ERJ climb profile difference Q

[Firebird2XC]

Whoa you guys have legit VNAV? We had to do math for our descents. I mean there was a jacked up "VNAV for dummies" setup in the FMS, but it wasn't a true VNAV.

We have VNAV, so we can plot a descent point in the FMS, but we can't couple to it. In other words, we put a target altitude with reference to a fix, then rate of descent to it. We get the FPA on the PFD and everything, but we have to dial in the V/S setting manually for the descent.

The weirdness comes from having Honeywell avionics and Universal FMS. Apparently we snubbed Honeywell for the Universal FMS because it was cheaper... and then asked them to rig it up so we could do coupled VNAV. Honeywell's answer was something akin to "Oh, NOW you want us.. that'll cost you a bazillion dollars because you hurt our feelings."
Needless to say, we didn't get coupled VNAV.

 

[Firebird2XC]

Without autothrottles, there is never really a legit VNAV. The guidance is there but you tell it the descent path so you're really just putting your mental math onto the screen and using vertical speed or pitch mode to follow it down.

I'd assume that is what Firebird2XC is referring to since Eagle doesn't have autothrottles in them.

There's no mental math involved- you just tell it where you want to be, and how fast you want to get down (or up) and it does all the math for you. You just have to set the descent rate and thrust levers to match the FPA.

It helps with fuel savings. We do idle thrust descents whenever possible. If it's something we can throw in special, it's how we balance our hauling ass at cruise. One captain I flew with requests Pilot's Discretion descents to outstations whenever possible. If he can get a specific range to be at that altitude out of the controller, we just self-defined a crossing altitude. Now we can stay high and fast until the last minute, and do a power-off descent. Saves fuel all around, and you get there faster, too.

 

[Nick]

There's no mental math involved- you just tell it where you want to be, and how fast you want to get down (or up) and it does all the math for you. You just have to set the descent rate and thrust levers to match the FPA.

It helps with fuel savings. We do idle thrust descents whenever possible. If it's something we can throw in special, it's how we balance our hauling ass at cruise. One captain I flew with requests Pilot's Discretion descents to outstations whenever possible. If he can get a specific range to be at that altitude out of the controller, we just self-defined a crossing altitude. Now we can stay high and fast until the last minute, and do a power-off descent. Saves fuel all around, and you get there faster, too.

As I suspected that is indeed the same configuration as the one Jtrain is talking about.

Next to the fix goes the altitude and descent path

4.3 / 11000

and then the magenta FPA appears on the right side.


All too many pilots I flew with, however, just put in 3.0 in the PERF INIT out of habit at the gate but never changed it nearing the top of descent, even with a 100kt headwind.

I'd do 4.3-4.5 in calm wind and they'd spaz out as Jtrain has mentioned. It is nothing to get excited about but a lot of people would get on the edge of their seat for not reason at all. They are the same ones who start hovering their hand over the flap lever when you get slowed to [gasp] 190 knots in smooth air. "Want flaps 9?"

 

[Firebird2XC]

As I suspected that is indeed the same configuration as the one Jtrain is talking about.

Next to the fix goes the altitude and descent path

4.3 / 11000

and then the magenta FPA appears on the right side.


All too many pilots I flew with, however, just put in 3.0 in the PERF INIT out of habit at the gate but never changed it nearing the top of descent, even with a 100kt headwind.

I'd do 4.3-4.5 in calm wind and they'd spaz out as Jtrain has mentioned. It is nothing to get excited about but a lot of people would get on the edge of their seat for not reason at all. They are the same ones who start hovering their hand over the flap lever when you get slowed to [gasp] 190 knots in smooth air. "Want flaps 9?"

Not exactly. I don't set the Angle... I set the rate. The rate is then continuously re-computed throughout the flight. If I set 3000 fpm, I just watch for the required rate to build up to that point.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

They are the same ones who start hovering their hand over the flap lever when you get slowed to [gasp] 190 knots in smooth air. "Want flaps 9?"

