If the morphing wing can be engineered as a sound and safe design application, it will revolutionize aviation much like the jet engine.Stop judging: Pilot of Jet Airways Goa runway crash writes a strong letterAviation is a strange profession. I love it to death, but the strange part is that if I meet my end in my line of work, it's most likely that I'll be blamed.I'll be blamed long before any proof is brought forward. I'll be blamed by the media, by the people. I'll be blamed by the passengers if they survive. In a week the data recorders will be analysed and then maybe they'll find that it's not my fault. That I fought for hope amidst hopelessness till my dying breath.Sadly that won't make as good a headline as much as "pilot error", or "pilot veers off runway when aligning for takeoff".In fact, it was nothing to do with aligning that brought this ill-fated crew to a halt just short the peripheral wall at Dabolim yesterday (December 27).How I wish I could explain concepts of asymmetric thrust to the number of people passing silent judgment and being armchair jurors. How do I tell someone about how much thrust 27,000 odd pounds is? How do I reiterate what a reverser unlock is? How do I tell the person that the same 27,000 pounds is now in an opposite direction?Most of the crowd probably doesn't even know what a moment arm or a couple is. They dropped physics in 8th grade as it was too complex. That said, they blame the human machine who earns his bread and butter, putting into practice what they felt was too complicated.
Jet Airways Goa-Mumbai flight, which skid off the runway on December 27. To be honest it's disgusting - flying this kind of passenger and taking responsibility for his life for however long it may be.How do I explain not being able to see three taxiway lights in front of me to a crowd that says, "anyway you autoland in fog"? How?It's at the brink of frustration that I'm writing this. Back in the day, an old grey instructor told me, "Son, in this world of civil aviation, its best to be a nameless faceless pilot who does his job and goes home!"I probably didn't understand it then but now, more than ever, I totally understand. The sad part is it doesn't matter if it is a Cactus 1511 with Sully or the 9W aircraft.Sadly, with technology improving in the home and workplace, the human has become the weak link. Sometimes one must note that the human is the strongest link. Without them shutting down the malfunctioning engine, the plane might have gone into the terminal, increasing the statistics of loss of lifeAs an appeal to the non-aviation public, believe that we as pilots love what we do and would never put anyone's life in jeopardy. We are sons, daughters, wives, husbands, parents, just like you. We haven't fallen from the realm of Asgard into the helm of these metal ships. It takes years of hard work to achieve it.Media folk, this is an appeal to you: It's you who have sensationalised our profession with scandals, malpractices, and so on. Paint the right picture of pilots worldwide. Tell people that we are there to save lives, not take them. Make an honest effort to redeem your name when you're standing at heaven's gates, or you'll probably have the boatman remove you from the boat.Educate the masses - who you manipulate to get more views - to the actual facts of thrust, lift, weight and drag. Tell them, from start to finish, what happens from takeoff to touchdown.Do tell them that when they see the wind looping out of the window and the tip moving, there is a hand guiding this giant metal bird through the skies.
Thinking about Asiana flight 214, and anecdotal evidence of near misses on approach (stall) when autothrottle was believed to be active but was actually off, is it common to misunderstand the state of autothrottle, and is it easy to miss?
You have to look at aerobatics like any other sport. Consider any top athlete and you'll find that their road to the top was diverse and relied heavily on self discipline, goal setting, tenacity, practice practice practice, etc.
If you pick any top aerobatics pilot you'll probably find that most of them were trained basic aerobatics in the military or were taught basic aerobatics at an early age. You'll also find that they tend to be top achievers, successful, and driven at whatever they aim to accomplish.
To see who teaches these top aerobatics pilots, take a look at some of the top military air forces like the United States, Israel, France, Germany, UK, Italy, Russia, Australia, Canada and so on.
If you want to see who teaches aerobatics around the world check out this website for a listing:
Two of my personal favorite aerobatic pilots are Patty Wagstaff and Bob Hoover. I saw them both years ago and they were spectacular. I was especially impressed with Captain Hoover and his dead stick aerobatics in his twin engine Shrike Aero Commander. WoW! was that impressive. See for yourself:
Who teaches the top aerobatic pilots?Bob even poured iced tea from a pitcher to a glass while rolling to show the positive g force in the maneuver.
