Plane Answers: A pilot’s inflight routine, cruising speed and chasing the dream

by Kent Wien on

Welcome to Gadling’s feature, Plane Answers, where our resident airline pilot, Kent Wien, answers your questions about everything from takeoff to touchdown and beyond. Have a question of your own? Ask away!

Frank asks:

I’ve recently been on a few long flights and was wondering what the routine is like for pilots when the plane reaches cruising altitude?

‘Long-haul’ flights are a nice break from domestic flying for me. When flying domestically, the non-flying pilot (which could be the captain or the co-pilot depending on whose turn it is to fly) is listening for calls from ATC and changing frequencies as the flight crosses the country.

Transatlantic and transpacific flights require position reports to be made to ATC every 10 degrees of longitude, which is approximately every forty-five minutes. These flights are quieter than a domestic flight, since we don’t have the constant ATC chatter found over populated countries. We do monitor an emergency frequency in case a flight has a problem en route, as well as an air-to-air frequency that allows for pilots to give turbulence reports to other flights in the vicinity. If a controller needs to contact our flight, they simply chime us with a SELCAL (SELective CALL) ding.

I recently read a rather humorous story at cracked.com called “5 Jobs You Wanted as a Kid (And Why They Suck)” which reasoned that the long hours of sitting in a seat with nothing more to watch than the sky is painfully boring.

Apparently, I must have tired of simply looking at clouds all day, so I queried some of the pilots I’ve flown with recently.

“Is boredom the worst part of this job? Do you even find yourself bored while at altitude?” I asked.

After a quizzical look, they all came to the same conclusion; not one of them found boredom to be an issue. Going through security two or three times a day far out-ranked boredom.

Most of the pilots I work with have some rather interesting stories or insights to share. I rather enjoy these conversations. A few of the discussions can be rather heated during the political season, but most are about family, home DIY projects or opinions shared on more effective ways to operate the airline.

And as you may have gathered from my photos, I enjoy looking out the window occasionally. It’s a better office view than my CEO has, that’s for sure. And sometimes clouds can be spectacular:


Frank adds another question:

Who determines the cruising speed? The pilot? The FO (co-pilot)?

Cruise speed is up to the captain, who may choose to fly at the company’s planned cruising speed or another speed if conditions warrant.

The planned cruising speed is listed on our flight plan, which looks at our estimated arrival time and our fuel burn to come up with the best speed for us to fly. That said, a flight running late may fly at mach .82 instead of .80, which is only a 5 knot difference. So our best method to make up time is by keeping the speed up in the climb and descent, and arranging for any shortcuts that may be possible with ATC.

But this speed only takes into account the winds aloft and en route. It doesn’t look at how late or early the flight lifted off the ground. So some leeway is required for the captain. If the flight is running early, we’re encouraged to back off on the speed to save fuel and there’s always a chance that we won’t even have a gate available at our destination if we get there too early.

Chris asks:

Hi Kent,

I’m currently in my final year at University here in England, studying Computer Science. Although computers are a passion of mine, I would say that flying is something that interests me even more. Once I graduate and settle into a job, I hope to begin working towards my PPL and beyond.

My only concern is that of future job prospects. With the economy looking ever more glum, is pursuing a career in flight a bad choice? I’ve been told by a friend in America (who already has his PPL) that many pilots are coming up to retirement age, and also that travel is, on the whole, increasing – both of which suggest a future pilot shortage, and excellent prospects. However, airline recruitment pages right now seem to paint a very different picture, with few if any of them looking to recruit pilots – especially those with little/no experience.

I’ve read in one of your previous entries where you’ve suggested that people shouldn’t give up if “they absolutely must fly”, and that is exactly how I feel. I’m most definitely not in it for the money – of course I’d like to make enough to get by, but I understand that I won’t be pulling in a hefty salary any time soon!

So really, any advice you can offer would be most appreciated.

I hesitate to push people one way or another in their career choices. I will tell you this, however. I’ve been getting a lot of emails from readers who wish they had pursued a flying career when they had the chance even though hiring had come to a screeching halt, like it did in the late ’70s.

Had they worked toward their ratings then, they would have been perfectly placed to enjoy the boom that started in 1984 and continued to 1991. After those seven years, we saw another seven years of lackluster recruitment followed by another mini-boom that lasted from 1998 to 2001. The slump we’re seeing since then has been unprecedented.

This weekend, an article in the Fort Worth Star Telegram says it all: Pilot hiring is at lowest point since 9-11, firm says.

AIR Inc., a pilot hiring information service that is often upbeat about future job prospects, lays out the numbers:

133 pilots hired in November compared to 1,084 in November of ’07. And over 4,000 pilots are still on furlough in the U.S.

These facts demonstrate the cyclical nature of the airlines. Junior pilots and flight attendants are hired, laid off and rehired. Airlines fold and employees scatter. Even the corporate fractional operators, once o
ffering a great opportunity for advancement to the left seat, are slowing down, having hired just ten pilots in October according to AIR Inc.

Finally, the increase in the pilot retirement age from 60 to 65 that occurred in the U.S. last December has meant that fewer pilots are retiring at most airlines. It will be another four years before pilots see mandatory retirements happen at their airlines.

But as long as people have a need to travel, there will be flying jobs in the U.S. and Europe. You can take your flight training in stages while working your IT job, acquire ratings as you have the time and money and hopefully you’ll be ready when things turn around. Last summer there was a brief period where regional airlines were hiring 250 to 400 hour pilots into the right seat of a jet.

My father discouraged me from flying since the industry was going through such turmoil just before I started my lessons. He thought maybe I should become a private pilot and earn a living elsewhere while simply flying for fun when I could. I considered his advice, but I knew that I wouldn’t be as happy with any other job. It’s a choice I don’t regret.

Someone once said that the road to success is dotted with many tempting parking places. So as hard as it’d be to chase the dream without success, the one dream you don’t chase could be the one regret you live with for a long time.

Just keep in mind, someone has to fly those planes over your head. It may as well be you.

Do you have a question about something related to the pointy end of an airplane? Ask Kent and maybe he’ll use it for next Monday’s Plane Answers

Plane Answers: Tapping into ATC communications, tracking aircraft and a 60 second takeoff rule?

by Kent Wien on

Welcome to Gadling’s feature, Plane Answers, where our resident airline pilot, Kent Wien, answers your questions about everything from takeoff to touchdown and beyond. Have a question of your own? Ask away!

Ronald asks:

Is there a site where you can listen to aircraft during approach and take off, and what is the site that the news media uses to show air traffic over the US?

Hi Ron,

Take a listen to the live audio feeds that LiveATC.net provides. Many of the controllers at New York’s JFK airport enjoy a large following because of this great service.

For real-time depictions of traffic, FlightAware.com is an amazing site that lets you view all the flights currently over the U.S. and Canada by city, airline, aircraft type or “N” number. Combine this with LiveATC and you’ve got a great view of what’s involved in getting around the country from a pilot or a controllers perspective.

If you’d like to listen to Air Traffic Control on your next flight, read on:
Tim asks:

On two recent flights on United, one of which was delayed in LGA for 3 hours due to weather, the pilot turned on the ATC station on one of the radio stations so we can listen. Two of the best flights of my life. I was up all night (was LGA-SFO) listening to ATC talk to our pilots as well as all the other pilots. What are the rules with this?

This is a unique service offered by United and their pilots on ‘channel nine’ of their inflight audio. I’m not aware of any other domestic carrier that offers this feature to passengers. You may not always hear it on every United flight either, because it’s entirely up to the pilots whether or not they turn it on. A visit to the cockpit to ask if there would be any way they could turn on the channel 9 audio for you might be helpful.

If you do enjoy this service, then please don’t critique the pilots on their radio work while you’re getting off the airplane. You wouldn’t want to encourage them to turn off the audio, now, would you? Give them a big thanks and let’s hope the feature spreads to other carriers. I know I wish we offered this at my airline.

Tim adds a second question:

What do the lights on the end of the wing indicate? I see red, green and others.

Those are navigation lights, just as you’ll see on a boat. Left is red, right is green and the tail light is white. They don’t flash, and they’re mainly to tell if an airplane is coming toward you or going away. The airplane also has white strobe lights, usually on the wing-tips and a red ‘anti-collision’ light on the top and bottom of the fuselage.

For landing, we have landing lights that illuminate the runway, turn-off lights for lighting up a taxiway during a turn as well as a taxi light, which is usually on the nosewheel strut and is used for taxiing of course.

Geoff asks:

I have heard that if a plane (irrespective of whether it is a small plane or a large one) does NOT takeoff within 60 seconds of starting it’s takeoff run it will NOT takeoff at all.

Well, Geoff, now you have me timing all of the takeoffs I’ve made this past week. Most have been in the 35 to 40 second range in the 757, which is an overpowered airplane. But this video of an Illyushun 76 shows just how long a takeoff roll can last. And another video taken from the passenger seat of an Airbus A340 might give you an idea of how it feels to be on such a long (54 second) takeoff run.

But I’ve never heard of a time limit for takeoff. I do remember that when flying a three-engined 727 on a two-engine ferry flight (without passengers), there was a requirement to reach 100 knots in the first 30 seconds or the takeoff would have to be discontinued.

And Geoff follows up:

I also have a question about the different flight levels that ATC gives out for an IFR flight. When ATC initially gives a plane its flight level it seems to be anywhere from a low altitude to a somewhat higher altitude. Are they made because that is the point where ATC will change to another station or are they given to allow for a more efficient use of gravity to speed up or slow down a plane? They often seem like arbitrary numbers however I’m sure there is a reason for them.

You’re close, Geoff. ATC does have different sectors, such as the low altitude center which extends to FL230 (23,000 feet). So pilots are often cleared initially to FL230, but they usually won’t have to level off at that altitude, since ATC will hand them off to a high altitude center controller who can clear the flight to a higher flight level in their area.

Leveling off before reaching the optimum cruise altitude costs fuel, so controllers try their best to give ‘unrestricted’ climbs if they can, traffic permitting.

Once the airplane is at its most efficient altitude, it will stay there until it burns off enough fuel to step up to the next most efficient altitude. These flight levels are usually even-numbered altitudes when traveling west, such as FL320, 340, 360 or odd when flying east. But ATC may assign a different altitude than planned, and it can be at a ‘wrong way’ altitude for a time if traffic warrants.

Do you have a question about something related to the pointy end of an airplane? Ask Kent and maybe he’ll use it for next Monday’s Plane Answers

Plane Answers: Airplane specific questions

by Kent Wien on

Welcome to Gadling’s feature, Plane Answers, where our resident airline pilot, Kent Wien, answers your questions about everything from takeoff to touchdown and beyond. Have a question of your own? Ask away!

I get a lot of question about the specific details or features of airplanes. I thought I’d round up a few for today’s Plane Answers.

Kevin asks:

I fly on A319 and A320s a lot. As we are on landing approach I hear three shrill tones or whistles from the cockpit. Sometimes it is close to the runway sometimes not. What is it?

Hi Kevin,

I checked with my friend Chris, who’s an A320 pilot who has a good answer for what’s causing the noise.

He’s most likely hearing the autopilot disconnect siren. It has a two-tone chime that repeats three times. It’s loud enough to easily be heard in first class and sometimes the first couple of rows in coach. A lot of pilots will allow the AP to trim up the aircraft after all the configuration changes before disconnecting the autopilot. That is why he hears it at about 1000-1500 feet on visual days.

The other possibility is the flight attendant call tone. It wouldn’t happen close to the runway, but it’s so loud that it blocks all other noises–including master caution warnings. They’re trying to get Airbus to turn it down a bit.

