why do you keep slowing down

Derg said:
Airbii and the big Boeings, not so much because of a high number of unstabilized approaches and flaps being "high lift" rather than drag
@PeanuckleCRJ, thoughts?
Click to expand...

dergie, you and I are going to have to have a chat about this some time and educate your captain ass before you keep spreading urban legends
 
MercFE said:
The 73's are a bear to get down... Doing first flights here in Renton, we fly them like we stole them from time to time. Even with full boards and gear down, they're slippery as hell.

Coming back into SEA, we'll typically try to slow if we're getting stuck high in close. Doesn't normally happen, but it's nice to be able to lose the energy when you can so you can get down and back on speed quickly.
Click to expand...
just reach under your legs and drop the mains. flufs come down fine then.

I have another c1 coming up, maybe see you on it.
 
MercFE said:
Part of our first flight testing has us doing some interesting things that I'm sure can upset controllers in SEA. For the most part, they're used to our requests, but still probably don't completely understand why.

Recently, we've started working on have local controllers come and fly with us during some of our testing. Trying to build a good relationship with them and actually show them exactly why we need block altitudes and changes in speed.

So far, it's been a huge success. All the controllers that have tagged along have enjoyed the show and walked away with a better understanding of our needs.
Click to expand...

wow, after 40 years of doing that someone finally had that thought. amazing progress
 
Derg said:
What "stand" are you fooly ready for poooshback and engine staht from?
Click to expand...
They did that to me in Pisa one day. Pisa has, like what, 6 gates? I asked him how many southern jet 767s he currently had at a gate (while eating crew pasta!), and he replied just me. I said, well, I guess you know what gate I am at then
 
Seggy said:
A lot.



Next Generation will allow a more precise system which will allow more aircraft in a smaller space. Instead of 1950s radar technology GPS will be used to better direct aircraft around, give more favorable routes, direct aircraft around weather, and allow for more aircraft during saturation periods.

ATC having 'groundspeed from radar' is not enough. Next Generation will allow ATC to have a broader picture, such as seeing what speed the pilot dials into the autopilot, altitude is selected, and a lot of commands the pilot is actually imputing into the machine. This will allow ATC to actually see what the pilot is doing instead of anticipating, which will in turn ad another layer of safety, as well as allow for tighter spacing margins.

Sooo.....to get back to your question, ATC will be able to see if an airplane is not doing what they want them to do before it even becomes a traffic deviation issue.
Click to expand...

We haven't been briefed on if what you say is part of the package, however if that is accurate, awesome. Most of the time in bad WX we're sitting on an two legged stool. If I can see and know a pilot is blowing off my control instructions in normal ops, that'd help. But tighter spacing without more runways is something I have a hard time reconciling. As it is terminal arrival min spacing is determined by runway occupancy times. Unless you're ok with an aircraft departing your runway as you land, NEXTGEN does little to help.

In the meanwhile I'll take every little bit I can that helps, but the end goal may be one bridge too far.
 
Controllers in the UK are watching you. They get your heading, IAS and MCP selected flight level on their screens so they know if you are telling porkies on the speed or haven't heard them right.

CDAs aren't exactly rocket science either, just manipulate the VS thumb wheel with whichever digit most irritates your colleague ;)

I love standard speeds though...
 
rjmore said:
Meh....if you can't do something just say no. I just came in to HKG from BKK and they slowed us waaaaaay down then wanted a crossing restriction. I just said I can do one or the other, which do you want? He said speed and get down when you can. Problem solved, it's just communication. Trying to be a hero in a 747 or 777 is just going to cause a go around so may as well talk it out.
Click to expand...
"Tabernacle 6766, cross (someplace close) at (well below your altitude) and additionally slow to 210 knots."
"Which do you need more, sir, speed or altitude?"

That said, I'll do just about whatever I can to make an approach controller's life easier.
 
Jimflyfast said:
thats because in a Dash (is that like in a Ten?), if you go down at 2500 feet per minute for more than a couple of minutes you are going to hit the ground.:bounce:
Click to expand...
They forgot to start us down one afternoon and then said "hey can you make Point Reyes at 11,000?"

"yeah, you bet!"
 
arkflyr said:
The joke I have heard is they are paid by radar vector over there. But I have also been told that they can run traffic closer together by vectoring vs own nav, don't remember where or who told me that so it could be total BS.

What gets me is when they combine everything up so you get "turn right 10 degrees, climb flight level two hundred, and call London now 135.257 and tell them your heading" my colonial ears just can't handle all of that at once.
Click to expand...

I agree. That's bad practice to combine altitudes/headings with frequency changes. You're just setting both up for a readback/hearback error. Some will say it's better because it reduces transmissions. I strongly disagree but there is no policy on it so it's technique. I realize it's redundant to say, "arkflyr turn 10 left. arkflyr climb and maintain. arkflyr contact..." but it's clear and as much as we like to pride ourselves in multitasking the fact remains that we simply do better doing one thing at a time.

Vectoring is also technique. Some guys like to wait until the conflict is 4-6 minutes out and then turn you 15-20 degrees to make it quick. Other guys prefer to turn you 8-10 minutes out and make it 10 degrees. I personally don't really think it matters either way. It's technique, though but if I'm really busy, I'll probably turn you early so it's one less thing I have to worry about a few minutes into the future.

Also, when it comes to vectoring versus own nav. If I've got 7 miles but you're going to be making a turn then I'll probably just assign you present heading and be done with it. You might even get cleared to the next fix 10 miles before you would have turned on your own. However, I've seen a lot of A300's make some really early turns so I just treat everyone the same and stick with something another guy has always said and that it's "better to be cautious than nauseous."
 
drunkenbeagle said:
I haven't seen any mechanism where FMS or autopilot inputs would be sent via ADS-B -- where can I look at the specification for this?
Click to expand...

It's part of the Mode S transponder

http://nbaa.org/ops/cns/mode-s/

http://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/eurocontrol-documents-ssr-mode-s

Basically any Airbus delivered today complies. I don't think the equipment here in the US can read it. Don't know about Boeings, but I imagine if the Boeings in Europe have to be compliant, then Boeing probably sells the equipment to make them compliant, it will depend on whether the airline that's buying wants to have the option installed I guess.
 
Last edited:
If I go look at the equipage of most us air carriers they all have mode s.

Have I mentioned I really hate icao flight plans and eram lately.
 
deadstick said:
Solution: more turboprops.
Click to expand...
hqdefault.jpg
 
deadstick said:
Solution: more turboprops.
Click to expand...
Word.

I had DEN approach tell me to expect a short approach, then they proceeded to vector us onto a 7 mile final. Dude, a short approach for us is turning towards the numbers from abeam on downwind. A 2 mile final is too much. In SLC, they'll clear us for the visual abeam the numbers at 11,000 ft and we'll still make A4 without going south of 1300 S.
 
Xcaliber said:
Word.

I had DEN approach tell me to expect a short approach, then they proceeded to vector us onto a 7 mile final. Dude, a short approach for us is turning towards the numbers from abeam on downwind. A 2 mile final is too much. In SLC, they'll clear us for the visual abeam the numbers at 11,000 ft and we'll still make A4 without going south of 1300 S.
Click to expand...


Go fast. Go slow. Whatever is needed.

I seem to recall passing jets on a parallel final. Just sayin'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top