|
Problem is that we are all busting our rear ends trying to save precious $$'s for the company and they take that savings and invest in other airlines that threaten our jobs.
Keep that backpack on grasshopper!! |
Originally Posted by Rudder
(Post 2013641)
Problem is that we are all busting our rear ends trying to save precious $$'s for the company and they take that savings and invest in other airlines that threaten our jobs.
Keep that backpack on grasshopper!! These people are raking it in, while neglecting and reducing our payback. TEN |
Originally Posted by MDPilot
(Post 2013554)
FTB, you're good at that kind of stuff, just the person to do that. Waiting patiently on the supporting graphs, charts, and PPT:D
So basically, they lost $63 / sec. Is that right? How many lbs of fuel does the 320 save with this abnormal flap configuration for landing? Are you showing more chord on the tires? How much does a tire cost btw? |
USAir has been pushing Flaps 3 for years on the Airbus. They say it lowers the risk of tail strikes. You can land at 3 or Full, but if you whack the tail and you landed Flaps Full, I can guarantee you'll making a trip to the big brown desk.
Having said that, the 321 lands better with Flaps 3. Post merger, the company said our preferred Flap Setting for the 757/767 is 25. Boeing says the risk of a tail strike is higher at 25. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 2013720)
Well, they lost $2B in Q4 2014. There are 31,556,926 seconds per year.
So basically, they lost $63 / sec. Is that right? How many lbs of fuel does the 320 save with this abnormal flap configuration for landing? Are you showing more chord on the tires? How much does a tire cost btw? |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 2013519)
That said, real world me, realizes you will have a better FO if you keep them in their comfort zone and routine. Do that and less mistakes will be made. There may be a better way to do things, like my way, but it might not be the cultural norm the FO is used to and the FO has their show to run too.
|
Originally Posted by Blackwing
(Post 2013762)
Bravo. This should be mandatory reading for captains. Way too many have a tendency to push (especially newer) FOs off their game without realizing the detriment to the operation it's causing.
|
No use rushing anything in aviation. Especially between pushback and V1.
|
Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley
(Post 2013814)
No use rushing anything in aviation. Especially between pushback and V1.
|
The paper WDR is going away... it'll all be uplink. That will reduce the workload!
|
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2013498)
I agree with all of the above, we get a lot of paper printing out on the taxi out and one of the two pilots (the F/O usually) has to go head's down to either enter or verify everything in the FMS, then he's got a rather long taxi and T/O checklist to run, and part of that check is the Captain has to verify everything in the FMS and on the paper print out, so he's got to go head's down too. A simple departure runway change is a mess, because now both have to do it all over again, while running the 'Runway Change Checklist'.
I was not at all in favor of doing all this data loading while taxiing, but as you said, some cubicle pilot/bean counter came up with it as a way to help our On Time Departure numbers go up. Our FOQUA data has shown there have been guys trying to take off with the flaps up, or in the wrong position, and I believe it is mostly due to this new procedure of loading the data while taxiing. As part of my departure brief at the gate (WARTS for the Delta guys) I always include the 'Threat' of being distracted by all the crap coming off the printer at the last minute, and going heads down to load it and verify it. I say, "If we get a runway change, or new AWABS, we will pull over and set the parking brake while we sort it all out.". We are getting paid by the minute, I'm in no hurry to try to take off and make the next Safety Bulletin headlines. |
Originally Posted by EMBFlyer
(Post 2013754)
USAir has been pushing Flaps 3 for years on the Airbus. They say it lowers the risk of tail strikes. You can land at 3 or Full, but if you whack the tail and you landed Flaps Full, I can guarantee you'll making a trip to the big brown desk.
Having said that, the 321 lands better with Flaps 3. Post merger, the company said our preferred Flap Setting for the 757/767 is 25. Boeing says the risk of a tail strike is higher at 25. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 2013861)
The paper WDR is going away... it'll all be uplink. That will reduce the workload!
