Southwest tries to redecorate LGA tower

killbilly said:
Which brings me to this little anecdote - I finally had a really good day as a baby Canabus driver. Had a fantastic CA that I got along with, and I'd briefed that I wanted to hand fly the approach from the base (it was a looooonnnng base, and I wanted to do it earlier but stuff was super busy and I wanted to err on the side of caution) going into MSY, and he was cool with that. Approach had given us some lousy vectors and left us high (and alternately fast, then slow, then fast again) by the time they cleared us for the approach. I probably *should* have called for FD off, but I didn't, instead I just ignored it and flew it down (the lesson there is, the FD sucks in some scenarios, but I had @MikeD 's voice ringing in my ears the whole time, 'it's just an airplane, fly it, you don't need the stupid FD) and turned a sub-optimal setup into a stabilized approach and landing. I still had the ATs on, which I guess is "cheating" some, but working toward deleting those, too.
Click to expand...
Different airlines, airplanes, and captains...but I don't let this happen in my cockpit. Flight Directors are either used and coupled or if you really want the practice without them, turn them off. Having a flight director commanding something completely different than what you are doing is a recipe for an incident. There's some bad results with this, we had one last year. Just something to keep in the back of your mind.
 
ZapBrannigan said:
Do you guys have any 700s? I’ve noticed the 700s single engine taxi like you’re trying to drive through a swamp. It takes a TON of power.

I think I’ve tracked down the problem to different tires on the -700 vs the -800/Max. It has a softer sidewall. As a result I almost never single engine taxi in the. -700, where I will frequently do it in the 800 or Max.
Click to expand...
Yea we do. I feel like every 737 non MAX single engine taxies like garbage compared to every Airbus. I hate the breakaway thrust required in the 800/900 single engine...
 
mikecweb said:
Different airlines, airplanes, and captains...but I don't let this happen in my cockpit. Flight Directors are either used and coupled or if you really want the practice without them, turn them off. Having a flight director commanding something completely different than what you are doing is a recipe for an incident. There's some bad results with this, we had one last year. Just something to keep in the back of your mind.
Click to expand...
I 100% agree with this and 100% admit I suck at getting them off when I’m PF. I see right through them and it doesn’t occur to me turn them off or call for them off. I super appreciate the PM asking if I want them off though.
 
Roger Roger said:
The wonderful consistency of the training department strikes again, because there are definitely instructors out there who will criticize you for that. And when you’re an FNG to the plane that’s primacy, and as we all know from CFI theory primacy is hard to break.
Click to expand...

This is why I hate cultural techniques that go against a limitation. If the training department wants us to fly like that, make it a limitation. The advantage for me when I went to the 737 was that when I did call for flaps and instructors tried to get on me for it, I pointed to the flap speed placard. "Yea but we try to blah blah blah blah." Ok is it a limitation or a courtesy? The training department loves to create scenarios where you are left high and fast and have to configure, so I will dump flaps 10 and speed brakes because I 100% can, and they talk about it every time like I did something I shouldn't do, except it is 100% allowed. When I was an instructor I would merely mention it but would never get on a pilot for doing something allowed per the AFM. You have some instructors who might not say anything, and you have some instructors that will pause a sim event and try to get you to repeat an event over it. It makes no sense to see the large spectrum of inconsistency within instructors over stuff like this.
 
mikecweb said:
Different airlines, airplanes, and captains...but I don't let this happen in my cockpit. Flight Directors are either used and coupled or if you really want the practice without them, turn them off. Having a flight director commanding something completely different than what you are doing is a recipe for an incident. There's some bad results with this, we had one last year. Just something to keep in the back of your mind.
Click to expand...

If you aren't following an FD, throw it away. 100% absolutely.
 
Inverted said:
the large spectrum of inconsistency within instructors over stuff like this.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that is one of if not the biggest issue in the training department. Again as an FNG, especially one new to 121, it really only takes getting snapped at once for doing something to create an aversion to it. And of course the least consistent group is the bunch of randos that teach PTs, which as a new hire is also the group that gives you the most primacy.
 
