Visit Captain Sim web site  
  Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

 

Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 124 Send TopicPrint
 25 Lou - STORIES (Read 650632 times)
CoolP
Senior Member
*
Offline


Flying X-Plane :-)

Posts: 2568
Joined: Jan 17th, 2010
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #15 - Feb 26th, 2011 at 5:39pm
Print Post  
That's a good one, Jay.  Grin

As a Fighter pilot, you don't receive such nice letters too.

from here http://www.skygod.com/quotes/flyingjokes.html, great site by the way.
Quote:
Airspeed: Speed of an airplane. Deduct 25% when listening to a Navy pilot.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LOU
Beta Team
*
Offline


727,707,747,757,767=
40years of Boeings

Posts: 1541
Location: Central PA, USA
Joined: Mar 3rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #16 - Feb 26th, 2011 at 6:52pm
Print Post  
CoolP asked...
So, from your long Boeing experience, what was or still is your favourite plane from that company?
The latest and greatest or something in between where the character came together with amazing capabilities or some welcome evolution from its predecessors?

Or what's the most annoying thing you can remember to be present on some plane. Something where you always though "why the h... did they do it like this?".


The best plane for many reasons IMHO is the 757! This plane can do just about everything. It's fun to fly and can land in short strips and does just about everything in between. You can fly it on short runs and make money and then do the same flying across the ocean. The 767 was nice to fly, but too big to fly into small places. My first plane was the 727 and I'll always have a special place for this baby. The 727 was the last of the push rod & cable planes. All the new stuff is really fly-by-wire. We used to call flying the 727 "pig wrestling" because it was a hand full some times. You've seen where we call it the pig because it was no performer. Heavy and hot were a real challenge in the 727. The 757 on the other hand did just fine.

The 747, even though easy to fly, was a pain to operate because so many little things would go wrong with systems or cabin items. The log book was always full of write-ups that took time to fix and made being on time difficult. Also, the plane had a thing called simplex wiring. They would use one wire to control several different cabin items. This was done by various frequencies sent over the wire to turn things on and off. This never worked all that well and made it a pain to have stuff in the cabin like lights and stereo work properly. Also the cockpit in the 747 had very loud noise from the air going by the window in flight. 757 & 767 are much better.

Lou
  

Processor: Intel Core i7-4770k @3.5Ghz Memory: 6Gb DDR3 1600mhz Video: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Storage: 256Gb Samsung 840 Pro | 120Gb OCZ Agility 3 | WD Black 640Gb 7200rpm 55" Samsung LED - HDTV for monitor
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CoolP
Senior Member
*
Offline


Flying X-Plane :-)

Posts: 2568
Joined: Jan 17th, 2010
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #17 - Feb 26th, 2011 at 7:17pm
Print Post  
There's another quite happy 757 Captain around, Bruce Dickinson from Iron Maiden.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzwAxZ6rad
So this thing seems to attract a bunch of people.

The 727 stays a beautiful plane though, like the 1011. They just look cool with their #2 intake and those swept wings (727).
Funny to read about noisy 747 environments. These planes (if not operated around Japan) are loud throughout some very long trips then.  Huh
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
pj747
Senior Member
*
Offline


Delta 737-200

Posts: 1009
Location: UNITED STATES
Joined: Jan 29th, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #18 - Feb 27th, 2011 at 1:50am
Print Post  
Wow. Nice letter, who does that little girl hang around with?
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LOU
Beta Team
*
Offline


727,707,747,757,767=
40years of Boeings

Posts: 1541
Location: Central PA, USA
Joined: Mar 3rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #19 - Feb 27th, 2011 at 2:05am
Print Post  
I think most of the air noise in the cockpit was caused by the sharp edges on the windows and to a lesser extent the windshield wipers.

The 727 was so noisy that most pilots did not fly above 300 KTS IAS. Below 300 KTS it was tolerable, but the level of noise went up sharply as you flew faster. Same for the 747 and to a lesser extent the 707. The 757 and 767 were whisper quiet compared to the older Boeing planes.

As I've said before, the windshield wiper noise on the 727 was beyond anything else in aviation. It was so loud that you could not talk to the other pilot and it did little to remove rain to boot! The wipers were powered by different motors and would operate at different speeds and get out of sync. I would laugh at the scene of the two wipers violent trashing as they flung back and forth. The 757 / 767 were much better.

Don't talk to me about rain repellent (Rain Bow) because that was just useless and only tried once by most pilots. If you hit the rain repellent button on a too dry windshield, you had messed up your vision for the rest of the flight until someone was able to scrub the stuff off.