BUT, as I said before, we DO get paid by the minute!;) |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 2013861)
The paper WDR is going away... it'll all be uplink. That will reduce the workload!
But I want to be the guy that answers the phone when people complain that's not how we used to do it. :cool: |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2013966)
Well I hope they improve the reliability of the uploads, right now it only works about 50% of the time, and if you get a runway change on taxi out, you'll be sitting, waiting, waiting... for awhile.
BUT, as I said before, we DO get paid by the minute!;) |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 2013861)
The paper WDR is going away... it'll all be uplink. That will reduce the workload!
|
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2013966)
Well I hope they improve the reliability of the uploads, right now it only works about 50% of the time, and if you get a runway change on taxi out, you'll be sitting, waiting, waiting... for awhile.
BUT, as I said before, we DO get paid by the minute!;) The other downside of the auto uplink is (for example) when you need nadp1 and it automatically uploads, it begins to remove that load process from your thought process. I am actually a fan of thinking and knowing what goes on behind the curtain...it allows me to break a negative chain of events. However, i dont understand why we get the wait at the gate for wdr on the D-7 sometimes. It seems like an irrelevant delay. |
Originally Posted by iceman49
(Post 2013880)
The entire time we flew the bus with flaps full we did not have any issues with tail strikes, their was 1 issue out in DEN that was due from too much back stick input and leaving the thrust on to long. It would make sense that the 321 is more sensitive to a tail strike.
|
Originally Posted by badflaps
(Post 2013795)
Take the runway with the flaps up a couple of times, that'll straighten things out. Always worked for me on the "9".
Ask me how I know!:cool: |
And an all expenses paid one day trip to the training center.
|
Checklists/Flaps 3
Originally Posted by aewanabe
(Post 2013992)
At least on the 320, flaps full pitch attitude = 1-2.5 degrees nose up, with flaps 3 coming in at 5-6 degrees. As a fairly new bus captain I'm genuinely curious how reducing your flare margin reduces the tailstrike risk. Seems counterintuitive at best.
|
Guess delta shuda ordered it with a HUD installed
|
Originally Posted by Piklepausepull
(Post 2014002)
Ha! All you get is a squark from "Betty" and a call from ASAP about a month later!:eek:
Ask me how I know!:cool: |
Our checklist is designed to keep the FO heads down until the first runway signage comes into view, at that point the FO can reference the sign, FMS and WDR in a most efficient manner.
|
As a captain I do not move till its all done, we are paid by the hour whats the rush? they talk about dwell times on check rides and line checks but you can't fail for being slow, you will fail if you violate some taxi route or hit something.
|
Originally Posted by nohat
(Post 2018039)
As a captain I do not move till its all done, we are paid by the hour whats the rush? they talk about dwell times on check rides and line checks but you can't fail for being slow, you will fail if you violate some taxi route or hit something.
It was a typical July day, hot and hazy, maybe 3 miles vis in haze, we are cleared directly to the airport and the approach controller is asking us if we have the airport in sight, we are still 20 miles out descending. I say to the F/O, "Tell him we want a vector for a 10 mile straight in.". F/O does, we get our turn on vector, turn 30 degrees left and intercept the LOC about 10 out, get configured and land normally, taxi to the gate, shutdown, another on time arrival. The LCA then precedes to debrief me. "Well, that wasn't the most fuel efficient approach but I guess it was ok.". There was a big push on the pilots to 'save fuel' back then too, just like all this Flaps 25 in the 757 today. So I look at the LCA and say, "Neither one of us have ever been here before, there was no way I could accept a 'visual' approach with no landmarks, 20 miles out, and how much fuel does it take to pull a Mad Dog out of the grass and tow it to the gate?". :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2018046)
Speaking of LCA's.... back in 1992, I got my very first Delta line check as a 6mo. MD88 Captain, the leg was ATL-PNS. My F/O was brand new, second line trip, neither one of us were former Navy and we had never been into PNS. This was about 6 months after a Delta MD88 had run off the end of the runway at PNS.
