Do you fly your Freighter differently than a passenger Aircraft ?

[stilton]

To clarify my question, I fly passenger Aircraft only and attempt to give them the smoothest rise possible, ease gently into turns, etc, etc.


I usually make up for this with my landings.


I am not, for a moment implying that those Pilots flying freight are any less careful operationally, what I wonder is if there might be a tendency to be less concerned about turbulence or handling the Aircraft a little more aggressively ?


Is there ever an attitude of 'they're only boxes' ?!

[zerozero]

My company operates both pax and freighters.

I think a "smooth" pilot (control inputs) shows skill and finesse. I admire smooth handling whether we're empty, full of freight or full of pax and try to be as smooth as possible at all times.

That said, personally, I'm less concerned about in flight turbulence with freight and not just from a comfort standpoint, but with pax you also have working FAs whose safety you need to be concerned about.

JMHO.

[main_dog]

Agree with zerozero, you owe it to yourself as a professional to always fly as smoothly as possible, even if you're by yourself on a C-152.

:ok:

[aviatorhi]

And from the other end of the spectrum... I have more "fun" in freighters.

[Icebear2710]

I've done both pax and cargo. Flying wise no difference. As said before by others, to be gentle at the controls and to aim for smoothness and precision during flying should be in every pilot's blood.

Only thing I take advantage of is indeed the opportunity to care a little bit less about turbulence. You see those light chop conditions where you would search for a different level to give the passengers a better ride and to help the cabin crew during their service. Now, I usually keep my current level as long as the coffee stays in the cup ;)

[zeddb]

Absolutely no difference. I have no more desire to upset a box full of dangerous goods than I ever had to spill Lord Posh's G & T in first class. Or even Darren Snotbag's Stella down the back.

All a question of doing the job properly.

[D'pirate]

Passengers or boxes, they get the same ride I do, and I like to be as safe and comfortable as possible! :cool:

[Offenbach]

I tend not to make so many PA announcements.....:)

[Fish Head on Final]

What Is PA announcements :rolleyes:

[Offenbach]

er, public address.....

[11Fan]

I tend not to make so many PA announcements.....

:D

And from what I've heard, boxes don't bitch.

[JW411]

But when they do, they bitch with a vengeance!

[G&T ice n slice]

yeah, Racehorses can be highly strung.


(and the the nag I backed last week deserves to be)

[Gulfstreamaviator]

thank you mr cheese

glf

[stilton]

Your reply is not relevant Ga

[skyryder]

NO, it's all the same for me.
I will admit that I tend to tolerate a "bumpy" ride a little longer for efficiency than I will with peeps in the back. That is about the only difference.
It is nice not to get constant calls from the back about temp, etc. and given the appearance and attitude of the F/A's I was dragging around before I switched to cargo, I will put up with a few "high strung" horses....even if they are nags.....

[Exascot]

I'm less concerned about in flight turbulence with freight...

The only dedicated freight flights I have operated were full of pallets loaded with bombs and missilies :eek:

Reminds me of the old story of the loadmaster who removed all the pins with flags on them saying, 'Remove before Flight'. I don't know how much truth there is in it especially as it was allegedly one of our delightful ladies.

[stallspeed]

Absolutely no difference. I have no more desire to upset a box full of dangerous goods than I ever had to spill Lord Posh's G & T in first class

Very valid point about that HazMat. Flying all-cargo ac you're likely to carry a LOT more of that stuff. Sure, it's checked and re-checked and tied down and all that, but Lord's whatchmacallit drink-soiled pants are lot easier to deal with than the contents of a busted HazMat package sloshing around in the cargo hold...

[The Dominican]

I wouldn't even know what to do differently:confused: kind of a strange concept I have to say:hmm:

[Slasher]

I usually plough through mod turbulence as pallets of cargo
do not complain about spilt drinks or being unable to sleep.
And junior FOs get more landings as the same cargo doesn't
give dirty looks and comments when the main undercarriage
invariably gets driven through the wings.

