Numbers
 

Are American Pilots personally charged for each set of numbers they send off? Really need that Full length instead of an intersection departure 200 feet down at a sea level airport? Let’s get it together guys we all see through that “operation purposes” BS.

What the hell are you taking about?

I suppose you were on the jumpseat and knew exactly what was going on with the jet

I’m paid by the minute.

Well, if we don’t have the numbers in front of us via our “TPS”, then we can’t do it unless we can make another T/O data request via ACARS and reload everything once we get it, so we’d end up just clogging up the line anyway. So, if we’ve got the numbers, then it’s usually no problem. No numbers, then it’s just way easier and more practical to say unable.

Honestly, though, why do you care? If you’re behind us, you take the intersection while we head for the end. BFD.

If we don't have an analysis for a particular intersection (or the ability to get said numbers), we have to use the analysis that we have. Don't blame us. Blame the FAA.

Numbers.....airline pilots love numbers!!
Numbers like V1, 16%, 401 and the letter K, 777, W and 2

Not so much the number 65.

Are you guys able to request numbers for more than one runway? Should be an easy uplink if you can receive data for multiples? Am I right?

Release comes with data lines for 5 runways/intersections. If departure runway is different, need new numbers. If winds, weights, or temps come in high at closeout, need new numbers. Sometimes a request is answered quickly (computer spits out data), sometimes it takes time because load planner needs to massage configuration (flaps, packs off, etc). Hell, sometimes closeout isn’t provided until last moment. 🤷

I don’t know. Are you right? You were fairly certain of things with your thread starter but you clearly don’t know what goes on for pulling data.

This is what you’re worried about on a Saturday night?

And boom goes the dynamite. Al for the win.

I find the AA way of pulling new t/o numbers to be fairly tedious personally, and have also seen Capts backtaxi for an extra 200' of takeoff roll on a 10,000' runway in a small narrowbody rather than using the X intersection numbers that had no change.

Also the way AA does their intersection notation is whacky.

Agreed. It's way more complicated than it needs to be. But we've always done it that way. #facepalm

You must really have a pitiful life.

English please? The first sentence still has my wondering what you are trying to say. Edit and delete it.

“Has my wondering”? English please? I have no idea what you’re trying to convey with that. Edit and delete please.

This comes across as an accusation instead of a question. Is there a specific airport that you have run into AA aircraft causing you a problem?

To be legal we have to have the data(as I imagine you do unless the FAA let you have pretty some loose performance procedures.) As the above poster said, sometimes it's easy, sometimes it's not. Sometimes it's quick, sometimes it's not. But, at least on the A320, we set our data before start. We can and often do get and set new numbers, but that opens the door for errors as it's not as easy to cross check while taxiing. A new TPS could have a different flap setting for something as simple as a 200' intersection. Is it worth it at the last minute instead of a quick back taxi? Maybe, maybe not, but again...what has caused you an issue?

Now, what I really want to know is why do UA guys always ask for ride reports every time they check on a new freq.? ;):D

All this legality talk is utter nonsense. Just get this guy airborne 39 seconds earlier!

I would have just ignored the thread entirely but it's too fun to make fun of this guy for totd.

Dear moderators, why isnt this flamebait? You guys are throwing points my way, spread the points this guys way.

If you see a violation of forum rules, use the “report post” icon. Do not comment on Moderation or reply with a bad post of your own.

Just curious, how do other airlines do it and why is it overly complicated at AA? I thought all airlines used very similar takeoff data. I’ve only flown at a regional before AA and the takeoff data calculations were similar.

To me, the TPS system is reliable and pretty spot on. It gives data for up to 5 runways including intersections. How much more simpler and/or easier can it be?

Sure, if you come in heavier or hotter than planned you gotta make some adjustments.. pull new data or go max thrust. but isn’t that the case at all other airlines?

Thats what I do. Just kidding, thanks

PSA was a little faster of a system for changes. But it wouldn't work at AA. The weight and balance stuff was done differently in the acars. But the info came faster. Which was nice. Sometimes here you feels like it's taking a year to get the updated numbers.

