Drone flying within LAX restricted airspace
I don't know who you are but---
1/ intercepting the G/S from above is NOT normal and indeed is discouraged for many reasons an experienced Pilot would know.
2/ deliberately flying 1 dot high is also NOT normal and would be outside SOP, wake turbulence lateral separation standards are designed to take care of any problems.
Not to mention it isn't the way the approach is designed to be flown!!
In more than a few years of Airline flying I've never heard of such a thing.....
1/ intercepting the G/S from above is NOT normal and indeed is discouraged for many reasons an experienced Pilot would know.
2/ deliberately flying 1 dot high is also NOT normal and would be outside SOP, wake turbulence lateral separation standards are designed to take care of any problems.
Not to mention it isn't the way the approach is designed to be flown!!
In more than a few years of Airline flying I've never heard of such a thing.....
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am learning so very much. Pilots who don't know the real world.
ACMS, yes, its better to intercept from below. But does your autopilot have a selection to force capture from above? . And, though I am sure you don't hand fly, you can quite easily handle an interception from above.
Flying a dot high outside of SOP? Wow. I am so happy I fly for who I do fly for. Its even in our FOM.
We even train for vortex encounters in the sim. Do you?
And trusting wake separation standards? So you have never , ever been hit by wake turbulence. yeah.
ACMS, yes, its better to intercept from below. But does your autopilot have a selection to force capture from above? . And, though I am sure you don't hand fly, you can quite easily handle an interception from above.
Flying a dot high outside of SOP? Wow. I am so happy I fly for who I do fly for. Its even in our FOM.
We even train for vortex encounters in the sim. Do you?
And trusting wake separation standards? So you have never , ever been hit by wake turbulence. yeah.
Last edited by glendalegoon; 23rd Aug 2014 at 03:54.
No the 737 747 777 and A330's don't have an "intercept from above" function on the MCP/FCU.
It's far from ideal intercepting from above, yes I can and do fly a raw data approaches and intercept from above but I'll stress again it's not IDEAL and indeed discouraged by most flight operations departments for obvious reasons.
Airbus, Boeing together with all Airline flight Ops departments teach stabilized approach criteria for good reasons today my friend, Airlines have learnt the hard way in the past.
Yes in the last 27 years I've had a few wake encounters, both en-route in cruise and on approach, gets your attention without doubt. A little common sense and following the rules goes a long way. I wouldn't be flying 1 dot high on approach.......just not done in the wide body I fly.
It's far from ideal intercepting from above, yes I can and do fly a raw data approaches and intercept from above but I'll stress again it's not IDEAL and indeed discouraged by most flight operations departments for obvious reasons.
Airbus, Boeing together with all Airline flight Ops departments teach stabilized approach criteria for good reasons today my friend, Airlines have learnt the hard way in the past.
Yes in the last 27 years I've had a few wake encounters, both en-route in cruise and on approach, gets your attention without doubt. A little common sense and following the rules goes a long way. I wouldn't be flying 1 dot high on approach.......just not done in the wide body I fly.
Why don't you one-dot-high-shock-horror people just turn off the ILS, then fly a bit high on the PAPI. What's the drama?
Heliphile, where does this drones stuff end though? They might be small now, but they are much harder than your average bird (it seems you were in a chopper..skids??... bit different to one of these things being sucked into a spooled up jet engine) and will become bigger. They might also be "incredibly rare" now, but in a fews year's time, they'll be everywhere.
As for the one hovering by the cop's window, I would have opened it and shot the thing down. Rampant technology being used by inconsiderate @#$%%^ who don't have any morals...
Heliphile, where does this drones stuff end though? They might be small now, but they are much harder than your average bird (it seems you were in a chopper..skids??... bit different to one of these things being sucked into a spooled up jet engine) and will become bigger. They might also be "incredibly rare" now, but in a fews year's time, they'll be everywhere.
As for the one hovering by the cop's window, I would have opened it and shot the thing down. Rampant technology being used by inconsiderate @#$%%^ who don't have any morals...
It's far from ideal intercepting from above, yes I can and do fly a raw data approaches and intercept from above but I'll stress again it's not IDEAL and indeed discouraged by most flight operations departments for obvious reasons.
Airbus, Boeing together with all Airline flight Ops departments teach stabilized approach criteria for good reasons today my friend, Airlines have learnt the hard way in the past.
Airbus, Boeing together with all Airline flight Ops departments teach stabilized approach criteria for good reasons today my friend, Airlines have learnt the hard way in the past.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ACMS, gee you are getting a little flumoxed eh? NOT IDEAL. WOW, no flight I have ever done in real life is IDEAL.
You don't have a function called, "MAN GP"? Fine. I just reread my POH and MAN GP allows for interception from above within 1.5 dots.