ZapBrannigan said:
Do you guys have any 700s? I’ve noticed the 700s single engine taxi like you’re trying to drive through a swamp. It takes a TON of power.

I think I’ve tracked down the problem to different tires on the -700 vs the -800/Max. It has a softer sidewall. As a result I almost never single engine taxi in the. -700, where I will frequently do it in the 800 or Max.
Click to expand...
Airbus: We have different engines on every version of Airbus so the idle power is different depending on make and model. Generally speaking, I'll single engine a 321CEO if the gas is for me, but I wont single engine it for the company. The 321NEO on the otherhand, because of the higher idle speed, taxis beautifully on one engine even if its heavy and makes taxiing nicer without having to ride brakes.
Single engine has always been the procedurally preferred method of taxi here for narrowbody airplanes, but I'd estimate it's about 15-20%.
 
Roger Roger said:
Unfortunately that is one of if not the biggest issue in the training department.
Click to expand...

Yep, I literally had an instructor tell me I couldn't do it. A new hire might not bite back and I completely understand why, as I wouldn't either as a new hire. So it makes me mad at the thought of how many touchpoints that instructor has had where pilots have taken the "you can't do that" as gospel.
 
mikecweb said:
Different airlines, airplanes, and captains...but I don't let this happen in my cockpit. Flight Directors are either used and coupled or if you really want the practice without them, turn them off. Having a flight director commanding something completely different than what you are doing is a recipe for an incident. There's some bad results with this, we had one last year. Just something to keep in the back of your mind.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree completely - it was the biggest takeaway I had from that flight.
 
SurferLucas said:
Y’all sure complicate flying the 737, glad it’s just known as the “gentleman’s plane” at SJI and we just do our job.
Click to expand...
There is definitely a phenomenon here that I’ve also seen other places where you have a pilot group that has flown the same family and only the same family for so long they have nothing better to do than overcomplicate it and/or come up with ways to operate the latest “greatest” version the same as the OG variant. Very similar to guys I flew with at the last job trying to operate the 45 like it was a 35.
 
killbilly said:
Yeah, I agree completely - it was the biggest takeaway I had from that flight.
Click to expand...
I dont know how the canadian cousin works, but in the French Bus, it is very significant to not be flying with the FDs wonky and AP off. This can lead to a Asiana SFO type situation (although protections would kick in first). It has been an emphasis item for years now but here's a scenario for you...
Smallish airport, clear day, you're downwind, maybe a little high so youre in OPEN DES an autothrust idle setting with AP on...get cleared for the visual, and (red flag again) you click autopilot off immeditely and transition to outside references and focusing outside, looking good youre getting configured, now starting to resume a normal rate of descent because youre getting close to a 3/1 and the speed keeps decaying and decaying well beyond the commanded speed on the PFD until you run into a protection and go on a magic carpet ride.... Turning FDs off (or selecting some other mode like FPA) forces the bus into a "speed" mode and not idle thrust.
 
Kingairer said:
I dont know how the canadian cousin works, but in the French Bus, it is very significant to not be flying with the FDs wonky and AP off. This can lead to a Asiana SFO type situation (although protections would kick in first). It has been an emphasis item for years now but here's a scenario for you...
Smallish airport, clear day, you're downwind, maybe a little high so youre in OPEN DES an autothrust idle setting with AP on...get cleared for the visual, and (red flag again) you click autopilot off immeditely and transition to outside references and focusing outside, looking good youre getting configured, now starting to resume a normal rate of descent because youre getting close to a 3/1 and the speed keeps decaying and decaying well beyond the commanded speed on the PFD until you run into a protection and go on a magic carpet ride.... Turning FDs off (or selecting some other mode like FPA) forces the bus into a "speed" mode and not idle thrust.
Click to expand...
Yeah I can see how that could bite you.

Canabus doesn’t have OPEN DES - at least, that’s not a name for something for us.

When you click off the AP, you’re flying normal controls but the autothrottles are still doing their thing. 99% of the time we are in MAN SPD so we are just spinning the knob for desired airspeed.

In your scenario we are likely about 190-210 on the downwind and slowing depending on where we are turning base. Turning final we want to be 180ish (again depending on where we are) and we bug VREF+5 (if the AT is on) for final descent and can let the airplane manage the power while we do everything else. No decay issue unless you tell it to.