Patty has competed for many years and I believe she still performs in airshow around the country.
Patty also has a Aerobatic Flight School in Florida:
I guess you can sum it up by saying you can't teach someone to be a top aerobatic pilot or athlete, it's something that you learn and earn.
Thomas Zerbarini
As others have pointed out, painting an airplane is very expensive.What I have found over the last few years is that most airlines used to paint their own aircraft or do it locally. Now I find that it is being outsourced mostly to Mexico. Mexico has less stringent environmental regulation and poor environmental oversight. So, they are dramatically cheaper and faster at stripping and painting aircraft.I have seen these operations and they do a very good job most of the time. Occasionally we have to send one back for a redo.Now, painting an aircraft is one thing. Maintenance and inspections is another. There are a number of airlines around the world that outsource their major maintenance to cheaper labor countries. I don't agree with the practice and feel the maintenance should be done at the airline, or at the very least, within the same country the airline and maintenance facility is certificated if the airline has to outsource its major maintenance.
None of the airlines I fly for outsources its maintenance out of the country except Canada where there is a close relationship with the United States.
How much work is it to repaint an airplane?Thomas Zerbarini
Pilots need to be good monitors/managers of systems; yet, they need to be good aviators too.The issue that comes to mind when this question is asked revolves around automation and flight automation and aircraft control philosophy.The two major manfacturers of commercial aircraft (Boeing and Airbus) have completely different philosophy's when it comes to automation:“Boeing flight decks are designed to provide automation to assist, but not replace, the flight crew member responsible for safe operation of the airplane.” — Boeing“All aircraft have physical limits that they must not exceed... These limits define the flight envelope, not to be exceeded during normal operation.” —AirbusBasically, Boeing allows a pilot full flight control authority to meet any need the pilot deems necessary to handle any emergency. Airbus places hard limits and will not allow the pilot to exceed any hard envelope.Here's an article for a good overview of the philosophy differences between the two manufactures:
I personally agree with the Boeing philosophy and find that there seems to be issues lately with too much automation. When humans rely on too much automation, there is the possibility for complacency. When automation does something unexpected or misunderstood by the pilots; and, when the other pilot does something unexpected or unknown by the other pilot (AF 447, no side stick feedback.)
Or the new Airbus A350 that embarrassingly self aborted on a media flight from JFK to Dubai.
And of course the Boeing 777 crash in San Fransisco where the pilots relied on automation to control their speed and did not realize the auto-throttles were off.Here is a more complete bullet list of each manufacturers philosophy. I included McDonald Douglas from the 80's even though it is now merged with Boeing.
Are airline pilots basically just good monitors?Airbus' Philosophy on Automation
- Automation must not reduce overall aircraft reliability; it should enhance aircraft and systems safety, efficiency and economy.
- Automation must not lead the aircraft out of the safe flight envelope to its full extent, should this be necessary due to extraordinary circumstances.
- Automation should allow the operator to use the safe flight envelope to its full extent, should this be necessary due to extraordinary circumstances.
- Within the normal flight envelope, the automation must not work against operator inputs, except when absolutely necessary for safety.
Boeing's Flight Deck Automation Philosophy
- The pilot is the final authority for the operation of the airplane.
- Both crew members are ultimately responsible for the safe conduct of the flight.
- Flight crew tasks, in order of priority, are: safety, passenger comfort, and efficiency.
- Design for crew operations based on pilot's past training and operational experience.
- Design systems to be error tolerant.
- The hierarchy of design alternatives is: simplicity, redundancy, and automation.
- Apply automation as a tool to aid, not replace, the pilot.
- Address fundamental human strengths, limitations, and individual differences-for both normal and non-normal operations.
- Use new technologies and functional capabilities only when:
- They result in clear and distinct operational or efficiency advantages, and
- There is no adverse effect to the human-machine interface.
McDonnell-Douglas
- Uses technology to assist the pilot naturally, while giving the pilot the final authority to override the computer and use skill and experience.
Thomas Zerebarini
The forward swept wing is a design makes an aircraft highly maneuverable. It does so because the wing is incredibly unstable. It requires computer fly by wire technology to allow engineers to fly an aircraft with such a wing. It would be impossible for a forward swept wing aircraft to be controlled solely by human input and hydraulics.
