American 767 RTO at ORD
- Thread starter Colin Levy
- Start date
Nark
Macho Superpilot
I've been tainted by a culture that embraces minutiae.
Sucky!
If you can't see it, touch it, feel it, change it, why worry about it.
How much thrust do our engines produce? Enough.
Sucky!
If you can't see it, touch it, feel it, change it, why worry about it.
How much thrust do our engines produce? Enough.
There's need to know, and there's nice to know.
Truth.
Plus, so little of the captain gig deals with minutia, it's mostly about delegation and decision-making.
A
Adler
Guest
KLB
Well-Known Member
There's definitely a difference between good to know and need to know. AMF was the worst! "Let's draw out the air cycle machine" or "let's talk about the oil going through the prop system on the brasilia". (The most complicated system)
Cptnchia
Dissatisfied Customer
MAX stops the plane faster than MED, faster than LOW. That's all we need to know. As to the deceleration rate, and when it activates? We can't change it or affect it in any way, so not important.
Cptnchia
Dissatisfied Customer
OK. Whenever called for by your company SOPs, or, if allowed by the company, whenever you wanted to.
This is how we do it:
If we think we'll need to use auto brakes for a short/contaminated runway, plug the relevant data into the ACARS, and out comes data for stopping distances related to auto brakes settings. Apply some of that pilot skill and decision making and select one.
No where in that process do I need to know the deceleration rate or when it activated.
What do I win?
Contamination and usable runway length.
I don't really get the reference, but that's aww'right aww'right aww'right.
The thing with trying to have a masters-level understanding of the Airbus is that without a maintenance manual, it's a fools game as a lot of functions are "bussed" together.
Personally, in my experience, the last jet I had a good handle on the "I'm an electron"-level systems knowledge was the MD-88 because it was a very manual aircraft with minimal automation and that annunciator generally meant one thing, compared to say LGICU1/2 on the big bus which was pages and pages of considerations and failures.
Every airline has it's "truisms". Our truism here at SouthernJets is that if you can't feel, taste, affect or see it, it's something we don't commit to memory. The man that signs the paycheck says it's so, and in our world, it's so.
It's different at other shops, which is fine.
It's french fries man. I think herbed European mayonnaise is delicious on fries, but there's always going to be someone across the room thinking I've lost my cotton-pickin' mind for foregoing ketchup.
Nark
Macho Superpilot
Boeing vs Airbus terminology. Same otherwise.
Let me be political here... I have no idea what Boeings deceleration rate is. I don't fly those antiquated bucket of bolts.
@Derg the pound cake is a jarhead-ism. Kind of like an inside joke, that's open to everyone I suppose. It was direct at chia, Capt. Poorly formatted response to both of you.
Don't be bashful in your yearning for knowledge. I bet the southern jets school house didn't teach how to find the AOA in the Bus, yet you learned where and how to find it, no?
Last edited:
Thank you! I knew I heard this rate somewhere. But even the feel between Medium and Low seems very different to me. Sometimes on Low I'm looking down wondering 'is this thing working?'. Sometimes even feel like clicking Medium even though the performance numbers say Low will work.
The way I took @Nark's 'quoted rate' was that there IS a big difference between the deceleration rate of Low vs. Med. The original post about the Bus's Low and Med were...'aside from the time of application, they are the same.' My initial reaction was...no way! You can feel the difference. Plus, assuming 2 seconds is not a lot of time(the difference between time of applications), what would be the point of having Low Med High? This will matter say from 31L Jfk vs. 22 at LGA.
And I completely liked @Nark's 'correlation to action' philosophy.
And I completely liked @Nark's 'correlation to action' philosophy.
One other thing, this brings up the whole spectrum of Systems Knowledge. They range the gamut from 'building the airplane' to 'knowing nothing you can't affect from the Flight Deck.' I'm somewhere in between.
First walkaround after IOE. 'It would be nice to know a little bit about what I'm looking at here. 10 panels/access doors on the cowls and I don't know what they do.' So I dug a little into the books, ordered 'A320 Systems' off FB, which included explanations for every panel, grill, probe, etc. Much better doing a walkaround knowing a bit more about the outside of the airplane that I fly than the rampers. And that sorta correlates with those buttons you push.
The Skipper doesn't need to build the ship. But shouldn't the skipper know something about the ship he/she operates?
First walkaround after IOE. 'It would be nice to know a little bit about what I'm looking at here. 10 panels/access doors on the cowls and I don't know what they do.' So I dug a little into the books, ordered 'A320 Systems' off FB, which included explanations for every panel, grill, probe, etc. Much better doing a walkaround knowing a bit more about the outside of the airplane that I fly than the rampers. And that sorta correlates with those buttons you push.
The Skipper doesn't need to build the ship. But shouldn't the skipper know something about the ship he/she operates?