Like I said - I’m still learning and will be for sometime - this is expected - but the point I’m (hoping) trying to make is that junior guys like me are allowed to turn stuff off and get better at it and this was an incremental step forward - even with mistakes and a good debrief took care of those.
 
killbilly said:
Yeah I can see how that could bite you.

Canabus doesn’t have OPEN DES - at least, that’s not a name for something for us.

When you click off the AP, you’re flying normal controls but the autothrottles are still doing their thing. 99% of the time we are in MAN SPD so we are just spinning the knob for desired airspeed.

In your scenario we are likely about 190-210 on the downwind and slowing depending on where we are turning base. Turning final we want to be 180ish (again depending on where we are) and we bug VREF+5 (if the AT is on) for final descent and can let the airplane manage the power while we do everything else. No decay issue unless you tell it to.

Like I said - I’m still learning and will be for sometime - this is expected - but the point I’m (hoping) trying to make is that junior guys like me are allowed to turn stuff off and get better at it and this was an incremental step forward - even with mistakes and a good debrief took care of those.
Click to expand...
“OP DES”= “FLCH”. Both command A/T idle (since you’re pitching for speed).

Recipe for “Asiana”.
 
Kingairer said:
Airbus: We have different engines on every version of Airbus so the idle power is different depending on make and model. Generally speaking, I'll single engine a 321CEO if the gas is for me, but I wont single engine it for the company. The 321NEO on the otherhand, because of the higher idle speed, taxis beautifully on one engine even if its heavy and makes taxiing nicer without having to ride brakes.
Single engine has always been the procedurally preferred method of taxi here for narrowbody airplanes, but I'd estimate it's about 15-20%.
Click to expand...
Meh. It’s just me, but I never SE taxi anything bigger than a Light A320. Considering the difference between an idling engine vs the APU (300# per HOUR), additional breakaway power/fuel, additional fuel for crossbleed start, additional crew workload, the way the plane handles, etc., it just rarely seems worth it.

If we get out there and it looks like we’re gonna sit for 30’ or more, sure, shut one down, but…
 
Inverted said:
This is why I hate cultural techniques that go against a limitation. If the training department wants us to fly like that, make it a limitation. The advantage for me when I went to the 737 was that when I did call for flaps and instructors tried to get on me for it, I pointed to the flap speed placard. "Yea but we try to blah blah blah blah." Ok is it a limitation or a courtesy? The training department loves to create scenarios where you are left high and fast and have to configure, so I will dump flaps 10 and speed brakes because I 100% can, and they talk about it every time like I did something I shouldn't do, except it is 100% allowed. When I was an instructor I would merely mention it but would never get on a pilot for doing something allowed per the AFM. You have some instructors who might not say anything, and you have some instructors that will pause a sim event and try to get you to repeat an event over it. It makes no sense to see the large spectrum of inconsistency within instructors over stuff like this.
Click to expand...

I'm really curious with all this hoopla what the data was behind this "courtesy" to delay flap extension for MX wear? Did they have definitive proof that it was causing issues extending flaps at 249 knots? On the CRJ-200 we actually had a company imposed limitation of 200 knots for Flaps 8 & 20 extension speeds because when extending close to the placarded speed of 230 knots it was causing a lot of FLAP FAIL issues due to higher air loads causing more stress on the components that extended the flaps. Once the flaps were extended we were allowed to go up to 215 knots. Flap failure due to high speed flap extensions doesn't really seem to be an issue in the 737. So I'm curious what data they're going off of over at AS.
 
Last edited:
Toobdrvr said:
Meh. It’s just me, but I never SE taxi anything bigger than a Light A320. Considering the difference between an idling engine vs the APU (300# per HOUR), additional breakaway power/fuel, additional fuel for crossbleed start, additional crew workload, the way the plane handles, etc., it just rarely seems worth it.

If we get out there and it looks like we’re gonna sit for 30’ or more, sure, shut one down, but…
Click to expand...
Try it on the NEO, minimal breakaway thrust.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top