Lou
  

Processor: Intel Core i7-4770k @3.5Ghz Memory: 6Gb DDR3 1600mhz Video: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Storage: 256Gb Samsung 840 Pro | 120Gb OCZ Agility 3 | WD Black 640Gb 7200rpm 55" Samsung LED - HDTV for monitor
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CoolP
Senior Member
*
Offline


Flying X-Plane :-)

Posts: 2568
Joined: Jan 17th, 2010
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #20 - Feb 27th, 2011 at 12:17pm
Print Post  
You are right, pj, we have to talk to the mother of that girl.  Grin

Lou, when watching the beginning of this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8_gcDVucdY) the wipers in the 727 really look like "rough engineering". Bolts and nuts are visible, and we're talking about a thing at the very front of an airplane without any cowling.
Just like they've finished the plane and then someone said: "Man, we forgot the wipers!" and another one answered "I'll take those from my car, they will do the job, I think".  Cheesy

By the way, Lou, you've mentioned the 757 to be very versatile when going for almost any available airport (not airfield though). What's your favourite memory of an approach then? Was it the really bad weather at some major airport or was it the difficult flying at a smaller location?
The video shows Sucre in Bolivia, a nice and demanding thing because of the altitude, I think, while the procedure itself shouldn't be a big deal for the pros if I should guess.
For those who are interested. Look here.


The video later shows some "pull up!" warning and also a view around the cockpit, showing at least two ladies without flying duties. I wonder if 5 people around is a "sterile cockpit".  Huh
And that 727 trim sound is really annoying, don't you think?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LOU
Beta Team
*
Offline


727,707,747,757,767=
40years of Boeings

Posts: 1541
Location: Central PA, USA
Joined: Mar 3rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #21 - Feb 27th, 2011 at 4:57pm
Print Post  
CollP,
In another post I said that the wipers must have been designed by the same #@%# engineer that designed the noisy trim wheel!  Angry



As you can see in this approach plate there is a ton of information that the pilot must keep in mind and understand. The runway elevation of almost 9,500 feet puts this airport at the upper limit of "pig flying." The GPWS probably went off as they flew over a hill and the computer saw the rising terrain. As long as they were visual and understood the nature of the alert, thats OK. A look at the MSA (minimum sector altitude) circle in the upper right part of the plate gives you a good idea of what's around the airport. Also, night operations for this approach are NA - Thank God!

From the MAP (missed approach point) 2,5 DME from SUR VOR to the threshold is only 1.5 miles and you have to loose almost 1,400 feet - that is pretty steep. Remember a normal glide slope is 300 feet per mile. This approach will require almost 1,000 FPM if you are IMC and just go visual at the MAP in order to have Miss Piggy in a position to land. I don't know what the runway length is of RW 23, but even though the IAS on the approach would be about the same as the IAS for a low level landing, the true airspeed is higher in that skinny air so the speed across the ground at landing is faster. Stopping becomes a factor. No US carrier and most carriers for that matter would allow these young ladies in the cockpit because of the distraction they might cause.  Wink

You ask about some interesting approaches...

One night I was flying KSTL to KICT in "La Pig." The weather was nasty. A long line of thunderstorms was moving across the middle of the US. The northern end of the line was up in Canada and the south end somewhere in Mexico. Mid-west weather is violent compared to other parts of the country.

This little piggy - a 727 -100 - had old style "C" band type radar. This radar was pretty good, but you had to know how to adjust the gain and the tilt to glean what was really out in front of you. The ATC controller was very help full in passing on information form the ICT tower. He would relay things like "the tower reports the storms over the field, moving east at 40 KTS., heavy rain, lighting in cloud, cloud to cloud and cloud to ground." Nice night!

Well, I was able to find a few small holes in the line and popped out to the west side without too much trashing about. The light show was very cool and there was a bright moon to add to the scene. When we switched over to approach control we were happy to hear that the line was now east of ICT and to plan on landing on 19R since the wind was now out of the south east at 15 to 20 KTS. We were in the clear at 5,000 feet and started a descent for landing. Even though we were in clear air the turbulence was pretty strong because of all the fast moving air trying to keep up with the cold front.

As we started down the ILS the tower reported winds at 1,000 feet were 350 degrees at 58 KTS.  Shocked  This was reported by a plane in front of us that had INS and ground speed readout. We knew we had a strong tailwind because the rate of descent was very high just to stay on the G/S. The tower reported the wind shift would happen around 500 feet. All this time during the approach the bumps were pretty bad. OTTO (our autopilot) was not able to handle this kind of abuse, so I was "pig wrestling" (hand flying) the plane. At the outer marker, we could not see the ground as we had entered an area of moderate rain. About 3 miles from the runway we observed ground contact and a bit latter the approach lights started coming into view. As we approached 500 feet we were poised to go around because of the sink rate being high and the turbulence being heavy. Just as advertised, at 500 feet it became fairly smooth and we had a pretty good head wind shear.