It was a typical July day, hot and hazy, maybe 3 miles vis in haze, we are cleared directly to the airport and the approach controller is asking us if we have the airport in sight, we are still 20 miles out descending. I say to the F/O, "Tell him we want a vector for a 10 mile straight in.". F/O does, we get our turn on vector, turn 30 degrees left and intercept the LOC about 10 out, get configured and land normally, taxi to the gate, shutdown, another on time arrival. The LCA then precedes to debrief me. "Well, that wasn't the most fuel efficient approach but I guess it was ok.". There was a big push on the pilots to 'save fuel' back then too, just like all this Flaps 25 in the 757 today. So I look at the LCA and say, "Neither one of us have ever been here before, there was no way I could accept a 'visual' approach with no landmarks, 20 miles out, and how much fuel does it take to pull a Mad Dog out of the grass and tow it to the gate?". :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2018046)
Speaking of LCA's.... back in 1992, I got my very first Delta line check as a 6mo. MD88 Captain, the leg was ATL-PNS. My F/O was brand new, second line trip, neither one of us were former Navy and we had never been into PNS. This was about 6 months after a Delta MD88 had run off the end of the runway at PNS.
It was a typical July day, hot and hazy, maybe 3 miles vis in haze, we are cleared directly to the airport and the approach controller is asking us if we have the airport in sight, we are still 20 miles out descending. I say to the F/O, "Tell him we want a vector for a 10 mile straight in.". F/O does, we get our turn on vector, turn 30 degrees left and intercept the LOC about 10 out, get configured and land normally, taxi to the gate, shutdown, another on time arrival. The LCA then precedes to debrief me. "Well, that wasn't the most fuel efficient approach but I guess it was ok.". There was a big push on the pilots to 'save fuel' back then too, just like all this Flaps 25 in the 757 today. So I look at the LCA and say, "Neither one of us have ever been here before, there was no way I could accept a 'visual' approach with no landmarks, 20 miles out, and how much fuel does it take to pull a Mad Dog out of the grass and tow it to the gate?". :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 2018087)
Basic question to ask the LCA.... Did the crew act in a safe and professional manner? What was his suggestion to save. fuel? Typical LCA who's part of the problem rather than part of the solution who vocabulary lacks "Good judgment, good job".
|
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2018046)
Speaking of LCA's.... back in 1992, I got my very first Delta line check as a 6mo. MD88 Captain, the leg was ATL-PNS. My F/O was brand new, second line trip, neither one of us were former Navy and we had never been into PNS. This was about 6 months after a Delta MD88 had run off the end of the runway at PNS.
It was a typical July day, hot and hazy, maybe 3 miles vis in haze, we are cleared directly to the airport and the approach controller is asking us if we have the airport in sight, we are still 20 miles out descending. I say to the F/O, "Tell him we want a vector for a 10 mile straight in.". F/O does, we get our turn on vector, turn 30 degrees left and intercept the LOC about 10 out, get configured and land normally, taxi to the gate, shutdown, another on time arrival. The LCA then precedes to debrief me. "Well, that wasn't the most fuel efficient approach but I guess it was ok.". There was a big push on the pilots to 'save fuel' back then too, just like all this Flaps 25 in the 757 today. So I look at the LCA and say, "Neither one of us have ever been here before, there was no way I could accept a 'visual' approach with no landmarks, 20 miles out, and how much fuel does it take to pull a Mad Dog out of the grass and tow it to the gate?". :rolleyes: |
|
|
Donna......
|
Anyone can land an Airbus in the water, it's all automated. It takes a Real Man to land a 727 in the water, raw data, no auto anything! Take THAT, Sully!:D |
Originally Posted by iceman49
(Post 2018327)
Donna......
|
|
|
Water Landing:
1. Check Essential 2. ? 3. Land |
Go Noles!:D Sorry for your loss Heiko! |
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:16 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands