Question for Pilots and F/O

[ant_us_flier]

OK, I have a question for pilots and F/O.

When getting ready to depart the gate EVERY time and I mean EVERY time on US, someone from the cockpit gets on and states the computer tells us the flying time from wheels up will be 45 minutes. 30-40 minutes later, we are still in the air.

The expectation has been set by the people up front that this is going to be a 45 minute flight (or what ever the time period is). If this is never the case, why make the announcement? Why not just say, we are going to do out best to get you in close the the arrival time?

I was on a flight the week to PHL to PIT. Told 48 minutes in the air. It was 1 hour 10 til we hit the ground.

PIT to CLT. 1 hour 19. Took 1.30.
CLT to DFW. Well that was a nightmare.

DTW to PHL tonight. 1 hour in the air. 1.25 (all this week)
PHL to DTW ( was asleep before the door was shut (didnt hear, same with DFW to PHL)

and the list goes on. By all means I am not mad, just frustrated. Why state it, if its never the case????

Is this standard operating procedure.

I had a woman next to me tonight who was ready to jump out of her skin, becasue upfront told us it was going to be 1 hour in the air.

Just asking..

 

[QA4Jet-A]

OK, I have a question for pilots and F/O.

When getting ready to depart the gate EVERY time and I mean EVERY time on US, someone from the cockpit gets on and states the computer tells us the flying time from wheels up will be 45 minutes. 30-40 minutes later, we are still in the air.

The expectation has been set by the people up front that this is going to be a 45 minute flight (or what ever the time period is). If this is never the case, why make the announcement? Why not just say, we are going to do out best to get you in close the the arrival time?

I was on a flight the week to PHL to PIT. Told 48 minutes in the air. It was 1 hour 10 til we hit the ground.

PIT to CLT. 1 hour 19. Took 1.30.
CLT to DFW. Well that was a nightmare.

DTW to PHL tonight. 1 hour in the air. 1.25 (all this week)
PHL to DTW ( was asleep before the door was shut (didnt hear, same with DFW to PHL)

and the list goes on. By all means I am not mad, just frustrated. Why state it, if its never the case????

Is this standard operating procedure.

I had a woman next to me tonight who was ready to jump out of her skin, becasue upfront told us it was going to be 1 hour in the air.

Just asking..

First of all, were these flights you mentioned actual airtime or Plane leaves gate till touchdown? I am not a pilot so disregard my answer if it does not suit you. My guess would be that, yes, the computer will show an approximate flying time from Take off to Touchdown but, it does not know what ATC will tell the pilots enroute about, traffic, weather delays, etc. Perhaps something happens in flight downline that holds up air traffic. Does this mean they should land anyways because the computer said they would or would you prefer to not land if conditions would not allow it in a safe condition? I fly every week and talk to our pilots frequently and this is what they have told me happens so I kick back, get a tad aggravated like you, then get over it B/C I realize it's no ones fault. It's similiar to programming your GPS in your car and it says, Trip is 355 miles and takes 5.4 hours, only to find out later your on I-95 with a 15 car pile up 1 state away and your stuck in traffic. Like i said from the get-go, I am not a pilot but this is what I have been told and it makes sense to me.
QA B)

 

[grog_sit_reserv]

First of all, were these flights you mentioned actual airtime or Plane leaves gate till touchdown? I am not a pilot so disregard my answer if it does not suit you. My guess would be that, yes, the computer will show an approximate flying time from Take off to Touchdown but, it does not know what ATC will tell the pilots enroute about, traffic, weather delays, etc. Perhaps something happens in flight downline that holds up air traffic. Does this mean they should land anyways because the computer said they would or would you prefer to not land if conditions would not allow it in a safe condition? I fly every week and talk to our pilots frequently and this is what they have told me happens so I kick back, get a tad aggravated like you, then get over it B/C I realize it's no ones fault. It's similiar to programming your GPS in your car and it says, Trip is 355 miles and takes 5.4 hours, only to find out later your on I-95 with a 15 car pile up 1 state away and your stuck in traffic. Like i said from the get-go, I am not a pilot but this is what I have been told and it makes sense to me.
QA B)

Yep, this is a great explanation. Also, a lot of times these delays come below 10,000 feet; this sequence of the flight is called "sterile cockpit." We don't make announcements to the cabin during this high workload portion of the flight and this is usually where the delays and extra turns come into play and blow our nice tidy display right out of the water.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Let's see if this helps....

The "anticipated" flying time comes from a computerized flight plan that is part of our paperwork. Unfortunately, it has some shortcomings - it assumes no delays of any kind, and assumes that you take off heading as close to toward your destination and land as close to straight in as the respective runway layouts permit. So right there, you have two possible places for extra flying time to creep in. I always tried to make an adjustment to the flight plan time when I knew there would be extra distance to fly because of T/O or landing direction (and assume/hope that other pilots do too). In the case of flights to PHL I'd always try to add 5 minutes to the flight plan time just because it's PHL.

Then there's the unknown and unknowable, at least ahead of time. Will there be ATC delays in route, speed reductions or vectors off course to fit in with the flow of traffic, will you be #1 for the approach at the destination or #5 - all of which add flying time.

Then there a few cases where we are just about certain that it'll take less than the flight plan time. CLT-JAX when taking off to the south is a perfect example - the route takes you to the navigational beacon east of downtown Jacksonville, then NNW back to the airport. I've never had to go the the nav beacon and that saves about 20-30 miles of flying or 5-7 minutes. On that flight I'd always give the flight plan time, figuring the passengers would be happy that we got there earlier than anticipated.

Jim

 

[mullet]

boeing boy covered it. I typed too slow.

 

[PHLfa88]

OK, I have a question for pilots and F/O.

When getting ready to depart the gate EVERY time and I mean EVERY time on US, someone from the cockpit gets on and states the computer tells us the flying time from wheels up will be 45 minutes. 30-40 minutes later, we are still in the air.

The expectation has been set by the people up front that this is going to be a 45 minute flight (or what ever the time period is). If this is never the case, why make the announcement? Why not just say, we are going to do out best to get you in close the the arrival time?

I was on a flight the week to PHL to PIT. Told 48 minutes in the air. It was 1 hour 10 til we hit the ground.

PIT to CLT. 1 hour 19. Took 1.30.
CLT to DFW. Well that was a nightmare.

DTW to PHL tonight. 1 hour in the air. 1.25 (all this week)
PHL to DTW ( was asleep before the door was shut (didnt hear, same with DFW to PHL)

and the list goes on. By all means I am not mad, just frustrated. Why state it, if its never the case????

Is this standard operating procedure.

I had a woman next to me tonight who was ready to jump out of her skin, becasue upfront told us it was going to be 1 hour in the air.

Just asking..

Not A F/A Question..

 

[CV580ETOPS]

Not A F/A Question..

I think that's why the title of his thread was "Question for Pilots and F/O ",maybe??? <_<

 

[USCREW]

I think that's why the title of his thread was "Question for Pilots and F/O ",maybe??? <_<

I can see PHLs' point though because "Pilots and F/O" sure looks like "Pilots and F/A". We usually consider F/Os as pilots and not a separate breed.

 

[CV580ETOPS]

I can see PHLs' point though because "Pilots and F/O" sure looks like "Pilots and F/A". We usually consider F/Os as pilots and not a separate breed.

You know,you may be right...Didn't think of that

 

[ant_us_flier]

I can see PHLs' point though because "Pilots and F/O" sure looks like "Pilots and F/A". We usually consider F/Os as pilots and not a separate breed.

99% of the flights i am on, they are announced as captain and First Officer. So I went with that.

I understand the computer model, what I was asking was if its more then 80% inaccurate (when it doesnt take into acocunt for ATC delays, weather etc...) then why make the announcement?

Just on another one today, "folks were 45 miles from PHL, we will have you on the ground in 15 -16 minutes" HOORAY!!!!! People thought we were getting in early. 45 minutes later we touched down. FRUSTRATING

I know, I am not going to change this , was just asking for my ADD and my OCD so I could get it out of my head.

Was always a question I wanted to ask.

Keep up the good work!!!! I strayed for a little with UAL, but something about US having over 85% of the flights out of PHL, keeps turning my car into garage A,B,C,&F in the morning. Good old Monopadelhia!!!!

Also, not sure if anyone else had heard this or not, but I heard when I was back in Denver a few weeks ago, that SW was going to try to take PNE as their new terminal like they have in MDW and LUV since they can only get a few more gates in PHL, and have long term goals that PHL cannot accomodate. They realized PHL area was a high origination airport with a lot of $$$ to be made.

Is there any truth to this?

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Also, not sure if anyone else had heard this or not, but I heard when I was back in Denver a few weeks ago, that SW was going to try to take PNE as their new terminal like they have in MDW and LUV since they can only get a few more gates in PHL, and have long term goals that PHL cannot accomodate. They realized PHL area was a high origination airport with a lot of $$$ to be made.

Is there any truth to this?

I do not know but I know that Philadelphia is the largest City in the USA that has only 1 airport with scheduled service. NYC, CHI, LA, HOU, DAL, SF, DC. PNE would need roads and terminals. I don't think the roads that are in the area of that airport are that great.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

99% of the flights i am on, they are announced as captain and First Officer. So I went with that.

Saying pilot and f/o like you originally did is sort of like mixing apples and oranges. Pilot, copilot, captain, and first officer are all proper terms but should be used correctly with each other. For instance....

If you say pilot, then call the other fellow copilot.

If you say captain, then call the other fellow first officer.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Was always a question I wanted to ask.

PHL is one of those airports (and about the only one that I flew the 737 into before I retired) that is difficult to predict. You can be 45 miles out and be on the ground in 15-16 minutes (though it's somewhat rare) or you can be 5 miles from the airport and not land for another 15-16 minutes.

It all depends on the amount of inbound traffic and where you fit into that flow. Unfortunately, the "10,000'" PA has to be made before descending below 10,000', and at that point you usually can't tell since you haven't switched over to the local controllers yet. So in PHL's case, how much time remains till landing is pretty much a guess.

Most other places, at least those that the 737 goes, you at least have a fairly good idea how much time is left till landing. I would hope that all pilots use their experience to estimate the time remaining for their "10,000'" PA. Based on what you've said, however, it seems some are just using the "canned" number - 45 miles = about 15 minutes.

Jim

 

[XUS]

The "anticipated" flying time comes from a computerized flight plan that is part of our paperwork. Unfortunately, it has some shortcomings - it assumes no delays of any kind, and assumes that you take off heading as close to toward your destination and land as close to straight in as the respective runway layouts permit. So right there, you have two possible places for extra flying time to creep in. I always tried to make an adjustment to the flight plan time when I knew there would be extra distance to fly because of T/O or landing direction (and assume/hope that other pilots do too). In the case of flights to PHL I'd always try to add 5 minutes to the flight plan time just because it's PHL.

Then there's the unknown and unknowable, at least ahead of time. Will there be ATC delays in route, speed reductions or vectors off course to fit in with the flow of traffic, will you be #1 for the approach at the destination or #5 - all of which add flying time.

Does USAirways still use AFPACS for computerized flight planning?

Another factor for calculating the ETE (estimated time enroute) is the accuracy/timeliness of the wind data received from the National Weather Service. If the weather data is old, the flight plan generated by the computer may be off. Also, correct me (it's been a while), aren't the flight plans calculated hours ahead of the flight? During the elapsed time between the calculation of the flight plan and the actual departure, the winds may actually change. This would result in a difference between the calculated and actual ETE. If there were significant weather changes after the initial flight plan, the pilot was to have a new flight plan calculated.

Interesting story - Many moons ago the dispatcher(s) monitoring the weather data transmissions from the NWS accidentally missed 2 weather transmissions in a row. This caused the entire weather database for flight planning to be lost. Without wind data, you don't get a flight plan (or at least an accurate one). You can request that the NWS resend the data, but at that time it took hours for the data to be retransmitted and processed. We had a capture of the weather data in our test system from a week before (which we could run in rather quickly). My boss made a decision and had us run the week old data into the production system so flight plans could be generated. We then immediately requested the new data from the NWS. I will never forget that day. It was a scenario that wasn't supposed to happen, but did. The lead time (4 hrs?) on the generation of flight plans helped. There were no reported operational problems that day, but I remember we were all concerned.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Ya gotta remember (oh- you had no way of knowing) that I haven't flown west of MSP, MCI, DFW, IAH since 1990. Given that sort of flying, the flight plans are pretty accurate, given the limitions I mentioned way up above. In fact, if you exclude PHL we can probably beat the flight plan time if we take off in the right general direction and land relatively straight in if there were no ATC delays along the way. Of course, I've never seen a shortcut I didn't like, either.

But when you don't fly over 3 or 3-1/2 hours, the winds aloft can't change enough to make much difference in a couple of hours.

Jim