The saying goes...Flying is hours and hours of shear boredom punctuated by moments of stark terror!

Lou
  

Processor: Intel Core i7-4770k @3.5Ghz Memory: 6Gb DDR3 1600mhz Video: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Storage: 256Gb Samsung 840 Pro | 120Gb OCZ Agility 3 | WD Black 640Gb 7200rpm 55" Samsung LED - HDTV for monitor
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JayG
Senior Member
*
Offline



Posts: 316
Joined: Jan 12th, 2007
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #22 - Feb 27th, 2011 at 6:10pm
Print Post  
darn, I started this thread and I just now noticed there was a second page, I wondered why it was soooooooooo  quiet!

Thats what I get for using a desktop shortcut, but I'm caught up now, good stuff! I think I met that little girl once, but she was older   Smiley
  

Flight Lead: "Bandits at 3 oclock!!!"&&Wingman: "It's only 2:30 now, what do we do til then?"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CoolP
Senior Member
*
Offline


Flying X-Plane :-)

Posts: 2568
Joined: Jan 17th, 2010
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #23 - Feb 28th, 2011 at 8:39am
Print Post  
I had to laugh, about myself. Thanks to Lou, I (once again) was shown that I'm just some sim pilot, looking at the chart and saying "meh, not that difficult"  while the rw pilot Lou sees all the "small" problems some values might cause.
As said, I was and still am aware about the high altitude there and the shortcomings in thrust while coming in steep and fast, but I think my brain just lacks of the actual feel of the thing, so I don't get any worries but just try it in the sim.
If I fail .. I reload the flight.  Cheesy

Nice story on that approach, Lou. I like the AP's name. OTTO. Is that from the Otto of Captain Future's bird?  Tongue He was very flexible though.

Lou, I've got another potential question for you, after you (politely) got out of the fighter vs. airline pilot thingy.
You, as a rewarded Boeing Captain and also US citizen are now being asked what you think about the Airbus approach on commercial aviation.
Is "Fly by Wire" together with "Laws" something to drive you mad or will you stay unimpressed?
If you follow the videos with Bruce D., the 757 Captain, you will find him reviewing some Airbus and being quite surprised how well the stuff works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKBABNL-DDM

Quote:
I met that little girl once, but she was older 

And she still wasn't scared?  Cool
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JayG
Senior Member
*
Offline



Posts: 316
Joined: Jan 12th, 2007
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #24 - Feb 28th, 2011 at 9:59pm
Print Post  
"If you follow the videos with Bruce D., the 757 Captain, you will find him reviewing some Airbus and being quite surprised how well the stuff works."

Ask the guys flying USAir 1549 how they like a Scarebus Smiley

The first bus I ever was was at the Paris airshow. Seeing a prefectly fine plane plow into the trees and kill everyone onboard because the computer 'law' said it was time to land made a lasting impression with me. I decided right then and there I would never get in one, and I never have, real life or sim. Just to be fair, I don't much like a 777 or MD11 either  Smiley
  

Flight Lead: "Bandits at 3 oclock!!!"&&Wingman: "It's only 2:30 now, what do we do til then?"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CoolP
Senior Member
*
Offline


Flying X-Plane :-)

Posts: 2568
Joined: Jan 17th, 2010
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #25 - Feb 28th, 2011 at 11:42pm
Print Post  
I think your view on that mentioned flight could well be called somehow superficially, but I intend no offense here.
Wikipedia might help a bit, but the picture stays diffuse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296 so no clear "Pilot!" or "machine!" can be spoken in my eyes.
Seems like a sad roule in such cases, on thing out of many leads to another one, building a chain one has to break. Sometimes nobody does. And even experienced pilots get upset and forget to slam the throttles to the top end of the range if they want to enable TOGA. If engines then fail, the only law that comes to my mind would be Murphy's then.

But you've mentioned the Hudson River "landing" (USAir1549). From my point of view, this is a big pro for Airbus there since the thing proved to be able to let a good Captain land, even on water. So maybe I don't get the point your were stating.
Bird strike can't be prevented by FbW.