For more information on this wing design, see my answer to a similar question:
What is the most maneuverable aircraft in the world?
Here's a great video with an overview of the X29 Forward Swept Wing (FSW.)
Are wings like this practical on jets? Are there any other type of vehicles that could benefit from curved wings?
Thomas Zerbarini
Yes.Can I do Commercial Pilot License after completing Aircraft maintenance engg.?
One of my best friends completed his Mechanics Certificates and College degree before he seriously started flying. He is now employed by one of the top airlines in the world.
His knowledge of systems and mechanics is impressive. He uses his mechanics skills in general aviation now and helps his fellow pilots at his local airport with free maintenance advice and help keeping the cost of private pilots and aircraft ownership manageable. Nobel cause if you ask me.
You'll find you'll enjoy flying more and probably want to own and maybe build your own airplane with your mechanic knowledge.
Thomas Zerbarini
Aircraft manufacturers complete live evacuation simulations when they seek certification for a new aircraft from the FAA or other governing certification agency.Is it possible for an ordinary person, not associated with the air travel industry, to experience a simulated airline emergency evacuation?
In addition to manufacturer demonstration of evacuation and airline specific demonstrations, there are more computer generated modeling companies that can simulate evacuation(s) with limitless variables considered. For example, they can use several interior designs to determine the fastest evacuation time. They can tweak the design and add/change obstacles and features to better the results. They can also place human factors in the modeling.
Here is a video of a UK company that conducts computer generated studies of evacuations:
https://youtu.be/txnjO7O1aVs?t=18m12s
Of course simulating airliner evacuations comes with the risk of injury. The faster you try to get out the more likely they'll be injuries. Hence, the more emphasis on using computer simulations for most of the testing.
I would recommend reaching out to these software modeling companies, aircraft manufacturers and independent research firms and see if they can help you volunteer your time. Just be careful when you do and watch your head.
Thomas Zerbarini
The bigger question is will you buy a ticket with an airline that does not use humans in the cockpit to fly the aircraft?Are airline pilots obsolete?
(Boeing 787 Dreamliner)
The technology is there to develop a system reliable enough to replace pilots in airliners. It comes with a cost and can that cost be recoverable with passenger tickets or cargo waybills. Unfortunately, the answer is maybe. I for one, as a professional pilot, do not want to see pilots replaced in the cockpit whatsoever.
There is always a drive for any business (airlines) to find cheaper ways to provide the same product and boost profit. If an airline can replace humans in the cockpit and pay a ground operator to manage the flight, you better believe they are looking into it.
During my tenure as Executive Vice President of ALPA International, I made the statement to the Executive Council that in our lifetime we will see airlines attempt to replace pilots in the cockpit. The first "test" will take place in Cargo aircraft and it will be promoted as an "add-on" safety tool to supplement the pilots. Then they may move to replace the FAA and ICAO required "Relief Pilot". But, will this be socially acceptable?
Why pilotless planes aren’t the answer to preventing air disasters
Now I merely said attempt. I think it is an idea that is in deep thought as I write this today.
Of course my opinion on the subject is biased being an airline pilot, I acknowledge that. You can't ignore the value of having "two" pilots in the cockpit for safety. The value of cross checking each other and good Crew Resource Management keeps normal human errors in check.
FAA TV: The History of CRM
Further, the adaptability of a good crew to handle any nuance or emergency with efficiency is directly proportional to experience and training. A well trained professional crew is a far better resource in the cockpit than any computer or ground base pilot without any skin in the flight (life on the line.)
I do see the interest and research taking place; I just don't see the viability nor think it would be an acceptable alternative that the public would embrace.
Thomas Zerbarini
Tom's got a great answer.What is the runway length needed for Antonov 225?
I'm also a very big fan of pulling out the spaghetti charts (performance charts) to confirm my aircrafts capabilities. It's just good piloting to master your aircraft.
Here are some examples of the charts pilots, flight engineers and dispatchers use to calculate performance numbers. We used to do these calculations ourselves before standardized performance manuals and computers. Despite the help from computers, good pilots still keep tinker with the old performance charts to stay proficient in using these charts.
