Oct-26-03 05:42 PM by Padraig18
Who makes the safest planes? The reason I ask is that a pilot friend of mine says he prefers not to take M-D equipment, if another option is available.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #59
62. I liked Lockheed best.
The L-1011, from a pilot's standpoint, was my favorite. Years ahead of it's time. By losing what was basically a political battle (complicated) Lockheed was forced out of the airliner business.
Except for an early stint on Convair 880s (and my time in the 1011) all my experience was on Boeings. 727, 707, and 747. Never flew Macdonald-Douglass, or Airbus. Don't like much of what I've heard and seen of the Airbus fly-by-wire and autoflight system. Maybe they have the bugs worked out by now.

More important than the airframe (to me) was the engines. Flew Pratt & Whitneys and Rolls Royce until my last 10 years. Then GE.
GE was the absolute best, based purely on personal experience, hands down. They could apparently eat all manner of crap and keep right on chuggin'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #62
90. What;s the biggest thing your engine ever ate?
I flew mostly (as passenger) in small aircraft and my job was to watch for geese.

I've seen footage of a military jet eating a person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #90
93. A fat sea gull.
Out of SFO on the way to Anchorage early one morning. Didn't know what happened at the time. Got a little vibration at lift off. Engine instruments all looked OK. At about 15,000 feet, while we were still trying to diagnose and locate the problem, the vibration ceased.

Mechanics did a visual inspection of exterior and engines at Anchorage. Nothing. The new crew took it on to Narita (Tokyo International) and reported no problems inflight. At Narita, our main maintenance base, a more detailed inspection revealed damage to compressor blades in one engine and enough dried blood & tissue to indicate a sea gull. They can always be a problem at seaside airports.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
64. I Always Check To Make Sure My Lifevest Hasn't Been Stolen...
... or otherwise removed. I haven't actually tried it on and pulled the little auto-inflate cord.

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. You are a thinking man.
I mean I already knew that, but wow.
Like insurance, much better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
Good on ya Allen.
I'd fly with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
68. ever get tailed by anything wierd?
or hear of that, from pilot friends?

i also hear pilots wont talk about that stuff because they might get grounded or something. is that true?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. You mean UFOs?
Don't quite understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #70
76. uhuh
but close enough to at least be able to identify the "wierdness"
maybe somethin like this..
plz critique -> http://autocannibal.home.comcast.net/pilotufo1.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #76
82. Looks a lot like a meteor shower,
but who knows?
I have seen things that I couldn't positively identify, but I had a pretty acceptable (to me) idea what they might be. I've never had anything "track" me.
I do not discount the possibility (even probablilty) that we aren't the only ones "here".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
71. Was There REALLY A Problem With Drunken Pilots? Or Was It...
... a hot sensational story that sold newspapers and hooked viewers?

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #71
77. Since I think the statute of limitations has passed...
It crops up in aviation, like any other profession.
I've put a fellow pilot to bed more than once.
In my younger days I've flown on days when I was damned glad (and lucky) that everything on the aircraft worked as advertised.
I've had a co-pilot show up red-eyed and reeking and probably not quite even hungover...yet.

Taken as a group, pilots are (or at least used to be) a hard driving, fast living, booze drinking bunch. Maybe a holdover from the post WWII guys who were the first airline pilots when the industry really started to take off (pun intended). Flying for a living was more of a crapshoot back then and I think a lot of us were fatalists. We looked up to them. A fighter pilot's breakfast (following a night of debauchery) was "a puke and a cigarette". Read "The Right Stuff" and you'll get a good flavor of the (fighter) pilot mystique. When things get too tough for everybody else, they're just right for me. I can hack it, no matter what.

As a youngster I flew with a captain who spent every night of every layover sitting at the bar with a pair of Ray-Bans on and downing Martinis until closing. He was one of the wittiest, most intelligent men I have ever known. I never saw visible signs of drunkenness and he showed up every morning (Ray-Bans still in place. I think he slept in them.) ready to go to work and did an excellent job. Go figure.