The question of good or bad in case of the Fly by Wire stuff is somehow obsolete though but I still am interested in opinions here. The stuff is there, since decades, and is used every second as we're typing.
Even the law based operation is very common, not only at the Airbus planes. So if there was a proof of a system not being able to maintain safety throughout a huge envelope, it just wouldn't get installed, despite all emotions towards chips and electric cables. CFIT (Controlled flight into terrain) for example can (and did) happen with or without electronics, it just takes a weak link in the chain.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JayG
Senior Member
*
Offline



Posts: 316
Joined: Jan 12th, 2007
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #26 - Mar 1st, 2011 at 12:41am
Print Post  
From your link CoolP...
"Captain Asseline also reported that the engines didn't respond to his throttle input as he attempted to increase power"

They had plenty of time to go around, the computers wouldnt let them, which is also my point about USAir. The Scarebuses use FADEC intregrated into the flight computers. When the FADEC says 'shut em down', they shut down and you aint gonna restart them until the computers say you can.

In a Boeing you probably would not have lost full power in both engines and would have had enough to get back to JFK or even Newark. I have a bit of insight into that crash, as a good friend of mine was the Capt on the exact same plane the day before. You might remember a news blurb about it having a compressor stall. They had numerous problems with that plane well before a few birds brought it down.

My whole point is, Boeing gives the pilot options, Scarebusses think the pilot is just there to drink coffee and check out the cabin crew.  Grin

If it aint Boeing, I aint going!
  

Flight Lead: "Bandits at 3 oclock!!!"&&Wingman: "It's only 2:30 now, what do we do til then?"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
CoolP
Senior Member
*
Offline


Flying X-Plane :-)

Posts: 2568
Joined: Jan 17th, 2010
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #27 - Mar 1st, 2011 at 1:09am
Print Post  
Quote:
If it aint Boeing, I aint going!

I think I've got your point there. From my experience, flight sim forums never lack of emotions which is their good and their bad at the very same time.  Smiley

How did we get here? Ah, I remember, opinions, thoughts and feelings towards some modern aspects of flying.
How would Lou like the A380 and how would a young pilot like the 707 for example?

Here's some nice training video for another classic. I really like this "son, sit down and let me explain" flair in the videos. Aviation looks so easy (joking) and handcrafted there. E. g., see how one "walks the throttles". Enjoy!  Smiley
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZQSqtAxnr0

Part 2 (the French Italian guys better not watch the sign they make for "ok")
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMS4oEhf6sE

Part 3 (watch at 4:00 to get one of the coolest explanations of lift, drag and AoA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHCVUsx8K7M
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JayG
Senior Member
*
Offline



Posts: 316
Joined: Jan 12th, 2007
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #28 - Mar 1st, 2011 at 4:43pm
Print Post  
Great links, thanks for posting.
  

Flight Lead: "Bandits at 3 oclock!!!"&&Wingman: "It's only 2:30 now, what do we do til then?"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LOU
Beta Team
*
Offline


727,707,747,757,767=
40years of Boeings

Posts: 1541
Location: Central PA, USA
Joined: Mar 3rd, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Lou - STORIES
Reply #29 - Mar 15th, 2011 at 3:25pm
Print Post  
CoolP wrote:
Lou, I've got another potential question for you, after you (politely) got out of the fighter vs. airline pilot thingy.
You, as a rewarded Boeing Captain and also US citizen are now being asked what you think about the Airbus approach on commercial aviation.
Is "Fly by Wire" together with "Laws" something to drive you mad or will you stay unimpressed?
If you follow the videos with Bruce D., the 757 Captain, you will find him reviewing some Airbus and being quite surprised how well the stuff works.


Well, first I never flew the bus so I really don't have a full prospective on its operation, but I have an opinion.

All the modern planes after the 727 are fly-by-wire. The big yoke in the 757 or 747 is really just a joy stick. You move the yoke and signals are sent to a flight control computer to move a certain control. But, and it's a big but, Boeing's logic has always been to let the pilot fly the plane even if parameters are exceeded. I have to agree with JayG when it comes to Bus vs Boeing. There could be a time you might need to really roll the plane hard or pitch up or down big time. As a pilot I want that option. I think the woodcutter was a very good example of bad laws. As a flight instructor in the airlines I would remind the pilots that the plane never read the flight handbook and could do stuff that was not in the good book.

Computers are great - to a point. All I need to say is "Microsoft Windows" and you get the point.  Tongue
  

Processor: Intel Core i7-4770k @3.5Ghz Memory: 6Gb DDR3 1600mhz Video: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Storage: 256Gb Samsung 840 Pro | 120Gb OCZ Agility 3 | WD Black 640Gb 7200rpm 55" Samsung LED - HDTV for monitor
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 124
Send TopicPrint
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board  ^Top