FAA to change how some planes land in effort to cut emissions

fholbert

Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
Currently, most planes that land at airports descend in a stair-step method, where aircraft repeatedly level off and power up the engines during the descent. Under the agency's new 42 Optimized Profile Descents, or OPDs, planes will instead descend from cruising altitude to the runway in a smoother, continuous path with engines set at near idle.

 
The other day they stepped climbed me out of PHX. In 2000 ft increments. To 210 before allowing the rest of the climb. That must have been for emissions as well. Glad I could help.

What was the preceding aircraft to you in relation to performance?

I often get this when the aircraft in front has a slower climb, or larger wake turbulence category necessitating more miles in trail.
 
What was the preceding aircraft to you in relation to performance?

I often get this when the aircraft in front has a slower climb, or larger wake turbulence category necessitating more miles in trail.
Actually I was the first to go out of the set that were waiting. AND they vectored me off the departure right after take off. So I was out of the way anyway. Who knows.
 
Last edited:
Didn’t they try this before somewhere and it didn’t really work all that well?
Also it does get frustrating every place thay has fancy RNAV arrivals and ATC screws with them every single time. Makes the whole thing pointless.
 
Didn’t they try this before somewhere and it didn’t really work all that well?
Also it does get frustrating every place thay has fancy RNAV arrivals and ATC screws with them every single time. Makes the whole thing pointless.
My favorite is being told to slow to a speed near Green Dot when the airplane hits the DECEL point.

“You know, if you micromanaged this a bit less, it would still probably work…”
 
Actually I was the first to go out of the set that were waiting. AND they vectored me off the departure right after take off. So I was out of the way anyway. Who knows.
If not slower ahead of you, maybe a faster aircraft behind you?
 
If we weren’t trying to fly more efficiently/ profitably then we wouldn’t have profiles and cost indices. I applaud the FAA for trying to have a more efficient NAS, but it is a tough challenge given the diversity in machines out there. A CE500 or CJ1 has a radically different profile and aerodynamic needs than a 747 or 777.
 
I’m not a 121 pilot so I’m not sure I understand the idea behind this.

Are they trying to eliminate carbon emission saturation from air to make room for more chemical spraying? If you‘re afraid to answer in open forum, send PM. :cool:

Ok..Hear me out on this. What if the aircraft sprayed a biodegradable chemical into the exhaust airflow that neutralized emission and formed a "bio-chemtrail"? :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
Currently, most planes that land at airports descend in a stair-step method, where aircraft repeatedly level off and power up the engines during the descent. Under the agency's new 42 Optimized Profile Descents, or OPDs, planes will instead descend from cruising altitude to the runway in a smoother, continuous path with engines set at near idle.

These are nothing new, we’ve had these for many decades now, getting from the high altitude environment, all the way to landing. Used to fly these all the time, which for us was namely for fuel conservation, with often nearing fuel mins on missions, in aircraft that can’t afford to be leveling off for that reason.

4284B26A-E041-4BA2-AD98-778D2B91E7F9.jpeg
E6689050-3B55-464E-A6A1-08CA6E71316B.jpeg
 
These are nothing new, we’ve had these for many decades now, getting from the high altitude environment, all the way to landing. Used to fly these all the time, which for us was namely for fuel conservation, with often nearing fuel mins on missions, in aircraft that can’t afford to be leveling off for that reason.

View attachment 62931View attachment 62932
Would I be right I’m assuming whatever was flying these wasn’t a typical “set the bottom altitude and babysit it” affair?
 
Would I be right I’m assuming whatever was flying these wasn’t a typical “set the bottom altitude and babysit it” affair?

At the time, we weren’t equipped with any vertical navigation in tactical jets, and no autopilot in many of them, so these were all hand flown (the horror!). The heavies that had/have vertical Nav could use it like they normally did.
 
Ok..Hear me out on this. What if the aircraft sprayed a biodegradable chemical into the exhaust airflow that neutralized emission and formed a "bio-chemtrail"? :biggrin:
Then we would all be mandated to wear masks! Wait………
 
Back
Top