I’ve often heard the altitude callouts on the MD-80 from first class. “50, 40, 30, 20, 10.” It seems if passengers can hear it in the cabin, then maybe it’s just a little too loud. Unfortunately, we don’t have any control over the volume. Thanks Chris for the A320 insight.


Keith asked a question that took a little more research:

I often fly on SAAB 340s from my home airport to a hub. Unlike a lot of folks I love flying on the 340. I enjoy being able to “feel” the plane flying. Before 9/11 the cockpit “door” was just a curtain, which was often left open by the pilots. If you sat up front you could see most of the instrument panel. I’m familiar with most cockpit instruments but this one has me stumped:

On the bottom right of the “captains” panel is a little device that looks like a toy. It’s a round sphere filled with liquid and another sphere with black and white wedges. Sometimes it spins wildly and other times it just moves lazily. I’ve never seen a pilot pay it any attention. Just what is this thing?

I talked to my friend Frank, a former Saab pilot who told me that he’s pretty sure the Saab didn’t have such a device, but he remembered that the Beech 1900 did in fact have exactly what you’re talking about.

Here’s a fuzzy picture he dug up for me:

The little ‘pinwheel’ at the bottom-right of the instrument panel is a device that’s used to manually ‘sync’ the propellors. When the propellors spin at different RPM’s you’ll hear a wow-wow-wow sound. It’s caused by a harmonic vibration and it’s rather annoying to the passengers and pilots.

It even happens on jets, too. You’ll notice it when sitting between the rear mounted engines on an MD-80 in the aft row of seats, or even a Boeing if you’re paying attention.

But some turboprops have a feature that the jets don’t: a prop sync.

As the wheel spins, it’s up to the pilots to increase or decrease one propellor’s RPM to slow the spinning pinwheel down as much as possible. This is only necessary when the auto-sync system, or Propellor Synchrophaser as it’s officially called on the Beech, is inoperative.

Ivan asks two questions:

Long time reader first time questioner, and you said the questions have been dryin up, and in so doin’, you’ve opened a pandoras box :-). Anyway, here goes:

On the right side of tail cones on Boeing’s 757s, there is a little tab, like a strake or vortex generator (don’t see why you’d need one back there), that looks like a mini-elevator. What is its purpose?

Most people probably don’t realize that the 757 and other twin-engine Boeings really have three jet engines on board. Two propel the airplane and one is a small jet turbine, identical to what’s used in a turboprop airplane such as the Jetstream 31. On the ground, it’s sole purpose is to provide electricity through a generator as well as air-conditioning for the cabin. Inflight, it’s used as a third source of electricity in case one engine fails.

The aft most portion of the fuselage on most Boeings is where the APU exhausts. Since there’s a small amount of fuel that leaks from the APU when it’s shut down, the APU has a fuel drain shroud that is designed to keep the drained APU fuel away from the exhaust. So here is a picture of the ‘fin’ on the right side of the aft fuselage that you saw:

Ivan continues:

And finally, one last question dealing with engines. At the aft end of a 757 nacelle, there appear to be two different cowling designs. Is there a difference as far as performance in the open end versus tapered versions. Look at AA’s 757 engines as opposed to say, Delta’s.

What you’re seeing is simply a different type of engine. AA bought Rolls Royce RB 211 engines for its 757 and other airlines, like TWA, United and Delta bought the Pratt & Whitney PW 2037 engines. If you’re curious, the Rolls-Royce has more thrust.

You can see the side by side difference below when looking at a former TWA 757 in AA colors and the Rolls Royce version on the right:

Because of the engine differences that require extra spare parts and training, AA has sold all of the former TWA airplanes, with most of them going to Delta.

Ben asked:

Kent – I was at the Atlanta airport today and I saw this crazy tug. It looked like the nose gear of the Delta jet was sitting ON the back of the TUG. Am I imagining things? I linked to a picture, sorry I couldn’t get closer to get a better shot. If you look closely under the tug, you can see that there is no plane tire touching the ground.