If I carry DGs and anything else likely to blow up only diff is
the FO stays as PNF...much to his chagrin.

[2 Whites 2 Reds]

Now now Slasher..... while any decent FO will always know his/her limits and should therefore respect the more experienced chaps judgement in the other seat; I've found the heavy landings are equally shared between both seats. Even in sporting gusty x-winds, either guy is almost (not quite) as likely to "put the main undercarriage through the wings"

2W2R

[Slasher]

But you don't work in the same country and Co as I do 2W2R.

With an A320 frightener (a freighter with li'l junior as PF) the
AZFW is exactly that - no assumed weights but all is put thru
the hangar scales. This means the FAC weight (GWFK in your
PARAM Alpha callup) should equal FMC computed weight with
buggerall difference, even allowing for that sneaked-on stuff
ground crew send each other inter-port.

With a ZFW using assumed pax weights, most bums around
here wouldn't weigh 80kg even if you stuffed their boots with
mud. Consequently on pax flights the aircraft is actually a bit
lighter (as reflected in the FAC app speeds on the tape), so if
li'l junior sticks to his FMC Vref he normally doesn't make so
much a hash of it as he does on the freighter...er...frightener.

But having said that I prefer the kid fly freight sectors for the
reasons given earlier. And don't forget - all the bums down
back think the captain does all the landings. :rolleyes:

[Basil]

Once carried a couple of gorillas. Wouldn't have wanted to piss THEM off!

[2 Whites 2 Reds]

No maybe not Slasher. To be honest I didn't even realise the A320 Freighter existed....I thought Airbus cancelled the programme. Or is it just a case or hand balling boxes through the normal entry doors???

We generally hop around on the 757 at about 90 tonnes so Vref is normally around the 130kt mark. The heavier the better for me. We have an artificially restricted MTOW of 95t as we run out of space before we run out of weight and it keeps the airways bills down. I've landed a number of times at 66 tonnes or so where the Vref is 110kts and the thing fly's like a kite, much prefer more stable flight at the heavier weights.

I'm glad that I got my first job flying a 75 freighter....it has been and continues to be a great 'training ground'. And I really enjoy my job, no PAX, no hassle, good fun, professional but relaxed and nice atmosphere, and on a geeky note I love the 757. The biggest thing is no 'Man and Boy' attitude from most of our guys and girls. Only if its a stonking on limits x wind will a skipper usually ask if you're ok with it. Im the first to put my hand up and politely ask if he would mind doing it if I think or know it's beyond me.

I frequently get asked by people I've just met at a party or in the pub...."so when will you be allowed to fly passengers???" :ugh::ugh::ugh:

2W2R

[BraceBrace]

Freighter flying is usually both sides of the envellope: either extremely heavy with interesting and limiting takeoff performance, or empty and hardly any fuel which makes landings like trying to land something that just doesn't want to land and gets thrown around like a paper plane (slightly exagerated, but you get the point). These landings are far more interesting than high weight landings (except for the fact that on some types like the 737 you find yourself chasing the max landing weight on approach).

Passenger flying seemed to be much more "somewhere in the middle, but always a tad away from the limit". Freighter is sometimes takeing off AT the limit, landing AT the limit, emty... really EMPTY.

Heavy landings I find easy, they usually end up in nice greasers because of the stability of the airplane in the flare. It's the empty landings that are more likely to "drive the undercarriage through the wings". On our 777 the Vrefs are floored, pitch is fairly flat and any excessive flare input will send you halfway down the runway in a sigh. On a 737 freighter ie, turbulence and gusts can make your empty landing very interesting...

[Slasher]

The heavier the better for me

Mate there just aren't enough o's in smoooooooth to describe
landing a 747 at 285,762kg (freight or pax). When the gear
handle lock tinkled like crazy for a few seconds because the
MG tilt switches were borderline between the air and ground
mode it almost gave me a hardon.

I was once a FO on the beast and an unrivaled hog for all the
sectors at MLW.

Oh and that 320 freighter isn't a real one - its a pax with a
seat-loaded freight option and the netting mod.

[main_dog]

When the gear
handle lock tinkled like crazy for a few seconds because the
MG tilt switches were borderline between the air and ground
mode

And when the speedbrake starts whirring past, changes its mind and re-stows, only to come whirring past again... bliss. Few ships land as well as a heavy 744, although on the -400F at 302 tons it becomes near impossible to do a flap 30.

[de facto]

I've landed a number of times at 66 tonnes or so where the Vref is 110kts and the thing fly's like a kite, much prefer more stable flight at the heavier weights.
Damn at that same weight my vref is 151kts!!(737).

[DeltaT]

I was doing a lot more 'fun' things in my freight turboprop than I would do with a passenger one. I don't think it wise of me to list some examples, but our freight was always chocka to the roof, so it was going no where. We were always empty though when doing the more extreme stuff.

[upsfr8rcaptain]

I've done both jobs, and I can answer your question with an emphatic "no difference!"

Regardless whats on the other side of the cockpit door from me, I fly my freighter the exact same way: safely, smoothly, and professionally (except I do wear cruise clothes and slippers on the longer flights once level).

[Slasher]

No one is saying that freighters are not flown safely smoothly
and professionally at all ups.... just that some "liberties" can
be taken (like letting a 300hr wonderkid do the landing) as
there isn't any bitching and moaning SLF down back (except
maybe horses and their attendants but I haven't carried them
in yonks).

[NG_Kaptain]

Not about flying differently but dressing differently. On the freighter we tend to fly in jerseys and flip flops, love the informality, though I do put on my shoes prior to landing, would hate to evacuate in slippers. The food is more basic but the loadies are better cooks, and I make my own coffee.
Started as a freight dog and after many years as a pax pilot am enjoying the hell out of flying a A330F for an airline if I mentioned its name PPrune would ban me.

[FR8R H8R]

Now pleasantly back on the pax fleet and no longer making my own coffee in the middle of the night, I would have to agree with most here saying that pax comfort comes first and in the freight world, unless it's time to eat dinner, moderate chop is tolerated for a much longer time.

As for flying the aircraft itself differently, not at all. You'll still end up in the office explaining yourself when the aircraft rats you out for unacceptable flying technique.

FR8

[Direct Bondi]

an airline, if I mentioned its name PPrune would ban me


Alarming news to me. What happend to the ethos of this website as an open exchange of information, ideas and comment ?

[C K]

P A is passenger advisory I believe

[CargoMatatu]

In my experience it meant "Passenger Address".

[haughtney1]

I fly all the current 777 airframes including the 777F, and to be honest I do it no differently purely because that's the way the guys that own the trainset want it done. That being said, flying the freighter is a bit more informal with more T-Shirts and slippers on show.
I recently flew an empty 777F from the antipodes to a well known southeast Asian trading port, empty, and when I mean empty, I mean landing within 1 tonne of the MLW of 154T or so. With a moderate 15-20kts of wind, a bit of mechanical turbulence off terrain and the considerable residual thrust of the GE-90-110's, the old girl was a handful....and required a good chunk of crossed controls to dump enough lift so I could plant it where I wanted it..even at F25 :}

[Loose rivets]

when the aircraft rats you out for unacceptable flying technique.


I hate that.


What would 'the management' say if you told them the Pitch excursions of 40 degrees both ways, and the 75 degrees angle of bank was all good for knowing one's aircraft? Empty, I hasten to add.

[LiveryMan]

What would 'the management' say if you told them the Pitch excursions of 40 degrees both ways, and the 75 degrees angle of bank was all good for knowing one's aircraft? Empty, I hasten to add.Was that when entering or exiting the barrel roll? :}

[kwaiyai]

Slasher,
I agree as would rather let someone in a former company land the 72/200 F than in the present A320 plastic Pax job. Hopefully I am going back to that F'ing job too.