Dude, Is this a serious question?

Don’t tell him what to do

Yes, it is. Why? Or are you going to launch into your typical “I hate everything AA, we’ve always done it this way” line?

I don’t have the experience of having flown for several prior airlines like many of you... only one regional prior to AA. After 20 years at AA I find the TPS system relatively easy to use. Especially compared to the whiz wheel I used to have to use to calculate CG at the regionals back in the day.

I’d love to know how much simpler other systems at other airlines are, and how it’s done.

Care to share your experiences too?

At Envoy, TPS prints out automatically with the closeout. If we want to change something, we can get the new TPS through ACARS and typically we get the new numbers in a few seconds. For intersection takeoffs, we always get the initial numbers for the shortest allowed intersection. That data is then valid for anything behind that point on that runway.

I've never waited for numbers for more than 5 seconds or so. It's a fully automatic system, even when you change flap settings, outside air temp, tailwind, runway and so on.

The TPS is one of the most misunderstood things in the cockpit. I can’t tell you how many times we have needed new numbers and the other guy insisted we didn’t/times we didn’t need new numbers and they insisted we did. A overhaul wouldn’t hurt. It’s a powerful tool but needs a dummy interface. I think it will be 100% uplinked in the future. Uplink=valid

Well that’s a fair point, but if someone didn’t understand the TPS during an actual flight, that’s not the fault of the TPS - it’s the CKA’s and pilot’s fault for not fully training it/understanding it before being released to the line. When I checked out as a brand new 727 F/E back in 2000, our CKAs made sure we know that thing COLD, inside and out. There was zero confusion from day 1.

So maybe they’re just not training it the way they used to. Once you understand the TPS it’s a piece of cake. I think what you mean to say is, they need to teach it better.

Its possible the misunderstanding may go hand in hand with the lack of SOP on the 737.

Where do you get a "lack of SOP" on the 737? It's just as standard as every other fleet. And if it's some kind of 737 issue, we shouldn't have had another airbus depart without any takeoff data set, or a valid TPS recently.

I'm with aa73, any lack of understanding of the TPS is a training issue.

Back to the question that started this whole circus, I'd say any time an airplane is "waiting for numbers", it's probably because they haven't received a load close out yet, not a TPS.

Is this a serious question? Are you a 737 CKA, or fleet manager, line pilot..... or even anyone qualified to make this type of statement?

I’ve got close to 5000hrs on the 737 fleet and you couldn’t be more wrong. We are just as standard as any other fleet

Al you’re losing your credibility with these types of sweeping generalizations.

A few of the things:
When is the before takeoff checklist completed?
What is the response to a checklist item?
What happens to the checklist when the hud is not set?
Who briefs the takeoff?
Who starts the apu after landing?
When is the before landing checklist completed?
What is the call climbing or descending through 18,0

Are these things uptight? Yes. Are they standard? No.
After 5,000 hours I can understand you thinking it’s SOP. You don’t get to see how different things are done on a day to day basis from the left seat. It’s standardized deviance. Things I used to notice (because they are not done standard) just slide by now that I have 2,000 hours on it. Are these things unsafe? Not really. Maybe I’m use to a more standard cockpit, but it’s not SOP.

That’s always been the case for me.

All these things got bunged up during the transition to trigger and flow. I would say we were highly standardized prior. Half the guys I fly with now are still struggling? with standardization as it relates to certain aspects of the trigger and flow.

All that stuff, 100% of it, is in the operating manual, down to the smallest detail. Did you study it before posting clueless statements on this forum?

Stop digging yourself a bigger hole, dude. You have ZERO credibility. You have absolutely no clue about 737 SOPs, but that’s exactly what they are - SOPs. You just challenge them because they are not the way YOU like to operate, as proven by your general anti 737 and anti LAA comments in the past. Do us all a favor and stick to your Airbus, I’m sure that fleet can benefit from your extensive knowledge base.

I believe Al was posting rhetorical questions, actually, to illustrate that apparently some of the pilots he flies with don't seem to know the answers to many, if not all of these questions.

Yes. 73 missed the point completely.