Having confessed all that, I think the modern generation of pilots are a lot more calmed down and responsible. They all seem to be health nuts now. All the airlines that I know about have substance abuse programs in place and I don't think fellow pilots are reluctant to turn in a cohort any more. For good or ill (I think ill) we were not like that. "We took care of our own." We "carried" the weaker ones, covered for them. A career and family was at stake. Although I subscribed to it at the time (There, but for the grace of God...) I don't now.

That's my 2 cents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
72. Did the BFEE blast your plane with microwaves when you flew politicians?
:P :tinfoilhat:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #72
78. Every single time.
That's why I lined my uniform cap with aluminum foil.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #72
89. Heee heee heeee
ROFLMAO

fell off my chair and everything
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
73. Do Notebook Computers And Cell Phones REALLY Interfere...
... with the plane's controls and communications?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #73
79. I honestly don't know.
I'm no electronics engineer.
Maybe somebody around here can explain it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
74. Is It Safe To Check Pets As Luggage? Wouldn't They Get Cold?
Or excessively HOT once the plane landed in Miami? Is the luggage compartment climate controlled and pressurized?

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #74
80. At least one usually is.
Usually the rear baggage compartment is climate controlled and pressurized. Still a bit noisy and probably a frightening place for an animal.

The biggest problem is on the ramp. Jet engine noise can severely damage or destroy a dog's hearing and generally screw them up. I ALWAYS wore hearing protection on the ramp. Many of my friends pooh-poohed it and are deaf as posts now. In a hot climate, heat's a problem too. Many time a pet will be in it's cage on the ramp for hours.

I've never shipped a pet, and I could do it for free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
75. Do you still say "stewardess"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #75
81. Naw, we call 'em "air bags".
Oh, I am so going to get my ass whipped.
Just kidding folks.
In my early days we called them "stews".
They were exclusively female except for the purser on international flights. He was the cabin boss and, oddly enough, many times gay. The first male F/As were too. At least that was my experience. That has changed also. Until the recent financial holocaust brought on by 9/11 F/A was a pretty good job. Farirly decent pay and benefits, and free world travel to boot. Still, it's a hard job and one I wouldn't do.

Feminism was on the rise, the flight attendant unions got stronger, we got a little more "educated" and they became Flight Attendants (F/As) or Cabin Attendants. I've even heard some refer to themselves as safety personnel.

In the early days (even before my time) they were required to be registered nurses. That eventually dropped by the wayside in favor of "cute". When I started out, F/A was NOT a career. The girls (oh my) did it for a few years until (hopefully) they married a rich passenger. Like going to college and majoring in "husband". Most did. I think the airlines could actually fire you after a certain age. All that has obviously changed now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychopomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 04:12 AM
Response to Reply #81
91. sounds like the way the profession is today
in Japan. Not a career, just a way to travel, make bucks and hopefully meet a guy who wants to marry. FAs have a bit of status, still, in Japan, and it is a job for those on the marriage track.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
83. and goodnight all
It's been an interesting and thought/memory provoking thread.
BTW, the chili was excellent.
<blush>
I'll check this in the a.m. to see if anything else came up.
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Superfly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
84. Ok....how efficient are
jet liners, expressed in miles-per-gallon during take off, cruise, and descent? What is the average efficiency of, say a 747, heavy, during a trans-oceanic flight, also in MPG?
.
.
.
.
You don't feel so bad about people having a Hummer H2 anymore, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #84
94. Don't remember all the numbers now,
but I once did some gee whiz calculations for the amusement of passengers on a long leg during the 70s gas crunch.
A full 747 is remarkably fuel efficient and non-polluting compared to surface transportation.
I think it came out something like...
if each of my 400 passengers made a New York to California trip driving a car they'd have to average something like 35 mpg to equal the fuel burn of the aircraft. The polution created by 400 internal combustion engines runing for 40-something hours was infinitely greater than that of 4 jet engines running for 6 or 7 hours.
Interesting question.
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
really-looney Donating Member (330 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
85. Ever fly with Captian Hoglander
He was also with TWA and in the Air National Guard for many years. Similar background and a great Democrat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #85
95. Hell yes!
You know Harry?
I liked him very much.
He was head of our union for a while.
Give him my regards, if he's (hopefully) still around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
really-looney Donating Member (330 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #95
99. Still around and still raising hell
The good Captain was appointed by President* to serve on the National Mediation Board so he is still active in union issues just on the other side of the table now. By the other side of the table I mean government service not union service.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #99
100. Is he still around Boston?
Were you with TWA?
Gee, a gummint puke now.
Who'da thought it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
87. What, exactly, does setting the air pressure on the altimeter accomplish?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #87
96. I'll give it my best shot.
This may be TMI (Too Much Information).

