A day as a pilot

stevenmeyer2005 said:
How long before a flight does the pilot have to show up?
Click to expand...

Domestic flights, one hour. International, one and a half hours.

How long before the passengers get on plane does the pilot get on?
Click to expand...

Well, no set time. Just after the flight planning is done. Usually about 45 minutes prior to flight time. Passengers start boarding at UAL about 30 prior to flight time.

I still do not have an answer to my last question: Before the flight the pilot is to walk around the plane and check for damages, leaks, tires and brakes. Is that all he has to check?
Click to expand...

Well, in simplified terms, that is about it. We check Pitot tubes, static ports, Positive and Negitive pressure valves, check to make sure the gear pins are removed, lights, a whole host of things.
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Another thing. Once the pilot puts the autopilot on. His job is only to watch the instruments and keep radio contact. Is this correct?
Click to expand...

That is an over simplification, but yes that is about it. We are pretty much system managers at that point, but that does not mean we are just along for the ride.
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
While I was at Embry Riddle another aerospace University in Florida. I got to see what some pilots have to do.
Click to expand...

Pretty much not relevent to airline stuff.

Who gives the pilot the route they have to fly? And what plane they can use? Then they have to get the flight path, their altitude? Then they check the weather, chat with the crew and go to the gate to get the plane ready for the passenger.
Click to expand...

That is all pretty much dispatch stuff. We have people whose job it is to figure all that stuff out. They are called dispatchers.


I saw a german tv show on pilots flying from Frankfurt to Southamerica. The pilot gets the information on how many passengers there will be onboard and how many tons cargo and luggage. He with this information then decides on how much fuel they want to carry.
Click to expand...

That is also a function of dispatch
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
thanks for your help guys!! Any pilots that fly larger planes to answer my last questions?
Click to expand...

Steven,

Greg B. flies 777's. That's gotta count as "larger." :)
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Steven,

Greg B. flies 777's. That's gotta count as "larger." :)
Click to expand...
He also flies a beautiful Cessna 195. That's gotta count as "more fun." :goofy:(He's also a great guy!)
 
That helped me a lot. I by the way love the 777 300ER nice big enignes! Very powerful!! Are Airbus planes easier to fly than Boeing planes because they have fly by wire? Does that make it easier for the pilots?
 
Last edited:
I smell a Flight Simulator buff. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but that's what I smell.

**I am also into Flight Simulator, when I can't fly the real thing.
 
SkyHog said:
I smell a Flight Simulator buff. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but that's what I smell.

**I am also into Flight Simulator, when I can't fly the real thing.
Click to expand...

I am still saving my miles and more miles to get into a real flight simulator in Frankfurt. I still have some time to get those miles. Until then I have to stick to Flight Simulator 9 for the computer.
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Are Airbus planes easier to fly than Boeing planes because they have fly by wire? Does that make it easier for the pilots?
Click to expand...

Not really, because Boeing 777's are fly by wire also.
 
Greg - the big question is, is a Fly By Wire aircraft easier to fly than a Cherokee 180?
 
SkyHog said:
Greg - the big question is, is a Fly By Wire aircraft easier to fly than a Cherokee 180?
Click to expand...

Well I mean more like a boeing, because they do not have fly by wire. They are still old fashioned.
 
SkyHog said:
Greg - the big question is, is a Fly By Wire aircraft easier to fly than a Cherokee 180?
Click to expand...

Your Cherokee is fly by wire too you know. Look all the controls have big wires link them to the flight surfaces. They have a special name too, cables!! Cables are wires are they not?
 
smigaldi said:
Your Cherokee is fly by wire too you know. Look all the controls have big wires link them to the flight surfaces. They have a special name too, cables!! Cables are wires are they not?
Click to expand...

With the hydraulic system you maybe FEEL your plane better. But another thing not to forget is the cockpit layout in the airbus. They have nice LCD panels allover. The boeing has more old fashioned stuff!!
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Well I mean more like a boeing, because they do not have fly by wire. They are still old fashioned.
Click to expand...

I can't believe Greg forgot that the plane he flies all the time is actually not Fly By Wire.