You can google more here to see them better:
b727 performance charts
Thomas Zerbarini
Most large aircraft have two methods of steering on the ground. For slow speeds and ground maneuvering we use the "tiller". The tiller is a hand control that sends steering commands to the nose wheel. The tiller usually commands approximately 60 to 75 degrees of direction left or right. The second method of steering is the rudder pedals. The rudder pedals have a smaller amount of deflection than the tiller, about 8-12 degrees of deflection left or right.How do airplanes manage to stay straight on the runway during takeoff?
The rudder pedals also have independent brakes systems for their appropriate side (left brake system for left pedal, right brake system for right brake pedal.) Having independent brake systems allow the pilot to use differential braking to control direction. this can be used as a back up method for on the ground steering if the hydraulics to the nose wheel or other steering electronics failure occurs.
During take-off roll, the tiller is initially used to align the aircraft with the runway centerline. Once aligned, the rudder pedals are used to maintain directional control as the aircraft accelerates during the take-off roll. As airspeed increases, the flight controls become more affective and are used for directional control at higher speeds. Once the aircraft has reached a safe speed for flight (We call it Velocity Rotate or Vr,) the flight controls are the primary method of controlling the aircraft. The pilots will use flight control input to "Rotate" or fly the aircraft off the ground. As a positive rate of climb is established, the landing gear is commanded raised and the nose wheel steering system is deactivated.
Thomas Zerbarini
I love answering these questions. Most of what you'll find is centered around flying the airplane and monitoring systems. The rest will be defensive and offensive instrumentation and/or special operations and recording devices for reconnaissance.What do all of the controls in an eurofighter typhoon cockpit do?
Check out this fantastic website that lists all the items in the cockpit with pictures and explanations:
Functionality EF-2000
Thomas Zerbarini
When we talk about maneuverability in an aircraft you have to consider that an aircraft is more maneuverable the more its aerodynamics are "unstable." The aircraft I would say was the most maneuverable would be the experimental Grumman X-29 flown by NASA:What is the most maneuverable aircraft in the world?
This unusual looking aircraft that appeared to seem it was flying backwards was so unstable that it required a triple redundant Fly-by-wire (Fly by Wire: Fact versus Science Fiction) flight control system to provide "artificial" stability and keep the aircraft from spinning out of control. The cockpit was simple yet the aircraft was ahead of its time.
The aircrafts instability was inherent in turning the wing backwards. The aircraft wanted to pitch, roll and dutch roll violently if not actively controlled by the triple redundant fly-by-wire systems with an analog back-up.
I'm certain that the variable exhaust nozzles, being used in our most advanced fighters today, if placed on an forward swept design like the X-29 would have dazzled NASA and the Pentagon on the extreme maneuverability of such a concept.
You'll have to consider that todays designs are larger demand multi-role tactical fighters that are bigger, use stealth technology and would have a tendency to be more lumbering in a dogfight than say the F-16 or a design like the X-29.
In an effort to save money, congress tends to like the multi-role fighter platform. Such a platform depends more on technology, missiles and radar to defeat a foe and the aircraft tend to be larger and more lumbering.
This idea has happened in the past with other aircraft like the F-4 Phantom. A huge powerful aircraft that was too big to effectively dogfight with lighter more maneuverable fighter jets. We may again see another aircraft surface that is light and nimble to truly replace the F-16.
Thomas Zerbarini
MoGas is motor vehicle gas or gasoline. General Aviation aircraft owners sometimes use MoGas instead of AvGas to save money. MoGas generally is cheaper than AvGas. Pilots flying experimental aircraft tend to use MoGas more than pilots flying manufactured aircraft.What is mogas?
There are issues that must be considered if using MoGas.
Using Motor Gasoline in Aircraft Reciprocating Engines
Also, check out the FAA Advisory Circular on using MoGas:
AC 91-33A - Use of Alternate Grades of Aviation Gasoline for Grade 80/87, and Use of Automotive Gasoline
MoGas may become a more popular form of fuel for General Aviation due to the fact that AvGas may become obsolete over the years. Aircraft engine manufacturers are already addressing the issue by making duel fuel engines.