Yes, Ben. You’re right. That’s a high-speed tug designed to pull or push airplanes back without the nosewheel touching the ground. We occasionally see these tugs. The first clue that you’re going to be pushed back by one is when you feel yourself being jacked up a bit as if someone was trying to steal your wheels with you inside. (A rather rare event in an airliner.)

These tugs are commonly seen in France. It’s rather amazing just how fast they can pull a 747 around the airport. Perhaps someday we’ll be pulled to the end of th
e runway to save on the amount of fuel burned. It’s something that’s been proposed before and it sure makes sense to me.

Do you have a question about something related to the pointy end of an airplane? Ask Kent and maybe he’ll use it for next Monday’s Plane Answers

Plane Answers: Kent’s 3 favorite and 3 most dreaded runways.

by Kent Wien on

Welcome to Gadling’s feature, Plane Answers, where our resident airline pilot, Kent Wien, answers your questions about everything from takeoff to touchdown and beyond. Have a question of your own? Ask away!

Deb asks:

Are there any favorite/hated runways by pilots? Pictures and videos of the one in St. Maarten made me wonder.

I’m sure every pilot has a few favorite or hated runways, and I’m no exception. Here are my top and bottom three:

My three favorite:


LGA – New York’s LaGuardia

With its reputation for delays and cancellations, LGA might not be on the top of most passengers’ lists. But it’s often the challenging runways that are the most enjoyable for pilots. While LaGuardia‘s runway 13/31 is short at just 7,003 feet, and it has water on both ends of the runway, the expressway visual takes you over the former Shea stadium and it requires some planning to make the sharp turn and perfectly line up on runway 31. But the most beautiful approach I’ve ever flown is the ‘River Visual’ up the Hudson to runway 13. Sailing past Manhattan at night, with the buildings seemingly at eye level, and then making a right turn over Central Park to line up with the runway, is certainly a rush.
SXM – St. Maarten

You mention St. Maarten, and I’d actually have to list it as one of my favorites. Coincidently, it’s also 7,003 feet long. But the fun part about St. Maarten are the spectators that gather at the end of the runway to witness the landing airplanes fly over at less than 50 feet above the ground. It’s probably the closest spectators can get to a landing aircraft without being on board. And who knows, maybe someone like Matt Hintsa will snap a picture like this of your landing:

SAN – San Diego

Finally, I must admit to a fondness for yet another short runway. San Diego‘s Lindbergh field offers a scenic arrival, and the approach crosses rather close to a parking garage located near the field. Since there’s no ILS, you have to be right on the glidepath during the approach. If you’re precise, the radar altimeter in the cockpit will read 190 feet as you pass over the garage, making for the perfect approach to runway 27.

Three worst:

NME – Nightmute, Alaska

Ahh, Nightmute. At 1,600 feet long, you’re probably not going to find anything larger than a Twin Otter flying there. Most of the landings I remember in Nightmute were in a strong crosswind during the winter on a packed, snow-covered runway that resembled a frozen lake. Reading the airport notes from this place might give you a better picture.

SURFACE: GRAVEL, IN POOR CONDITION. SEVERAL DEPRESSIONS, DIPS, RUTS & LOOSE GRAVEL. THRESHOLD BOARDS DESTROYED OR OBSCURED IN BRUSH MARKED WITH NON STANDARD CONES. WINDSOCK UNRELIABLE.

I’m sure glad those days are behind me.

CCS – Caracas, Venezuela

Runway 10 at Caracas, Venezuela. It curves down, dropping 88 feet from the beginning of the runway to the end. Even if you do get a smooth touchdown, the runway is so rough that no one would realize it.

MIA – Miami, Florida

And finally, there’s Miami‘s runway 30. Nothing challenging here, it’s long, it’s wide, it’s even smooth. But I never seem to get a nice landing there. So I’m adding it to the list. Take that, runway 3-0!

I’d be curious to hear other pilots’ favorite and least favorite runways. Leave a comment and let us know!

Roger asks:

My friends & I live near an approaching flight path, and regularly get into discussions about planes and their landing or approach speeds. Do larger jets have a slower approach speed, or does it just appear that way? Do smaller ones have a higher approach speed, or does it just seem that way, or are they all flying at the same speed?

An answer to this will sort out several arguments.

I think I can help you win the argument either way.

Below are some final approach speeds for various airliners. I figured them based on the maximum landing weight for each aircraft type using the ‘normal’ flap setting, which may not be the maximum flaps.

From fastest to slowest:


747-400: 157 (174 m.p.h.)
737-800: 148 (170 m.p.h.)
767-300: 142 (163 m.p.h.)
A320: 142 (163 m.p.h)
EMB-145: 139 (160 m.p.h.)
777-200: 138 (159 m.p.h.)
MD-80: 136 (156 m.p.h.)
A300: 135 (155 m.p.h.)
A319: 132 (152 m.p.h.)
757: 132 (152 m.p.h.)

On a calm day, we’ll add five knots to the speeds above. If it’s gusty, we can add up to 20 knots to the approach speed.

Interestingly, while the 747 is the fastest, it definitely looks like the slowest on approach due to its size. At 232 feet long, it’s over 100 feet longer than the stretched 737-800.

While studying auto accidents involving railroad crossings, the NTSB attributed the problems to the Leibowitz hypothesis, which states that the speed of larger objects, like trains, is underestimated by observers owing to a normal deficiency of visual processing.

But if that doesn’t help you win your argument, you could use this counter example:

Take the EMB-145, a 50-seat regional jet, and compare it to the surprisingly slow speed of the 757. In this example, the RJ actually does fly faster on approach, and since it’s much smaller than the 757, it really looks like it’s late for a date.

So I think you’re covered either way. Good luck!

Do you have a question about something related to the pointy end of an airplane? Ask Kent and maybe he’ll use it for next Monday’s Plane Answers.

Plane Answers: Loud bangs, crosswind landings and F/A ‘crosschecks’

by Kent Wien on

Welcome to Gadling’s feature, Plane Answers, where our resident airline pilot, Kent Wien, answers your questions about everything from takeoff to touchdown and beyond. Have a question of your own? Ask away!

Ruthann, who’s my proofreader for Cockpit Chronicles and this column asks a question about her recent Delta flight across the Atlantic:

About 15 or 20 minutes after departure from Shannon, there was a loud thump/bang/shudder. Not like an explosion or anything, but more mechanical, something falling/moving/colliding. We were sitting in row 26, right over the wing centre, on a 757-2.

Initially I thought, did we just lose a panel? But then I assumed it was more likely to be cargo shift. Something heavy. We were climbing at the time of course. It felt like it was right below us, or very close, but I’m not sure what the cargo layout is near that section with central fuel tank, etc?

My nervous-flyer mother had her headset on listening to music, but still heard it and wasn’t too pleased. Luckily, I don’t think she heard how loud it was. It bothered some other passengers, who asked the flight attendants, and I guess they mentioned it to the captain.

He made an announcement saying it had just been sudden, unexpected turbulence. He put on the seat-belt sign, but of course there was no sign of turbulence. It was just one single thump, but I don’t suppose they heard it up front, either way.

I had hoped to look at the aircraft when we landed to see if it could have been a panel, but it wasn’t possible to see out of the airport terminal.

Is noisy cargo-shift common? What else could it be? How often do panels fall off/pop out? Can you hear them go from inside the cabin?

I assume the gear had been up too many minutes to blame any issues there, and I’m sure if there had been a problem with that, they would have mentioned it before approach/landing, wouldn’t they?

How much do pilots not tell their passengers? Where do you draw the line? Do you ever get semi-decent ear/eye-witness reports from those in the cabin? Do you appreciate them? Remember the lady who failed to mention the little crack she spotted on boarding Aloha 243?

Thanks Ruthann,

It’s really hard to know what could have caused that issue. A cargo shift is a possibility, but that’s more common on takeoff than during the latter stages of climb or cruise. Also, the cargo area on a 757 is well behind the wing or in front of it.

You may have heard something related to the hydraulic system, since that’s often a noisy component found in the wheel well below your seat. It’s always possible that you blew a tire, which could have been caused by a dragging brake that causes an excess of heat to build up on the wheel, although if it were hot enough, we’d have an indication of that as well.

It could have been a panel as well. There are air conditioning pack doors which have been known to come off and cause a good deal of noise. Most other panels that go missing, however, would be hard to hear from the cabin.

We have warning lights in the cockpit for entry doors, overwing emergency exits and the overwing doors that hold an emergency inflatable slide. So if any of those were to open, the pilots would have an indication up front. Generally, if it’s not threatening to the aircraft, then we don’t have a warning for it.

If there’s no indication up front of an issue, we’ll likely continue the flight. But it’s always a good idea to let a flight attendant know if you hear or see anything. It’s usually not an issue, but we’ll take it seriously. We’re often informed by passengers of flap track fairings that shake a bit or something that looks like a loose screw over the wing.

This information is easy for us to pass along to maintenance, who are required to look into the issue. Under certain circumstances, it could be valuable information. So it’s definitely appreciated.

As for what we tell the passengers, I can say wholeheartedly that we don’t lie. There are times in an emergency where it’s not possible to talk to the people in the back for a while, since an abnormal or emergency checklist can take a few minutes to go through. But there’s little incentive for us not to tell the truth. This applies for delays as well as mechanical issues.

We’re taught to be straight up with passengers and to use as much detail as we feel is necessary to describe the delay or problem.

Stephen asks:

I’ve always wondered, as an airplane taxis out for departure, there always seems to be a PA announcement for the flight attendants to “Cross-check.” What does this mean?

You’re actually hearing that just before the airplane leaves the gate or just after it arrives. I figured I’d let Heather Poole, our resident flight attendant, shed more light on this PA:

When you hear a flight attendant say “cross check” over the PA, they’re letting the flight attendants in other cabins know their doors are armed or disarmed. Arming and disarming has to do with the emergency slides. When a slide is armed, it will automatically inflate after a door is opened from the inside. Since we don’t want that at the gate, the slides need to be disarmed after we arrive.

So we’re attaching the slides to the door on taxi out, and then detaching them when we’re parked at the gate, using the words cross check to inform each flight attendant that the slides are either armed or disarmed as appropriate.

Thanks Heather!

And David asks:

Often times I see on TV the landing of a large passenger plane, from the rear angle; the plane moving away from the camera, and the plane seems out of line with the center line of the runway.

How many degrees can the nose gear be “off-center” to cause a problem? And what does it feel like?

Good observation, David. I’m convinced that camera crews and editors wait for the worst possible landing to show in a movie. Maybe it’s just an effort to add a dramatic flair to the film.

But what you’ve noticed happens during a crosswind landing. The goal in landing most airliners in a crosswind is to align the airplane with the runway at the last minute using the rudder. Opposite aileron will be needed to prevent the airplane from rolling in the direction of the rudder. This is something that applies to small planes as well and it’s learned during primary flight training.

When you see the airplane touch down in what we call a crab–slightly sideways to the direction of the runway–it means that the pilot didn’t use enough rudder (or even too much) to get the plane perfectly straight.

On the newer 737s even a degree or two off will turn what would be a good landing into a real ‘thumper.’ It’s part of what makes landing an airplane a lot like playing golf. There are just so many variables that need to be accounted for to get a nice approach and landing.

At least it keeps the job interesting.

I’ll leave you with this video demonstrating just how much of an angle the airplane can be off during a crosswind landing that probably shouldn’t have been attempted:

Do you have a question about something related to the pointy end of an airplane? Ask Kent and maybe he’ll use it for next Monday’s Plane Answers