This was my biggest pet peeve as a regional copilot. Here's how to cure them of their annoying habit: when they put their hand near the flap handle, intentionally keep waiting to call for flaps until their arm gets tired and they move their hand. As soon as they do, call for flaps. They get the point after a couple of times.

 

[Nick]

This was my biggest pet peeve as a regional copilot. Here's how to cure them of their annoying habit: when they put their hand near the flap handle, intentionally keep waiting to call for flaps until their arm gets tired and they move their hand. As soon as they do, call for flaps. They get the point after a couple of times.

I do just that.

I haven't flown with one in a while who does it but I have decided what I am going to do the next time someone prematurely asks if I want the first notch of flaps. I am going to call for gear down.

 

[Alchemy]

Ok, I pretty much understand, its either "crossing restrictions" thing or a "personal preference" thing.

Here's something else I don't get. XJet dispatchers file all if not most the flights with the following...

135/145
Climb CLB.M65 Crz MSC Descent DSC.IDL (145LR) or A/P (all other)

145XR
Climb ECL.M60 Crz M76 or M78 Descent A/P

What is the point of maxing out the speed, getting the OVSPD warning sometimes, besides the fact you get somewhere sooner but use more fuel.

I've seen AE get filed at like M72 +/- a couple. I even saw one filed last week that was 387kts @ FL370. I know 387 is the LRC speed but, geeze, thats like what M68 or something?

I can understand red-lining it at the end of a 4-day but still, I don't understand why Xjet guys need to push the plane to the max. Anyway, just another passing thought.

Fletcher

I think it's for the same reason they have us climb at 290 even though the plane can barely pull it off sometimes; they want to minimize the "roadblock" effect for faster aircraft (boeings, airbuses, dc's, etc).

Personally I almost always use 3.5 degree descents on the FMS. That usually will still get me down in time using the altitude to lose x 3 method and flight idle with a tailwind, but I use my super awesome 3rd grade math skills to try and get closer to an idle descent if I have a headwind.

 

[wheelsup]

This was my biggest pet peeve as a regional copilot. Here's how to cure them of their annoying habit: when they put their hand near the flap handle, intentionally keep waiting to call for flaps until their arm gets tired and they move their hand. As soon as they do, call for flaps. They get the point after a couple of times.

I guess saying "no thanks, we're OK with our weight" or something similar is out of the question these days :whatever:. Who needs CRM anyway?

 

[jtrain609]

The speeds you need the flaps out don't adjust in the ERJ, and I'd say 95% of the pilots at Express won't put flaps 9 down until you're decelerating THROUGH 180 knots or said another way, as late as you possibly can. Same thing with flaps 22, unless ATC is having you descend while giving you a speed restriction most guys won't put them out until you have to, which is usually at the marker when you're tossing the gear out.

To bug the guy next to you about putting flaps 9 out constantly is bad CRM in my mind. Let the guy fly the airplane unless you're about to break a regulation, a clearance or a limitation.

 

[Nick]

I guess saying "no thanks, we're OK with our weight" or something similar is out of the question these days :whatever:. Who needs CRM anyway?

No, one of them I flew with did it the entire four day. Every leg I flew, and it was not me being an inept pilot because I know the limitations and I know the conditions and a thousand hours in the airplane is enough to know that we didn't need flaps 9 yet when we were 30 knots above the speed for it in smooth air.

That is, of course, the 5% that Jtrain mentioned.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Let the guy fly the airplane unless you're about to break a regulation, a clearance or a limitation.

:yeahthat: That's exactly the way I did it as a Captain, and it's exactly the way the Captains I fly with here do it. Unfortunately, micromanaging seemed to be a bigger problem with CAs at the regionals. Not sure why.

 

[Baronman]

The CRJ could pass an ERJ like it was standing still.

ERJs Vmo/Mmo at .78 MACH.

