sdh2903
|
| posted on 6/2/13 at 11:15 PM |
|
|
As an aircraft engineer I find a lot of these programmes a bit much to take as they are sensationalized just for TV. As stated it was only a routine
database update that gets done every 28 days. With regards to power down/up to clear a fault, again the norm. Nothing dodgy, if it's a current
hard fault it will still be there it only cures any glitches, however New aircraft are now swaying away from this method.
As for the engine noise in the previous posts, the captain isn't likely to tell everyone over the PA that he has a fubarred engine! If it was
making a noise as you described it would be more likely be an engine ancilliary or a number of other things rather than the motor itself.
what people need to remember is that a lot of aircraft are not new, some charter airline aircraft are 20+ years old, worked 16 hours a day+ with over
1000 people a day passing through the doors. Spares are massively expensive so when a part is needed it may be 200 miles away. With all this in mind I
find it amazing that most modern Aircraft can still maintain a 98%+ technical dispatch reliability.
|
|
|
|
|
karlak
|
| posted on 7/2/13 at 08:05 AM |
|
|
We went to Cyprus with Helios Airlines. Very unfortunately while we were there, they lost one of their aircraft over Greece. the one where they
think the whole plane lost pressurization and it eventually ran out of fuel while circling a waypoint.
Was a very traumatic time with loads of coverage etc on the TV, we were eventually told we would be going home on another aircraft as Helios were
under investigation for "poor maintenance". That was fine until we were on the bus on the way to the aircraft and it stopped at a Helios
plane. Well there was pandemonium on the bus, the Cypriots started wailing and crossing themselves..
We boarded the plane and it was obvious the crew weren't too happy. Some of them had lost friends days earlier 
Now, I love flying and understand all the aspects of flying, so my main thought was, this is probably the safest plane to be on.. How many airlines
have lost two planes in a week ? My young boys were a little apprehensive.
The flight back to Luton was very subdued, with every bit of turbulence met with a gasp,, but uneventful, Until....... Landing at Luton we were very
low with full flap deployed and I remember thinking,, Hmmm this seems fast.... then at the threshold of the runway - he hit full power and pulled
back... I honestly thought this is it, he has screwed it up.....
Suffice to say we did a steep climb away, when he came on the PA and apologised, "we have a problem with a Wing".... well feck me that
started the Cypriots off again, wailing and worry beads out again.... We were being diverted to Stansted. Turns out one of the flaps on the
Starboard wing was not full deploying "asymmetric flap failure " i think. Now I know they use Stansted because it has better crash
facilities for this sort of thing..... Parrrrp !!
Anyway,, landed albeit bloody fast and bumpy at Stansted, which was OK,, until the Cypriots spotted the fire engines chasing us down the Runway,,,,,
Off they went again., LOL
Oh and the final issue - cos Helios may have being going Bust, we were not let off the plane until it was decided who would pay the landing fees etc..
Only resolved after we had a mini revolt and armed police came on the plane - LOL.... Then a crap journey back to Luton on old buses to collect our
cars....
Was a nice Holiday in Cyprus though 
MK Indy - 2litre Duratec - Omex 600 - Jenvey throttle bodies - ETB DigiDash2
|
|
|
Agriv8
|
| posted on 7/2/13 at 08:33 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sdh2903
As an aircraft engineer I find a lot of these programmes a bit much to take as they are sensationalized just for TV. As stated it was only a routine
database update that gets done every 28 days. With regards to power down/up to clear a fault, again the norm. Nothing dodgy, if it's a current
hard fault it will still be there it only cures any glitches, however New aircraft are now swaying away from this method.
As for the engine noise in the previous posts, the captain isn't likely to tell everyone over the PA that he has a fubarred engine! If it was
making a noise as you described it would be more likely be an engine ancilliary or a number of other things rather than the motor itself.
what people need to remember is that a lot of aircraft are not new, some charter airline aircraft are 20+ years old, worked 16 hours a day+ with over
1000 people a day passing through the doors. Spares are massively expensive so when a part is needed it may be 200 miles away. With all this in mind I
find it amazing that most modern Aircraft can still maintain a 98%+ technical dispatch reliability.
As you point out the noisey engine got us up to altitude so the main thrust part must have been working ok ( belive two engines are required for take
off ) . As I keep saying to the Wife Statisticly we are more likley to be killed traveling to the airport than on the plane itself. Still love flying
ATB Agriv8
Taller than your average Guy !
Management is like a tree of monkeys. - Those at the top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. BUT Those at the bottom look up and see a
tree full of a*seholes .............
|
|
|
bobinspain
|
| posted on 7/2/13 at 03:16 PM |
|
|
My logbook says I flew into (and out of) Kai Tak on 32 occasions in the 1970s whilst I was a navigator on RAF VC10s.
The runway 13 approach over the flats was 'interesting', (especially if you were shopping in the street market about 500 metres from
touchdown whilst the jet went overhead).
The approach revolved around "hitting the chequerboard" at just the right altitude, speed and attitude. It may sound prosaic, but a
painted, chequered pattern on an outcrop of rock about 3.5km from touchdown and how you flew past it was the best determinant for a successful
landing, (notwithstanding crosswinds).
An earlier poster mentioned Nepal. We used to ferry Gurkhas from Brunei to Kathmandu in the mid 70s whilst the runway was being extended to its
current 10,000ft. Back then, only 6,500ft was useable, and believe me, that ain't much for a VC10 with a threshold speed on landing of circa
150mph (130kts). The descent into the airfield was pretty hairy, since huge foothills surround the place and altitude had to be washed off swiftly
(over 2000ft/min rate of descent) to get the aircraft on the ground.
We could only take off with minimal fuel due to the shortness of the runway, thus we landed at Calcutta 35 mins away for a fueling stop before going
on to Brunei or Hong Kong.
I met a Pilatus Porter aircraft pilot with the unlikely name of Hardy Fuerer.http://nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=16117#.URPBXPL66Z0 He kindly invited
we VC10 crew to a party at his place and put on a fabulous spread of food and booze in what was for Kathmandu, and opulent apartment. Whilst browsing
his bookshelf, I opened a copy of 'Everest the Hard Way,' by Chris Bonnington and a sheaf of paper fell out. Opening the paper, it read as
a thankyou from Chris B to Hardy for the many photogarphs he'd supplied for inclusion in his book.
Apropos of take offs and landings, we regularly flew out of Gan to Hong Kong fully laden. 323,000lbs. V1 is the decision speed which broadly states,
before it you stop, and above it, you go. Optimal safety is afforded by its precise calculation, taking into account, (inter alia), all-up-weight,
temperature, runway parameters. In round figures, it was 125kts or so, with rotate (lift off) around 25 kts more. Gan Island is 9000ft long as is Gan
runway, at an elevation of 6ft above sea level. I can say hand on heart, I never once thought we'd a cat-in-hells chance of stopping before the
Indian Ocean if abort had been called at 124kts.
Happy days.
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 7/2/13 at 03:43 PM |
|
|
I flew Brize-Gan-Singapore-HK on RAF Air in the 70s as a child  ....always liked the rear facing seats
|
|
|
T66
|
| posted on 7/2/13 at 04:30 PM |
|
|
Bob ,
Testament to the VC10, you talk of flying one in the 1970s - One of pilots I work with, his son has just moved from pilot VC10 and is currently
converting to the new Airbus replacement.
So maybe the end of service is approaching for the VC10, It must rank as one of the longest serving aircraft the RAF has used?
|
|
|
JC
|
| posted on 7/2/13 at 06:20 PM |
|
|
Good shout, I think the remaining proper Hercs are a similar vintage, but the longest (non-historic) has to have been the Canberra, with some doing
nearly 50 years!!!
|
|
|
motorcycle_mayhem
|
| posted on 7/2/13 at 06:42 PM |
|
|
Pause and think how dangerously 'tight' it is at Heathrow. I simply don't understand how something really serious hasn't
happened yet. Shame the Victorians didn't build the airport, they would've gone beyond the bare minimum...
|
|
|
bobinspain
|
| posted on 8/2/13 at 09:25 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by T66
Bob ,
Testament to the VC10, you talk of flying one in the 1970s - One of pilots I work with, his son has just moved from pilot VC10 and is currently
converting to the new Airbus replacement.
So maybe the end of service is approaching for the VC10, It must rank as one of the longest serving aircraft the RAF has used?
The RAF VC10s were around 10 years old when I joined No10 Sqn at RAF Brize Norton in 1972. They had minimal hours compared to their civvy counterparts
and thus were comparatively un-fatigued. I'd estimate that the civvies (BA) utilised the aircraft 6-fold over our use in their need to make
money.
'She' was known as QOTS (Queen of the skies) to the cogniscenti, and to be honest, we used to revel in the stick we got from the Herc
crews et al. We'd rib them that they flew in a noisy, smelly, slow prop-driven machine and stayed in sub-standard accommodation on landing at
their destination, (sometimes, tents !!! Whilst in comparison, us "shiny tens," had a fast jet, flew in suits (best blue uniform) and had
5star accommodation laid on wherever we stopped over.
Had the US developed the VC10, doubtless they's have marketed it in their inimitable way and been made a made a success of. (Only fifty-odd were
built). Once later generation 707s came along (quieter and less thirsty), it was 'adios' to the QOTS as a production aircraft.
As you say she's given sterling service, some 45 yrs or so.
Regards, Bob.
|
|
|
|