Also, with the advent of radio and radar altimeters, not quite a crucial as it used to be.

Some organization, DOD, AAC/AAF, FAA, Bureau of Standards?...whatever...a long time ago established a "standard day" as having a barometric pressure of 29.92 inches of mercury. That was used as a standard to establish Mean Sea Level (MSL) at zero feet. Barometric altimeters measure feet above (or below...Death Valley) MSL, and for a long time barometric altimeters were the only thing we had.

However..."standard days" are few and far between. Barometric pressure (as measured at the surface) usually varies daily and even hourly. The pressure (baro) altimeter has a little knob and window so you can change the setting to coincide with the surface pressure. Most altimeters were manufactured by the Kollsman company, so we call this the "Kollsman window".

OK, let's say that the runway elevation at destination airport is 600' above MSL. On a standard day the Kollsman window setting on the ground would be 29.92. But it's not a standard day and a guy at the airport has measured the pressure at 30.15. When you begin your descent you reset your Kollsman window to 30.15 so that you will match the actual pressure and accurately reflect your actual altitude above the field. When you land, your altimeter should read 600', NOT zero. All altitudes on instrument approaches are (were? I've been gone a while.) given in height above MSL. If you have a 200' minimum approach altitude going into a 600' MSL airport, it will be shown as 800'. If you are taking off, you also set the local pressure so you'll have an accurate readout in the climb.

If I remember correctly you reset your altimeter at 18,000 feet. So, below 18,000 you reflect local pressure, but ABOVE 18,000 you want all aircraft to use the SAME setting for traffic separation to avoid collisions. 29.92 above FL180, local setting below.

That's about the best explanation I can give off the top of my head.
Was this just a test of an aging aviator's gray matter and you already knew the answer?
;-)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #96
101. Followup question
I had a pretty fair idea.

Why, in Microsoft Flight Simulator, is the elevation on the altimeter given from the current runway, not actual altitude?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #101
102. Aha! A sim pilot.
Let me try this example.
First, they always measure the pressure on the ground. Ground level is the only constant data plain they can use (I think).

You're sitting on the runway that's 600' above MSL. You have 29.92 set in the Kollsman window and your altimeter reads 590'. You set in the number they give you, maybe 29.98, and NOW your altimeter reads 600'.

I used to know how many tenths of an inch change in pressure equaled how many feet, but that is gone in the mists of time now. I can't even remember if a higher altimeter setting equals lower altitude, or vice versa. Whatever, you can see there's a direct relationship.

To go one final step farther, you adjust the number they give you for your particular instrument (altimeter). Instrument error may make it a little off.

OK, we're back on the runway. They give you an altimeter setting of 29.98. You set that and your altimeter reads 595'. NOW, you correct your altimeter so that it reads 600'. Maybe that gives you a setting of 30.00. You apply that same +.02 instrument correction to all future altimeter settings. Except when you are on an IFR flight plan above FL180, and then EVERYBODY is on a straight 29.92. Don't ask me why you don't apply your correction above 180, it just somehow works.

There is a limit that your altimeter can be off. If it exceeds that it has to be pulled, recalibrated, bench tested and reinstalled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #102
103. that's not my problem
You're sitting at Calgary International, waaaay up in the foothills, and your altimeter says 000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #103
104. If it's a radio/radar altimeter it should.
They read actual height above whatever's under you.
If you also have a barometric altimeter, it should read height above Mean Sea Level, or actual airport elevation when you're on the ground.
Maybe the sim doesn't have a baro altimeter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Book Lover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-26-03 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
88. Am I crazy to still want to become a commercial pilot
at the age of 34? If all goes as planned, I'll begin the process for getting my license in January (time constraints holding it up until then). I can do many things to earn my living; would it be worthwhile to add this skill to them?