Thomas Zerbarini
That depends on how large and how fast the aircraft is traveling. Also, how many birds the aircrafts strikes as well.What happens when a bird strikes an aircraft?
Small birds are typically a non event.
Medium birds can cause some skin dents and internal dents or popped rivets.
Large birds are the most dangerous. Large birds can cause significant damage and up to catastrophic failure of an engine, windshield or Radome nose cone.
Manufacturers go to great lengths to test engines for bird ingestion. Check out this test by GE, Watch GE Test Its Jet Engines by Putting Them Through Hell
As a pilot, anytime we encounter or suspect a bird strike we report that suspicion to the airport or Air Traffic Controller (ATC) to advise other pilots and airport personnel to inspect the runways for a circus or more birds that could be hazardous to other aircraft. Secondly, we'll run any appropriate checklists and determine if the flight can continue or be terminated. Upon landing, the crew will make a written maintenance entry and advice maintenance control of the bird strike Maintenance will conduct a thorough inspection on the aircraft to determine if any damage was encountered. Finally, the crew will file a written report to the company which will document the event for the company and FAA to research and/or track the bird strike event.
Bird strikes are usually not a serious event; but, they can be if the bird is large enough to cause severe damage.
Thomas Zerbarini
Reading your question immediately brought me back to my teen years and a funny story.What is it like to be in an aircraft lavatory during turbulences or cabin decompression?
When I was a teenager, I would travel occasionally on Delta Air Lines and Eastern Airlines between New York and Tampa Florida. I loved it. I would look forward to every second of each trip from packing to unpacking. It was clear, flying was in my blood.
One of my pre-planning tasks I would do was keep an eye on the weather for the days leading up to my trip. I loved the bumpy rides and look forward to finding out there would be pop up thunderstorms forecast for my flight. As any regular flyer knows, during the summer months in Florida there are almost always cumulus clouds and scattered thunderstorms from 3pm to 7pm. So, on this particular hot summer flight from New York to Tampa I knew it was going to be a fun ride over Florida.
On the day of my flight, I was sure to get a back seat where the bumps, swinging and swaying would be felt the most. Unfortunately, that's where the smoking section was back then too. Yuk! The takeoff, climb and cruise were smooth and uneventful. A huge meal was served, check this out:
except I remember a chocolate layer cake that day. Anyway, the descent came a little early because the Stewardesses (we call them flight attendants now) were collecting trays and drinks early. A sure sign that the fun would be starting soon.
The captain came on just as we were beginning our descent and turned on the seat belt sign stating that we'll have some turbulence on our descent. Immediately following his announcement, the Stewardesses finished collecting everything and took their seats. My face was buried in the window trying to catch a glimpse of the clouds we were approaching. Just as I saw the first glimpse of some pretty large cumulus formations I smiled and looked into the cabin to see if anyone else was sharing the same joy I was feeling. Wouldn't you know it, as I was smiling away a young women walked passed my seat heading to the bathroom. I tried to say something but she had already passed. I had a really good idea what was to happen next.
As soon as we entered the billowing clouds we were being tossed about like a rag in the wind. I enjoyed every moment; but, all I could think about was that poor women in the lavatory that decided to ignore the seat belt sign and not head the Captains warning to the expected turbulence.
After about 10 minutes of the whoops-e-daisy's, the young lady finally came out of the lav. She was completely soaked with, well use your imagination. I could tell she was embarrassed an nobody said a thing. I thought to myself, how many times I've seen folks ignore those seat belt signs and directions from the crew to stay in your seats and keep your seat belt fastened when things were going to get rough.
The real impressive thing was that the stewardesses also had the same judgmental thoughts I did; yet, they kept their composer and were completely professional and accommodating. They did everything they could to clean her up and make her feel comfortable so that she wouldn't leave the plane all disheveled. A real class operation and dedication to customer service I thought as a youngster.
The moral to the story I suppose would be to listen and follow the guidance and direction from the flight and cabin crew. It may seem repetitive and routine. We [pilots] can't alway predict every moment that turbulence or and emergency will occur. We shy on the safe side most of the time to ensure your safety. So, head our warnings and guidance. One out of Ten times we'll be right and you'll be glad you kept your seatbelt on.
Fly Safe!
Thomas Zerbarini