In real day flying rarely. Usually the CRJs are putzing around at .74 in the 20s and low 30s (the 200 at least), we're almost always at 350-370 if the flight is over an hour long.

Yeah, maybe .65 is slow in the climb but somehow ATC manages to work around it I guess. It's either climb at .65 and keep a steady 1000-1500fpm all the way up to 370 or go a little faster and spend all day climbing at 600fpm. I think it's just easier to go .65 and get up to altitude faster and then speed up to cruise sooner. And what are we talking about, a 30kt difference in TAS betweeen .65 and .70? Plus no step climb BS for us, no checking the numbers to see if we can make it..Unless it was a heavy plane with some strange icing going on up high we got it made no problem.

 

[Baronman]

:yeahthat: That's exactly the way I did it as a Captain, and it's exactly the way the Captains I fly with here do it. Unfortunately, micromanaging seemed to be a bigger problem with CAs at the regionals. Not sure why.

Disagree. You can help guys see the big picture and not necessarily be micromanaging. Additionally at a regional with guys on their first year on line they need some instructing even if they're not breaking a reg/policy. Descent planning is an obvious one. At least a third of the guys really have little concept of descent planning and the second they get a restriction they'll start down fast. To top it off they'll start down right into a layer (not really part of their "big picture" yet.) when they could have waited a few more minutes. Then it's clear they don't have an idea of how the wind will effect the descent. So is it better to watch them stumble, and somehow make it out ok, or just give an explanation on what's going on so next time they'll have an idea how to do it better?

 

[Firebird2XC]

In real day flying rarely. Usually the CRJs are putzing around at .74 in the 20s and low 30s (the 200 at least), we're almost always at 350-370 if the flight is over an hour long.

Yeah, maybe .65 is slow in the climb but somehow ATC manages to work around it I guess. It's either climb at .65 and keep a steady 1000-1500fpm all the way up to 370 or go a little faster and spend all day climbing at 600fpm. I think it's just easier to go .65 and get up to altitude faster and then speed up to cruise sooner. And what are we talking about, a 30kt difference in TAS betweeen .65 and .70? Plus no step climb BS for us, no checking the numbers to see if we can make it..Unless it was a heavy plane with some strange icing going on up high we got it made no problem.

Maybe I made an over-generalization then? These are the things I hear at my company, and we have ERJ-145s and CRJ-700s. Not really the same class for comparison, I suppose.

Anybody got numbers for the 700?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

So is it better to watch them stumble, and somehow make it out ok, or just give an explanation on what's going on so next time they'll have an idea how to do it better?

Let them make the mistake, and then discuss it afterwards. If it's not a reg or safety issue, then allowing them to make the mistake isn't a big deal. Your descent planning scenario is a perfect example. Let them start down whenever they want, and if they start down too early, discuss it with them afterwards. As a copilot, there is absolutely nothing worse than the Captain who tries to teach about a subject before you've even made a mistake. Assuming the guy in the right seat is going to screw up the descent planning and "teaching" him before he even does something wrong isn't good CRM.

 

[mtsu_av8er]

Let them make the mistake, and then discuss it afterwards. If it's not a reg or safety issue, then allowing them to make the mistake isn't a big deal. Your descent planning scenario is a perfect example. Let them start down whenever they want, and if they start down too early, discuss it with them afterwards. As a copilot, there is absolutely nothing worse than the Captain who tries to teach about a subject before you've even made a mistake. Assuming the guy in the right seat is going to screw up the descent planning and "teaching" him before he even does something wrong isn't good CRM.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!

What are you drinking? I'm buying the first round tonight.

 

[derg]

How come I always miss out when you guys start buying rounds?!

Well, except for that 40 oz over at the ShortTrain wedding.

 

[Baronman]

Let them make the mistake, and then discuss it afterwards. If it's not a reg or safety issue, then allowing them to make the mistake isn't a big deal. Your descent planning scenario is a perfect example. Let them start down whenever they want, and if they start down too early, discuss it with them afterwards. As a copilot, there is absolutely nothing worse than the Captain who tries to teach about a subject before you've even made a mistake. Assuming the guy in the right seat is going to screw up the descent planning and "teaching" him before he even does something wrong isn't good CRM.

Sure, in the descent planning example I'd let them make the error sometimes. How's about when they start down so early they find themselves below 10,000' way early slowing to 250 IAS minutes before they should be and causing a major log-jam on the arrival? No reg/policy broken but not realizing that we're leading a pack of CAL/Singapore/BA/Virgin planes going into EWR? Then yes, we are definitely becoming the roadblock you mentioned before. Wouldn't you have preferred that the captain on that plane asked to slow the decent so we don't get below 10,000' to early? Probably. I'm not going to yell at the guy but I'm going to point it out.

How's about the guys who have their heads down so much they don't even notice the cumulous wall they're about to enter. I drop the hint, "wow...some clouds ahead." Meanwhile they're focusing on maintaining the redline minus -1kt, we hit the wall and the speed subsequently goes through the roof. Sorry, I say "how's about we slow a little before we hit these clouds."

The First Officers here come on line with very basic skills, which is what we'd expect from the majority who come from a pure GA background and have around 600hrs. They're taught to cope with the text-book emergencies and work as a crew. They really aren't taught airmanship in the context of a 121 airliner till IOE and even then they scrape the surface.

Look..the way I see it there are times to pick our battles. I'm not going to sit back and be too "cool" to say something when it doesn't look good. I think some of the worst captains I flew with as an FO were those that were so disconnected with a flight that they weren't even in the game. Equally bad are those who micromanage.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

How's about when they start down so early they find themselves below 10,000' way early slowing to 250 IAS minutes before they should be and causing a major log-jam on the arrival?

Again, I would wait for them to actually make the mistake before correcting them. The problem comes in with something like this:

ATC: Flagship 5800, descend pilot's discretion to one zero thousand.
Captain: Discretion to one zero thousand, Flagship 5800.
FO sets 10k in the altitude alerter
Captain: Make sure you don't start down until (insert point in time that CA thinks is appropriate)

Before the FO has even started to begin a descent in this example, the Captain has already corrected him. You shouldn't correct mistakes that haven't yet been made. Assuming that the guy is going to screw up is horrible CRM, yet many regional Captains do it because they're predisposed to believing that the guy in their right seat is inexperienced and incompetent. Don't be one of those Captains. Always assume the guy next to you is a competent professional until he proves otherwise. Now if he starts the descent extremely early and it becomes obvious that he's going to be clogging up the arrival, then that is an appropriate time to say something. But don't say something to him preemptively.

How's about the guys who have their heads down so much they don't even notice the cumulous wall they're about to enter. I drop the hint, "wow...some clouds ahead." Meanwhile they're focusing on maintaining the redline minus -1kt, we hit the wall and the speed subsequently goes through the roof. Sorry, I say "how's about we slow a little before we hit these clouds."

Again, wait as long as possible before making the correction. It's possible that he's planning to slow down, but he's just going to do it a minute or two after you think about it. This is similar to the d-bag Captain who puts his hand on the flap lever when he thinks it's time for flaps. Let the guy fly the damned airplane.

The First Officers here come on line with very basic skills, which is what we'd expect from the majority who come from a pure GA background and have around 600hrs.

You see, this is the problem. Never just assume the guy in the right seat has only basic skills. He might pleasantly surprise you if you give him the chance.

 

[Roger, Roger]

Sounds like one of the lessons I've learned about CFI-ing. Often if you keep your mouth shut for just a minute longer the student will do what you were thinking. And if they don't, let them keep going anyway unless its a safety issue. They learn so much better if the screw up and have to work their way out of it than they do if you never let them make a mistake.