Oh, I just re-read what I wrote: I know I'm crazy... Let's hope textbook publishing management doesn't get shipped to India, and me and mine are safe for a while.

I do have another question: I used to work subcontracted passenger service for a little outfit who served Nigeria Air, as well as a cheapie travel airline (name? who the hell can remember...) Was it better working for one of the big 'uns? I never got to deadhead anywhere, and always wanted to...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #88
98. Yes. No. Maybe.
I quit in 1999 and the airline biz is a whole different world now.
34 is a bit late to start. I believe that mandatory retirement is still at age 60, although this may change. As it stands now, you'd have a 26 year career, at best.

1. I got my training in the air national guard/USAF. I take a certain perverse pride in the fact that I have never paid for one minute of flying time. To the contrary, every time I have strapped an airplane to my butt I have been paid to do it. Handsomely for the most part.

2. To get the necessary licenses in the civilian world takes a long time and is very expensive. Building enough hours to even be considered by a major carrier is a tedious process. Civilian pilots on an airline track usually start as private instructors and move on (when able) to charter work, corporate flying (generally the pits), commuter airlines (still the pits) and...MAYBE...eventually the majors.

3. Most of the U.S. airlines are at or near bankruptcy. I don't think it's gonna get any better for the foreseeable future.

4. I have no idea what the market for commercial pilots is now. The Viet Nam era pilots are hitting/have hit retirement. The present military isn't cranking out near as many pilots as they used to. On the other hand, all airlines have downsized to try and cope with the current market conditions. Try a google for more info on future needs.

5. Although I enjoyed my career for the most part, it wasn't all skittles and beer. I was furloughed (laid off) 3 times for a total of about 5 1/2 years. It was impossible to get a decent job because employers knew you were really a "temp" and would eventually be recalled (union rules) to the airline. At least twice a year (once in the simulator, once in the aircraft) I faced a potentially career ending check ride monitored by an FAA inspector or one of our FAA designated company guys. Most of us got "check-itis" to one degree or another. In the simulator you'll experience every inflight emergency imagineable. I knew pilots who were excellent on the line, in day-to-day operations, who really had to struggle with sim checks. Let's say my anxiety level rose a few weeks before each one of these. Plus, an FAA inspector could come on a regularly scheduled flight at any time for a no-notice check ride. Whew. In addition I had to pass a pretty stringent physical exam twice a year. Again, a potential career ender.

I guess, bottom line, if I were graduating from college today, I wouldn't be considering an airline career. Unless...unless I had the overwhelming burning desire and the fire in the belly to be a pilot. That might make up for some of the hardships and obstacles.
I don't mean to discourage you if this is what you've got your heart set on.
Good luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Book Lover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #98
108. I have thought of and heard from others everything you have said here...
But I love to fly and want to fly... Having been born too late, and the wrong gender to get my time in in the military, I think this is one of those things that gets placed on the "do it as a hobby" list. Only lack of money or injury will prevent me from getting my license; I can be content with that.

Ever read the "Ask the Pilot" weekly column on Salon?

Thanks for taking the time to reply :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #108
113. Never seen the column.
I'll take a look.
thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
105. Hey can I get some more peanuts back here?
Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #105
112. PEANUTS dammit!
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #112
119. Please pull your hostess call button.
Oh here.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Superfly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
109. I don't know if you can answer this...
but what do you think the effect on high-angle-of-attack flight attitudes the radar dish on AWACS planes would have? I know at 0 deg AOA, the dish has zero lift, but at high AOA what would the effects be? Would the plane stall differently?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #109
114. I can't.
But I would guess that it affects the aerodynamics and CG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zero Gravitas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
110. Why aren't all domestic airlines as good as
MIDWEST EXPRESS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #110
115. Management?
The most enjoyable flight I ever had as a passenger was on Southwest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #115
124. I think Southwest ROCKS!
Cheap, too! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Braden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-03 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
111. whats a Yaw Damper?
and why would I want to Damper my Yaw, and conversely why wouldn't I?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #111
117. Here ya go
Yaw Damper


