Dugie8
Well-Known Member
To quote the pilots who we're flying our beech jet when we bought it from them
Ahem..
"What's that thing used for anyway..."
CRJ-200 - 1/2 Bank and Holding
- Thread starter SpiceWeasel
- Start date
Ahem..
"What's that thing used for anyway..."
I know pilots have requirements and such...but queeno nailed it. As long as you stay on your side of the fix I really dont care how far you go...within reason.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
It has an AOA vane outside but that data is not displayed to the pilot in any way. It is used by the stall protection system (and possibly the air data computers, but I can't remember).
FlyDutchman
Well-Known Member
While this is an interesting topic and I don't disagree with its discussion, I see it exactly the way @queeno sees it. If you are holding in the 30K range in North America you aren't going to be hitting terrain or poles etc..., so the big problem is out of the way. Now all that's left is ATC not vectoring planes at the same altitude anywhere near your protected airspace, which is completely out of your control.
In a no wind scenario, even at 300kt ground speed the radius is less than 3nm with a standard rate turn. So 6nm with a half standard rate, roughly 17 degree bank. So at 12.5 degrees I'll say 8nm. And these are all estimates. Flown perfectly with the math using r = v^2 / g (tan bank ang) even 300kt at 12.5 degree bank would be just under 6nm.
Trying to decipher this cryptic text: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7130.3A.pdf
I gather at 30K altitude and 265KIAS, template 15 is the smallest used for protected airspace and gives a minimum of 7.7NM on the non-holding side and 12.1NM on the holding side. They only get bigger from there. I believe the units are nautical miles on the table I read but they weren't explicitly expressed and like I said, that document is no easy read so I may be wrong.
Whoa!!! Nerded out for a bit... I'm back.
What I'm saying is: I don't think you can really do it wrong either way unless you are faster than the max holding speed or high altitude stall ooooorrrr just don't do the hold right.
In a no wind scenario, even at 300kt ground speed the radius is less than 3nm with a standard rate turn. So 6nm with a half standard rate, roughly 17 degree bank. So at 12.5 degrees I'll say 8nm. And these are all estimates. Flown perfectly with the math using r = v^2 / g (tan bank ang) even 300kt at 12.5 degree bank would be just under 6nm.
Trying to decipher this cryptic text: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7130.3A.pdf
I gather at 30K altitude and 265KIAS, template 15 is the smallest used for protected airspace and gives a minimum of 7.7NM on the non-holding side and 12.1NM on the holding side. They only get bigger from there. I believe the units are nautical miles on the table I read but they weren't explicitly expressed and like I said, that document is no easy read so I may be wrong.
Whoa!!! Nerded out for a bit... I'm back.
What I'm saying is: I don't think you can really do it wrong either way unless you are faster than the max holding speed or high altitude stall ooooorrrr just don't do the hold right.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
265 knots @ FL300 is around 430 knots. That is no tailwind.
430 knots = 12 mile turn radius @ 12.5*
Seems to be right on the cusp, maybe turning 1/2 bank off isn't such a bad idea.
@ 225 kias (standard RJ holding speed IIRC above 15,000 ft), TAS is 360, turn radius @ 12.5* is 8.3 miles.
430 knots = 12 mile turn radius @ 12.5*
Seems to be right on the cusp, maybe turning 1/2 bank off isn't such a bad idea.
@ 225 kias (standard RJ holding speed IIRC above 15,000 ft), TAS is 360, turn radius @ 12.5* is 8.3 miles.
Beep
Well-Known Member
I wonder if it was a cost based decision? Too bad they didn't put them in the airplane.
H46Bubba
Well-Known Member
You are correct. The AOA is used by both systems.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
We were almost always planned in the 30s when I was at the 'Nickle. Not sure why you wouldn't be. Saves a lot of gas.
Rocketman99
Frozen Guppy Manipulator
Because several years later with dogged out planes and engines they no really likey climbing that high no mo', especially when it's not balls cold. I'm glad the 900 actually has some climb performance.
FlyDutchman
Well-Known Member
You're right. I forgot to bump up the TAS for altitude. In the 30Ks they would generally use nothing less than template 22 which is 11.9nm on the non-holding and 18.8nm on the holding side. Template 15 is the minimum used at all altitudes with a max holding speed of 265KIAS (A.K.A above 14,000 for civil aircraft). I was trying to be a more conservative and still prove my point but you called me out.
I still stand by at half bank you would still be fine either way but thanks for pointing out my error. Rookie mistake.