Southwest tries to redecorate LGA tower

[Boots2Wings]

Why were they landing with a tailwind, on a short runway?

Surface winds are what count. Until enough people complain or GA

 

[Boots2Wings]

The problem is handflying of the magenta crowd, VNAV above 10k when the speed goes from 250 to ~280-290, and the level off at or below 11,000 ft.


Initially out of 10k and approaching 11k, the FD only shows a slight pitch down, which makes the pilot think brute doing okay. You have to pitch down into the FD and then it continues towards commanding a level off.
.
It’s a funky behavior that involves accelerating from 250 to 290kts, while also going through 10k but leveling 11k.


Not a big deal. Just pitch down to hold 11k and the plane will do just that. But again, you have magenta line pilots and they bust right through.

Hmm ill have to ask to try this later. I usually have limited my requests for no automation/Fd once were at 250 or less below 10k , usually before prino…but thats an interesting point. Thanks for the heads up

 

[NovemberEcho]

Why were they landing with a tailwind, on a short runway?

It wasn’t a tailwind on the runway.

 

[MikeD]

The problem is handflying of the magenta crowd, VNAV above 10k when the speed goes from 250 to ~280-290, and the level off at or below 11,000 ft.


Initially out of 10k and approaching 11k, the FD only shows a slight pitch down, which makes the pilot think they’re doing okay. You have to pitch down into the FD and then it continues towards commanding a level off.

It’s a funky behavior that involves accelerating from 250 to 290kts, while also going through 10k but leveling 11k.


Not a big deal. Just pitch down to hold 11k and the plane will do just that. But again, you have magenta line pilots and they bust right through.

Following the magenta FD or even magenta lines only, without actually doing a crosscheck of other instrument data, will bite you in the butt.

 

[roundout]

Why were they landing with a tailwind, on a short runway?

NY

Also famous for massive tailwind on approach but calm or completely opposite at the surface is DEN. that combined with the fact the FAF is only 1200AFE on 2 runways. It’s really easy to get dorked up there.

 

[Shiftace]

Question from this noob - why won't they allow the use of AP on this approach?

 

[nc1982]

Question from this noob - why won't they allow the use of AP on this approach?

Runways sit on piers on the bay.

 

[derg]

Question from this noob - why won't they allow the use of AP on this approach?

 

[greg1016]

NY

Also famous for massive tailwind on approach but calm or completely opposite at the surface is DEN. that combined with the fact the FAF is only 1200AFE on 2 runways. It’s really easy to get dorked up there.

As a tower controller I never considered the winds aloft until I got to a tower that lost its tracon. We had the winds aloft display there and often used it to make configuration choices.

My experience in New York was that our configuration was often guided more by the airlines than what was actually happening on the ground. Once per shift there was a telecon where all the interested parties came to an agreement on runway configuration. Very often the wind would be favoring a 31 operation but we'd be landing 4R/22L and departing 4L/22R while also departing 31L@KE for RBVs only because the airlines would want to see 2 departure runways open for the morning push. In most instances there would never be a line at 31L so it wasn't much relief, but you know, gov/capitalist logic.

I am sure @NovemberEcho can elaborate more about what happens in the airspace when unusual configurations are required. (Like a straight in to 13L at JFK)

 

[CFI A&P]

Question from this noob - why won't they allow the use of AP on this approach?

There’s a close in obstacle, an antenna if I remember correctly.

 

[CFIT99]

Why were they landing with a tailwind, on a short runway?

It's common to land with a small headwind/tailwind when winds aloft (500AGL) are strong 30-60 KTS on the tail, it's very hard to get slow and configured and even more to be stabilized. If they were to land the other direction, (headwind on approach) it's easier to configure and be stabilized but most likely the loss in headwinds will result in a wind shear event and a GA. I see it DEN the most.

 

[derg]

Following the magenta FD or even magenta lines only, without actually doing a crosscheck of other instrument data, will bite you in the butt.

However, in the Airbus, it’s follow the FD pitch bars or turn them off. The autothrust assumes you’re at least following the pitch commands.

(Asterisk asterisk asterisk! )

 

[JordanD]

However, in the Airbus, it’s follow the FD pitch bars or turn them off. The autothrust assumes you’re at least following the pitch commands.

(Asterisk asterisk asterisk! )

I was a fairly seasoned Airbus guy and got "yelled" at for calling for FDs off in the 737 sim once out of habit when things got wonky. Not sure of the logic, but it's a pretty routine thing for me to kick them off in the bus on a visual.

 

[MikeD]

View attachment 77132

Note number 4 is crap. Dumb approach.

 

[ERfly]

A handflown RNAV departure procedure is a ‘maneuver’ now and has been for almost a decade because people screwed it up.

Back in the day when I started at USAir, RNAV SIDs had to have the autopilot engaged at the lowest usable altitude. Too many people were almost flying into each other in CLT (back when they had true RNAV SIDs). Hand flying was not allowed.

 

[Richman]

I was a fairly seasoned Airbus guy and got "yelled" at for calling for FDs off in the 737 sim once out of habit when things got wonky. Not sure of the logic, but it's a pretty routine thing for me to kick them off in the bus on a visual.

We were doing visual approaches in the sim, and I clicked off the AP, the AT, and the FD, and got the same reaction from the IP that Luke got when he was going to torpedo the Death Star by hand.

I got a metric ass ton of time in the DC-9/717, and I thought the alarm was, eh, overstated.

 

[MikeD]

I was a fairly seasoned Airbus guy and got "yelled" at for calling for FDs off in the 737 sim once out of habit when things got wonky. Not sure of the logic, but it's a pretty routine thing for me to kick them off in the bus on a visual.

That’s weird. It’s the same for the 73 on a visual. The needles aren’t doing anything for you, for the times you’re cross checking the ADI anyway.

 

[Skåning]

Two years in the left seat I’ve had exactly zero FOs do a visual with the FD off. It’s so weird because they loooove to hand fly on departures up to 10k+. Not sure what skill that takes. All you’re doing is following the FD and modulating pitch. Hardly “hand flying”.

While on the Bus we turned the FDs off all the time.

 

[NovemberEcho]

Two years in the left seat I’ve had exactly zero FOs do a visual with the FD off. It’s so weird because they loooove to hand fly on departures up to 10k+. Not sure what skill that takes. All you’re doing is following the FD and modulating pitch. Hardly “hand flying”.

While on the Bus we turned the FDs off all the time.

I’ve pretty much stopped issuing visual approaches to 121 because y’all don’t turn towards the airport anymore. Instead yall (generic yall) square off base to final and wind up flying 2-3 miles more than if I had just vectored for the ILS.

 

[Skåning]

I’ve pretty much stopped issuing visual approaches to 121 because y’all don’t turn towards the airport anymore. Instead yall (generic yall) square off base to final and wind up flying 2-3 miles more than if I had just vectored for the ILS.

I’m not surprised, the lack of spacial awareness, configuration, etc is kinda shocking. You have to “think in 3D” with this job and all you need to know is your distance, speed, and alt to the runway. It’s not that hard.

Ok since you got me on a rant I see guys all the time can’t even fathom increasing airspeed in a descent gets you down quicker, then go to idle and level off for the speed restriction.

Maybe “energy management” isn’t really taught anymore?