Greg - forshame! I think you need to hit the books again!
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Well I mean more like a boeing, because they do not have fly by wire. They are still old fashioned.
Click to expand...
Steven, what Greg was telling you above is true- the Boeing 777 is also a "fly by wire" aircraft, which is to say, the control inputs made by the pilots are transmitted to the control surfaces (ailerons, elevators, rudder) completely by means of electronic impulses directing hydraulic actuators- no mechanical linkage (such as cables or pushrods) between the cockpit controls and the control surfaces.

The 777 was Boeing's first "fly-by-wire" commercial aircraft design, but it is often contrasted with Airbus and their fly-by-wire aircraft (A320, A330 and A340 being the most common in current service) because the Boeing design philosophy and the programming that goes along with it is, "pilot-dominant," i.e., the pilot's commands will ultimately be followed, even where the commanded action might exceed normal operational parameters for the aircraft. The presumption is, the pilot might run the risk of damaging the plane, but if he or she, in light of their professional judgment, knowledge of the circumstances and training, decide that they need that particular maneuver, then they should have it available.

Airbus, on the other hand, has "limits" designed in to the flight control logic, such that if a pilot commands a maneuver which exceeds the design limits of the aircraft, the actual maneuver "delivered" by the flight control logic will only match the design limit, and not exceed it.

There are good arguments for both design philosophies; I prefer Boeing's approach, presuming (of course) you have well-trained pilots (like, say, Greg).

More than you asked for...
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
With the hydraulic system you maybe FEEL your plane better. But another thing not to forget is the cockpit layout in the airbus. They have nice LCD panels allover. The boeing has more old fashioned stuff!!
Click to expand...

Steven, have you actually ever looked inside a Boeing airplane?

May not have been FBW, but the 757 / 767 had advanced cockpit presentation when the Airbus engineers were still scratching their heads about the 320's design and the 300/310 had "steam" gauges (not that there's anything wrong with traditional cockpit presentation).
 
SCCutler said:
Airbus, on the other hand, has "limits" designed in to the flight control logic, such that if a pilot commands a maneuver which exceeds the design limits of the aircraft, the actual maneuver "delivered" by the flight control logic will only match the design limit, and not exceed it.
Click to expand...

And, unfortunately, it doesn't always work (remember the American Airlines flight in November of 2001)
 
Thanks! When the pilot gets on the aircraft is the APU already running or do they have to start it? When the pilots get on they have to enter the flight information into the navigation system and set the autopilot? Is this correcto?
 
In the late 1980's I worked on a project for Boeing in which they were trying to design fly by wireless. The idea is that the control inputs are transmitted via a microwave link to the control surfaces. Thank goodnes that never got past the research stage. Just think if the numnut in row 32 forgets to turn off his cell phone and the elevators don't work because of the interference.
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Thanks! When the pilot gets on the aircraft is the APU already running or do they have to start it? When the pilots get on they have to enter the flight information into the navigation system and set the autopilot? Is this correcto?
Click to expand...

IF the plane has an APU it is off until closer to push back time.
 
smigaldi said:
IF the plane has an APU it is off until closer to push back time.
Click to expand...

I know the engines get started with help of the APU. I just though that the light, air conditioning and etc is run via the APU or is it run via a generator outside the aircraft???
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
I know the engines get started with help of the APU. I just though that the light, air conditioning and etc is run via the APU or is it run via a generator outside the aircraft???
Click to expand...

Both.

On an airliner when you board. Which is what I think you are limiting your paper about the power is first provided by external means. At most airports this is the big cable you see plugged into the plane, you will also see a large, narmally yellow, hose bringing in AC. As it gets closer to departure the pilots will start the APU and switch over those systems to that internal source of power. Inside the passengers see the lights go out for a second as that swtich over happens. Upon push back the plane then uses the APU to start engines and then switches over to those generators and secures the APU.

The APU BTW is actually a small turbine (jet) engine normally located in the tail of the of the aircraft.
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
I am freshman studying aerospace engineering at Penn State. I have an assignment for my composition class. I have to write a step by step procedure on what a pilot does from the time he gets up in the morning, then getting the flight information, then landing the plane and until turning of the engines of the plane. Can you guys provide me with any information or links? Maybe another thing to add. I want to write about bigger planes for example the A340 or B747. Ones that have longer flying times and that transport cargo.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, well, it's not airline, but I'll give you one of mine. 0400(God I hate 0400)get up have a coffee & drive to the hangar and look at the weather radar while I look over the days fields to spray while I have more coffee and something noxious to eat like oatmeal (damn cholesteral grumble grumbel... I miss my bavarian creme choclate coated donuts) and look over the chemicals MSDS sheets if I'm not already familiar with them, then I tell the loader/mixer what to mix up. I go to the computer and clear the PCMCIA memory card and take it to the plane and load it into the Satloc unit and do a very thorough preflight, the specifics of which depend on the plane and make sure I have the right nozzels and calbration for the chemical to be applied. If the crop I'm flying is susceptible to the last load of chemicals in the tank (say the last load was 2,4,D on wheat and the crop I'm gomma fly is cotton or alfalfa...) I'll rewash and triple rinse the entire system. Sometime I'll even change booms and hoses. Then it's time to fuel and load. About first light I'll grab the Platte chart with the field(s) marked on it, fire up, taxi out to the end of the runway, do my runup, again this varies with the plane, and take off heading for the field. I'll circle the field at 100'-200' inspecting and making sure I have the correct field and noting where trees, fences, powerlines & poles... are as well as what's in the adjacent fields and where people may be. I'll then drop in to the field and do a smoke run popping the smoker 3 or 4 times as I cross and then pull out and observe the smoke to see what kind of winds I have to help me determine how to orientate my spray runs (I want a cross wind, and I want to start on the downwind side of the field so I don't fly into my own spray) and determine if the wind is of a strength and direction so that any drift will not harm adjacent crops or persons. Any questionable conditions, unless I'm just flying fertilizer, I go home. If all is good, I fly one more round now that the light is getting better to see if there are any obstructions I missed like a plow at the fence line or anything, I recheck the setting on my flow control, release the brake from the pump (or engage the hydraulics if it's a hydraulic system, most pumps are driven by a fan though) and check my pressure. Now I line up on my entry point, drop in (5ft off the deck), mark my A point in the corner at the same moment I hit the spray valve open (if I have a reasonably strong crosswind, I'll leave the downwind boom turned off if so equipped, otherwise I'll stagger the first run upwind an appropriate amount so my chemical doesn't go on the adjacent field) I cross the field, turn off the spray valve about 3/4 of a second before the end of the field, mark B on the satloc and pull up (Unless there are power lines, then I keep it down till I've cleared under them) checking to make sure I'm lot leaking. Then I turn to the far end of the field, line up on that edge, drop in and mark C & D, now the boundaries of the field are marked and I turn back towards the downwind side of the field and select parallel, circuit, or race track on the satloc. (The satloc is a precission enhanced GPS unit that's progammed with the swath width of the plane that has been precalibrated. It gives me exact alignment guidance into and through the field for complete and even coverage.) Lets say the field is reasonably long & narrow, so I'll choose parallel. This means I'll spray one pass right next to the other. The Satloc has a lightbar up on the cowling which works like a hyperaccurate CDI. I line up on the next swath & drop in and spray as before, pop out the end climbing 2.5 G turn downwind (yes for all of you that believe the downwind turn myth)45* then hard over tag the satloc button on the stick to advance it to the next swath (at this point I'm looking back over my shoulder at where I'm going back in, I pick my spot off my upwind wing as I leave the field) and rudder to the floor watching my wingtip rotating around the point it left the field and nose down in lining up on the light bar as the nose comes into my view, over the fence spray on... till the field is done or I've run out of chemical. Then I go back, down load the card, reload chems, & fuel, head for the next field and do it all again, back and forth and backforthandbackandforthand... until either the atmospheric conditions shut me down, I've finished all the fields, the plane breaks, or I am so damn tired I can't see straight. Some days are so busy you only get out of the plane to take a dump. You pee by refilling the gatorade bottle you just emptied that your loader threw up to you after the last load. Most days aren't like that though, only when there's a major bug run on, and sometimes there's weeks and months, even seasons between jobs. That's why even though I may make $900 an hour doing it, the annual ain't that great. Last seat I had, I was replacing a guy who was taking of to professionally hunt Bigfoots (no lie).
 
Last edited:
stevenmeyer2005 said:
With the hydraulic system you maybe FEEL your plane better. But another thing not to forget is the cockpit layout in the airbus. They have nice LCD panels allover. The boeing has more old fashioned stuff!!
Click to expand...

Wrong answer again.
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Thanks! When the pilot gets on the aircraft is the APU already running or do they have to start it?
Click to expand...

Depends. If there is a ground power source available, that is the preferred method of powering the airplane until, say, 10 minutes before the pushback time.

When the pilots get on they have to enter the flight information into the navigation system[/QUOTE]

True.

and set the autopilot? Is this correcto?
Click to expand...

Set the autopilot? You don't mess with the autopilot until in the air.
 
Ok thanks. Maybe I feel more inclined to Airbus because I have been very involved in the A380!!! By the way the i knew that the APU is a smaller engine. I did my internship at MTU Aeroengines Maintanence in Ludwigsfeld, Berlin, Germany.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Depends. If there is a ground power source available, that is the preferred method of powering the airplane until, say, 10 minutes before the pushback time.

When the pilots get on they have to enter the flight information into the navigation system
Click to expand...

Dont you enter your altitude, speed before? I understand that once you are in the air the tower tells you your heading. Once you take-off you then engage your autopilot.
 
Henning said:
Last seat I had, I was replacing a guy who was taking of to professionally hunt Bigfoots (no lie).
Click to expand...

Yeah, those chemicals are real safe, yeah.

:D
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Ok thanks. Maybe I feel more inclined to Airbus because I have been very involved in the A380!!!
Click to expand...

Which has essentially bankrupted Airbus, once again making Boeing the number one airline manufacturer in the world. :yes:
 
Anthony said:
Which has essentially bankrupted Airbus, once again making Boeing the number one airline manufacturer in the world. :yes:
Click to expand...

Looks like a few similarities between the A380 and the L-1011. Wonder if they'll be a gov't bailout of Airbus.... :rolleyes:
 
I do not want to argue about who is better! Boeing or Airbus!! I just will say that both companies have issues!!
 
wsuffa said:
Looks like a few similarities between the A380 and the L-1011. Wonder if they'll be a gov't bailout of Airbus.... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well when your taxed at the 90% rate ala Europe, anything is possible. LOL!
The entire economic system is a bailout!
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
Dont you enter your altitude, speed before? I understand that once you are in the air the tower tells you your heading. Once you take-off you then engage your autopilot.
Click to expand...

Well, that is all part of the preflight setup. The initial altitude is set on the Mode Control Panel, or MCP, and cruise altitudes and speeds are enterid in the computer.
 
stevenmeyer2005 said:
I do not want to argue about who is better! Boeing or Airbus!! I just will say that both companies have issues!!
Click to expand...

Airbus more than Boeing, at this point.
 
I am a european, so I stick with airbus! But I don't say that Boeing is bad. I love the tripple seven myself. Oustanding plane!! Right now they have big issues. But if you look back and research it. Boeing also had its troubles with its 747 when it came out but not so many as the A380!! Unbelievable how many views and replies this thread has. THANKS A LOT PEOPLE!!!
 
Last edited:
stevenmeyer2005 said:
I am a european, so I stick with airbus! But I don't say that Boeing is bad. I love the tripple seven myself. Oustanding plane!! Right now they have big issues. But if you look back and research it. Boeing also had its troubles with its 747 when it came out but not so many as the A380!!
Click to expand...
Break away from just the technology issue. When Boeing introduced the 747 there was a business need for that type of aircraft. In today's airline business there is a realy need for mid range, economically operated planes. The A380 is neither of those. Right plane at the wrong time. If the A380 had been developed in the mid 80's it would probably displaced the 747 then.

Go to large international airports and look around. Ten years ago all you would have seen were 747's. Now there are mostly 777, a few 747s and some airbuses.
 
Anthony said:
Well when your taxed at the 90% rate ala Europe, anything is possible. LOL!
The entire economic system is a bailout!
Click to expand...

True, but the US has had its share, too.

Chrysler was an example. The L-1011 had US Govt guarantees to Lockheed, subsidizing the production.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top