Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Same thing guys did in the CRJ. I still remember some guys jockeying the yoke by a large amount, forward and back as part of the flare.
The 73 is fine. Unless it’s gusty/windy, I don’t find myself doing too much.
Frontier 3506
- Thread starter Fixtur
- Start date
Same thing guys did in the CRJ. I still remember some guys jockeying the yoke by a large amount, forward and back as part of the flare.
The 73 is fine. Unless it’s gusty/windy, I don’t find myself doing too much.
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
Still hands are a wonderful thing.
Soku39
Well-Known Member
It just feels sloppy?
Hmm, ok well my types are ERJ-145, CRJ 2/7/9, C-17, C-130H/J and I've never had this in any of the others, I dunno maybe I'm just telling on myself for being crap.
roundout
VNAV monitor
The 2025 edition of Yoke Pumpers
Simple. Pay attention to your fuel while working other problems. Hell, it’s a crew airplane. Don’t end up like UAL 173 / 1978.
If one doesn’t know how to land the aircraft they are type rated in, then they shouldn’t have a type rating in that plane.
Fly by for gear issue? It depends on the particular situation. Low fuel? Don’t bother. Night? Don’t bother. It’s not a rocket-science maneuver, it’s a simple low approach. Only thing it might get you is a “gear appears to be down”, that may be better than nothing if the methods to tell onboard can’t confirm it, including the visual checks from the floor
Soku39
Well-Known Member
I think this is more fighter mindset, I never heard word one about this after leaving T-6/T-38.
Karnage
I-am-a-pirate. I do not need credentials!
No, the 737, especially the 900, just suck at speed control and it’s damned near impossible to get them to just stay on speed in most instances where other planes just come down like their on a rail. I’ve come to believe that we add a minimum of 5 kits to Vref just to compensate for the plane’s inherent inability to stay stable and on speed.
It may be. Or it may be the very- short body ones don’t have that issue. But I still see some guys do this weird right/left very rapid movement, and I’m not sure what it is they are correcting against, as the jet seems to be doing nothing to begin with.
Curiously, what’s the type rating the FAA issues for C-130J, is it L382J? Is there one for C-17 too?
I think it may be left up to discretion, unless it specifically states not to in larger aircraft. Just saying, it’s not a rocket science maneuver, but on the flip side, there’s limited information it gets you. You are correct that a landing gear issue in a fighter type aircraft is indeed much more critical than in a large aircraft, in terms of landing.
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
shrugs I can see blowing it more in a common category with different handling in the flare (ex: 757 vs. 767 maybe [though I would note that the pitch up vs. down at speed brake extension is trivially controlled on either] or more specifically the various kinds of CRJ with slats versus not), but it’s a bit harder if the handling is the same in the flare (320 series, I presume the 737).
Soku39
Well-Known Member
No idea, never got the types even though the thought of firefighting for Coulson or flying around Alaska or doing literally anything on this earth other than flying CLT - MSP for the 500th time has crosses my mind quite often. There is no FAA type for the C-17 as far as I'm aware.
Fair enough.
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
We’re not trained or checked on it in the airlines. I know how to execute one, but that doesn’t mean I’ll be doing it at work.
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
statusseeker1
Well-Known Member
At Purple we now have to brief our calculated flare height for every landing in addition to the other 5-10 minutes of verbosity that most people just tune out anyways
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
Reading to the CVR maximum ass-coverage, versus an actually good CRM/TEM tactic, etc.
Interesting that a low approach, essentially a go around with power being managed vs full power, and with a brief level off instead of a climb, is something that needs to be trained and checked in 121 land.
At my operation, it’s basically if you feel a low approach is necessary for your emergency, so one. If not, then don’t do one.
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
It's...not necessary for the emergency. All an even qualified observer is going to tell you is that the main or nose gear 'appear' down during a flyby. The issue isn't whether they're down, but down and locked, so the added low-level pass isn't really going to tell you much of use.
I have my doubts that anyone could have told whether a nose wheel and tyre was missing from this airplane at night during a flyby too.
invadertim
In my experence, its always my fault.
Several years ago I had a gear disagree on the CRJ going into CVG late one evening. We got it a fair way out, so we did a go around and ran the QRH, which basically said cycle the gear. That time no issues, but I decided that if it’s down and ok I’m leaving it that way. We of course told tower why we went around, and declared the emergency for good measure. Tower really really wanted us to do a low pass, which I declined, several times, because: 1) it was dark and you couldn’t see anything anyhow, and 2) I was fairly confident that if the gear said it was down ok, it was. The landing was uneventful, the issue was a position switch getting glitchy as I recall.
ERfly
Well-Known Member
In the MD-11, it makes sense and is actually helpful. In the 767? 20-30 feet. Every. Single. Time.
jhugz
Well-Known Member
I just don't get how our briefs haven't evolved yet. Threat first briefing was a huge step forward in the positive, but we are still reading out NOTAMS for the CVR as ATB stated. I'm checked out 30 seconds into a briefing. If it isn't an threat, I just really don't care. Oh the inbound approach course is 138, cooolllll...I can literally see that on the Jepp so why are we talking about it?