Weight: 3.1 lbs.
Power: 1.9 amps @ 14 or 28 VDC
Panel Size: 0.82"W x 1.77"H x 2.00"L




With passenger comfort its primary function, the Century Yaw Damper is an independent subsystem compatible with any autopilot system. It enhances directional stability by eliminating short-term yaw oscillations. It assures exact coordination in all turns and maneuvers through the use of an exclusive rate gyro and electrolytic potentiometer (skid sensor), thus reducing pilot workload. These composite signals are tuned to the natural yaw frequency of each aircraft model for maximum performance.

Century Flight Systems offers several different models of Yaw Damper systems. These yaw dampers are considered stand-alone systems unless they are approved as part of the autopilot system. Some of the yaw damper systems have the capability to be interconnected to the autopilot systems to provide full three axis control when the autopilot is engaged and disengagement of the yaw damper when the autopilot master disconnect is used.

The Century 41 autopilot system and the 1C753-100 and 200 series yaw computer can be interconnected to allow the engagement of the yaw damper when the Century 41 autopilot is engaged. Disengagement of the autopilot through the use of the ON-OFF button on the autopilot programmer or activation of the electric trim switch will not disengage the yaw damper. The yaw damper can only be deactivated by use of the AP Disconnect/Trim Interrupt switch on the control wheel or by depressing the ON-OFF switch on the Yaw Controller. The 1C753-( ) or the 1C651-( ) yaw damper systems can be used with the Century 41 autopilot system, but cannot be interconnected for the single acction of engage or disengagement. These yaw damper systems have a panel mounted ON-OFF switch that must be activated.

The Century 2000 autopilot system is essentially just like the Century 41 autopilot as far as the yaw damper system is concerned with one difference. The Century 2000 does not use the yaw damper controller in the 1C753-100 & 200 series. The Century 2000 has the capability to annunciate yaw damper engagement, adjust yaw damper centering and provide an ON-OFF switch. The 1C753-( ) or the 1C651-( ) yaw damper system can also be used with the Century 2000 but cannot be interconnected for engagement or disengagement.

For today's high performance aircraft, it is that final touch of refinement required by conscientious pilots.
http://www.centuryflight.com/products/frame/yaw.htm





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Braden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #117
118. cool. Its just for comfort?
especially useful when you are in 56c on a 747.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-03 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #118
122. Dutch Roll
Many swept wing aircraft suffer a dynamic instability problem known as Dutch Roll.

Dutch roll happens when the aircraft has relatively strong static lateral stability (usually due to the swept wings) and somewhat weak directional stability (relatively.) In a Dutch roll the aircraft begins to yaw due to a gust or other input. The yaw is slow damping out so the aircraft begins to roll before the yaw is stopped (due to the increased speed of the advancing wing and the increased lift due to the swept wing effect.)

By the time the yaw stops and begins to swing back toward zero slip the aircraft has developed a considerable roll rate and due to momentum plus the slip angle the aircraft continues to roll even once the nose has begun returning to the original slip angle.

Eventually the yaw overshoots the zero slip angle causing the wings to begin rolling back in the opposite direction.

The whole procedure repeats, sometimes with large motions, sometimes witch just a small churning motion. Like all dynamic stability problems, Dutch roll is much worse at high altitudes where the air is less dense.

Dutch roll is almost certain to happen in a jet aircraft if the Yaw dampener is turned off at high altitude. Therefore, the first thing to check if an aircraft begins to exhibit Dutch roll is that the Yaw Dampener is on. The pilot should then try to minimize the yawing oscillations by blocking the rudder pedals (i.e. hold the rudder pedals in the neutral position.) Next apply aileron (spoiler) control opposite to the roll. The best technique to use is short jabs of ailerons applied opposite to the roll. Try to give one quick jab on each cycle (i.e. turn the wheel toward the rising wing, then return it to neutral.) Finally accelerate to a higher speed, where directional stability will be better, or descend into more dense air, for the same reason.
http://142.26.194.131/aerodynamics1/Stability/Page5.htm...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 19th 2014, 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC