Jump to content

The new airline thread


FUSEPLUG

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SocialD said:

Don't most Air Force aircraft fly AOA? 

Every fighter I have flown or evaluated used AOA, but all, with the exception of the Super Hornet and Hornet, were flown in the region of "normal command" (front side) which is more intuitive to fly, IMO.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Muscle2002 said:

Every fighter I have flown or evaluated used AOA, but all, with the exception of the Super Hornet and Hornet, were flown in the region of "normal command" (front side) which is more intuitive to fly, IMO.

I'm very surprised by this statement.  Notwithstanding those two jets, the others all flew approaches faster than L/Dmax?  

I think there is something I'm missing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

I'm very surprised by this statement.  Notwithstanding those two jets, the others all flew approaches faster than L/Dmax?  

I think there is something I'm missing.  

These AoA are likely very close to L/Dmax, but I imagine that in each aircraft, test teams built in a pad to ensure acceptable handling qualities were maintained. This would be to protect against moving in-and-out of backside and frontside regimes. That said, none of the flight manuals I have read corroborate such a hunch, but I know that in evaluating "Steady-state flight-path response to pitch controller," the MIL-STD evaluation criteria requires that an "aircraft remains tractable at commonly encountered off-nominal speeds." In this case, off-nominal is 5 knots slow. Given that airspeed behavior becomes unstable at speeds below minimum drag speed, and that L/Dmax occurs at Dmin, it makes sense to build in a buffer, landing performance notwithstanding, and thus, published flight manual approach speeds are above L/Dmax. 

Edited by Muscle2002
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Muscle2002 said:

Every fighter I have flown or evaluated used AOA, but all, with the exception of the Super Hornet and Hornet, were flown in the region of "normal command" (front side) which is more intuitive to fly, IMO.

Do you mean have an AOA gage in the cockpit for reference, or fly an actual AOA approach? There's a difference.

Edited by Bigred
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mean have an AOA gage in the cockpit for reference, or fly an actual AOA approach? There's a difference.
Even the KC-135 has AOA gauges for both pilots. They aren't the most precise instruments in the world, but can be used in the event of a dual ADC failure (chances of that = slim to none). There is an arc at approach speed (.6 AOA). 1.0 units is stall. You really don't need airspeed or AOA to get the thing on the ground anyway. Known pitch and power settings along with an infamous full-flap burble will get you within 5 knots of approach speed every time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Muscle2002 said:

 Given that airspeed behavior becomes unstable at speeds below minimum drag speed, and that L/Dmax occurs at Dmin, it makes sense to build in a buffer, landing performance notwithstanding, and thus, published flight manual approach speeds are above L/Dmax. 

I'm not a test pilot.  However, I have a fair amount of experience in a multitude of military powered-aircraft and can't think of one I've flown where this is the case.  

I've got about 6 sorties in the F-16, including a front seat flight where we did SFO's.  Although it has been 10 years... and everything is done primarily in AoA... I recall that approach speeds were ~150 KIAS and L/Dmax is 200 KIAS... which puts it in the same category as the Hornet / Super Hornet you mention above.  

Again, I'm sure I'm missing something.  Can you give some examples of military powered-airplanes where approach speed is above L/Dmax?

Edited by HuggyU2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gazmo said:
18 hours ago, Bigred said:
Do you mean have an AOA gage in the cockpit for reference, or fly an actual AOA approach? There's a difference.

Even the KC-135 has AOA gauges for both pilots. They aren't the most precise instruments in the world, but can be used in the event of a dual ADC failure (chances of that = slim to none). There is an arc at approach speed (.6 AOA). 1.0 units is stall. You really don't need airspeed or AOA to get the thing on the ground anyway. Known pitch and power settings along with an infamous full-flap burble will get you within 5 knots of approach speed every time.

I guess I wasn’t too clear. I’m tracking most every military plane has some sort of AOA gage. My point is that, using the 135 as an example, I may fly an approach at 165kts and reference the AOA gage, but I’m not slaved to what it says precisely, I’m more concerned with airspeed.

In comparison, Navy guys fly a specific AOA all the way to the deck. Airspeed is important but AOA even more so since they don’t flare.

I’m sure the MD-11 has a flare at the bottom but from reading, it sounds a lot more pitch sensitive than other similar aircraft, hence why Navy guys may have been preferred.

At least, that’s totally my assumption and I’ve been AFU before and might be here as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the few jets I’ve flown, you could do either. But only in the F-15 was it a specific units of AOA you’d fly instead of just on the green donut. The others have been airspeed or AOA. The Eagle also could calculate landing speed with something similar to the T-38 (I think it was 138+gross weight or something) but AOA units was much easier.

Do airliners give you the 1.3 Vs out of some computer and it varies each time or is it a consistent speed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the few jets I’ve flown, you could do either. But only in the F-15 was it a specific units of AOA you’d fly instead of just on the green donut. The others have been airspeed or AOA. The Eagle also could calculate landing speed with something similar to the T-38 (I think it was 138+gross weight or something) but AOA units was much easier.
Do airliners give you the 1.3 Vs out of some computer and it varies each time or is it a consistent speed?

I mean, I just hit request and it sends me back numbers... God forbid I have to use the iPad and calculate it myself. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FMC calculates approach speed just line select from a list of landing flap settings, enter it into the landing settings line and your V speeds for all your flap limits and approach speed appear on your display. 

No. That can’t be right. I’m pretty sure magic is involved somewhere. Right?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Duck said:


No. That can’t be right. I’m pretty sure magic is involved somewhere. Right?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Black magic.  I forgot the part where you light candles (it's a Boeing so the candle auto-lights after selecting the FMC approach page) and throw some crew meal chicken bones onto the center console.  This conjures up the ghost of C.R. Smith (founder of AA, other airlines have different ghost options) and once his ghost appears and "Descent Checklist" is selected, the V speeds appear on the flight display. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/7/2019 at 4:39 PM, Bigred said:

I guess I wasn’t too clear. I’m tracking most every military plane has some sort of AOA gage. My point is that, using the 135 as an example, I may fly an approach at 165kts and reference the AOA gage, but I’m not slaved to what it says precisely, I’m more concerned with airspeed.

Ah gotya.  In the F-16 it's exactly the opposite.  I'll calculate an approach speed and QC that it generally matches up, but I'm really only concentrating on holding a particular AOA (via a "staple" in the HUD).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/6/2019 at 11:51 AM, Muscle2002 said:

Every fighter I have flown or evaluated used AOA, but all, with the exception of the Super Hornet and Hornet, were flown in the region of "normal command" (front side) which is more intuitive to fly, IMO.

Muscle, can you explain this statement?  I don't think I'm understanding what you're trying to say, since it is counter to everything I’ve ever seen or experienced. . 

Edited by HuggyU2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/7/2019 at 5:29 PM, Danger41 said:

Do airliners give you the 1.3 Vs out of some computer and it varies each time or is it a consistent speed?

The mighty MD-88 has speed cards in a holder on the dash.  Flip to the one with your gross weight listed, fly the printed speeds.  Like any true cave man.  😂

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/6/2019 at 4:43 PM, ImNotARobot said:

So FedEx trying to handpick guys to manage that monster right out of the gate doesn't seem crazy to me. But choosing C-17 background who fly on the backside of the power curve and add power to flare seems backward. And choosing USN 3-wire trap dudes seems equally incorrect. But they don't pay me to make those decisions

No expert here, but I have flown the MD-11 at fedex and the C-17.  My guess is pucker factor. The only two airplanes (out of 9 commercial/military flown)  that I felt I truly had to awake for on landing were the MD-11 and the C-17 on an assault strip.  If I flew carrier based aircraft I would imagine I would want to be awake for that landing as well. A 737 or C-5? Not so much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mighty MD-88 has speed cards in a holder on the dash.  Flip to the one with your gross weight listed, fly the printed speeds.  Like any true cave man.  
We fly speeds out of speed cards for the E190 at AAL also. Round your Landing weight up to the nearest thousand and plug those numbers off the card into the CDU so that it brings the bugs up on your speed tape. Yes, it is so easy a caveman can do it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, RogAir said:

No expert here, but I have flown the MD-11 at fedex and the C-17.  My guess is pucker factor. The only two airplanes (out of 9 commercial/military flown)  that I felt I truly had to awake for on landing were the MD-11 and the C-17 on an assault strip.  If I flew carrier based aircraft I would imagine I would want to be awake for that landing as well. A 737 or C-5? Not so much. 

If they based their decision on that far of a logical reach, I can see why it didn't end up working out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Gazmo said:
20 hours ago, Bergman said:
The mighty MD-88 has speed cards in a holder on the dash.  Flip to the one with your gross weight listed, fly the printed speeds.  Like any true cave man.  emoji23.png

We fly speeds out of speed cards for the E190 at AAL also. Round your Landing weight up to the nearest thousand and plug those numbers off the card into the CDU so that it brings the bugs up on your speed tape. Yes, it is so easy a caveman can do it.

Electronic bugs...magic!

the mighty maddog has physical bugs on the airspeed indicator you manually move around. No knobs, no dials, no magic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Electronic bugs...magic!
the mighty maddog has physical bugs on the airspeed indicator you manually move around. No knobs, no dials, no magic. 
Yeah I get my fill of moving bugs around the airspeed indicator (which often are missing or break off) on the KC-135.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Question:  in today's market, how does a recently retired USAF fixed wing pilot NOT get hired by a major?

I assume, assuming all basics - ATP, etc - are in place that it either comes down to the interview or a version of a black-ball from someone who knows the candidate.

Follow-on questions: 

- How does one blow (sts) the interview?

- If some form of a black-ball, how does the company know of such?  Are potential hires known/announced?  Is it word of mouth?

 

My curiousity is because a former commander very recently was turned down by a major.  Not sorry as the individual would very quickly let everyone know he/she was the smartest person not only in the room, but ever.  But that news led me to wonder the above.  Might help those pursuing such a job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went down to the crew base in Dallas to grab some paperwork a couple weeks ago and saw the interview list. A couple guys had some positive comments next to their name, but one dude had “Not only no, but HELL NO!” The Chiefs look at this sheet and it carries a lot of weight at Southwest.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...