Cappn Bloggs is quite right, I wouldn't tell you to intercept the glideslope at 500' or 1000' depending on weather. I am a huge advocate of stable approaches. ACMS we are even allowed to be stable at 500' if the weather is good.
But outside the marker, intercepting from above at busy airports helps out ATC, accepting a vector inside the apch gate makes things move.
I hope you read that US AIM URL I posted. You might learn something.
In the sim, everything is ideal and we intercept from the min GS intercept altitude and the "needle" shows the glideslope coming down to meet us. Oh how nice to do that in real life.
IDEAL. WOW. What planet do you fly on? I'm sure you haven't flown to some of our oddball airports like KDCA.
AS I mentioned before, this isn't when you are down to mins.
I am still laughing at "IDEAL".
Tell me, again I asked: There you are, wx above basic VFR, and you are intercepting high on the GS, do you:
ask for vectors back to do it again
or intercept from above by either using an increased descent rate until about on GS, or, GOD FORBID , Clicking off the autopilot?
Come on ACMS, do you really ask for vectors back for another try? I can imagine a 15 minute addition to your flying time at some airports here in the good old USA.
Do you ever land past the puff of smoke on the runway if you are following a plane bigger than yours?
And yes, you can certainly be stable on the approach and I wouldn't want you to be anything but stable. A dot high is very different than a dot low.
Ideal flying works fine in the sim.
You don't have a function called, "MAN GP"? Fine. I just reread my POH and MAN GP allows for interception from above within 1.5 dots.
Cappn Bloggs is quite right, I wouldn't tell you to intercept the glideslope at 500' or 1000' depending on weather. I am a huge advocate of stable approaches. ACMS we are even allowed to be stable at 500' if the weather is good.
But outside the marker, intercepting from above at busy airports helps out ATC, accepting a vector inside the apch gate makes things move.
I hope you read that US AIM URL I posted. You might learn something.
In the sim, everything is ideal and we intercept from the min GS intercept altitude and the "needle" shows the glideslope coming down to meet us. Oh how nice to do that in real life.
IDEAL. WOW. What planet do you fly on? I'm sure you haven't flown to some of our oddball airports like KDCA.
AS I mentioned before, this isn't when you are down to mins.
I am still laughing at "IDEAL".
Tell me, again I asked: There you are, wx above basic VFR, and you are intercepting high on the GS, do you:
ask for vectors back to do it again
or intercept from above by either using an increased descent rate until about on GS, or, GOD FORBID , Clicking off the autopilot?
Come on ACMS, do you really ask for vectors back for another try? I can imagine a 15 minute addition to your flying time at some airports here in the good old USA.
Do you ever land past the puff of smoke on the runway if you are following a plane bigger than yours?
And yes, you can certainly be stable on the approach and I wouldn't want you to be anything but stable. A dot high is very different than a dot low.
Ideal flying works fine in the sim.
By the way, what kind of light Jet do you fly?
Obviously not a wide body heavy, because if I'm landing behind another heavy or maybe a super then I certainly don't land beyond the guys smoke!!! If I was that close to see his smoke then.............
I think it's time you stopped flying it like you stole it....
I'm laughing at you now....
Oh and just for the record, the ideal approach isn't just for the Sim, in fact just the opposite is true and you should know that.
Outside the Sim you should be aiming for the ideal approach EVERY TIME but the Sim trains you to cope if it's not.
Obviously not a wide body heavy, because if I'm landing behind another heavy or maybe a super then I certainly don't land beyond the guys smoke!!! If I was that close to see his smoke then.............
I think it's time you stopped flying it like you stole it....
I'm laughing at you now....
Oh and just for the record, the ideal approach isn't just for the Sim, in fact just the opposite is true and you should know that.
Outside the Sim you should be aiming for the ideal approach EVERY TIME but the Sim trains you to cope if it's not.
Last edited by ACMS; 24th Aug 2014 at 06:00. Reason: 3rd grade spelling error.....
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bye? isn't it by? I've never flown a light jet.
if you want to continue exposing your ignorance of wake turbulence (even though I provided a nice link for you to learn something. Maybe I should have included the ALPA article too, chances are you don't read that magazine), why not PM me?
I should have made myself clear, an ideal vector or other nav to join an apch below glideslope is rare in real life. Flying the approach well is not rare.
The subject is drones near apch paths. This drone obviously was near the apch and someday a drone will get sucked into an engine, or bounce off your windshield. Transponders should be on drones flying above 400'agl.
if you want to continue exposing your ignorance of wake turbulence (even though I provided a nice link for you to learn something. Maybe I should have included the ALPA article too, chances are you don't read that magazine), why not PM me?
I should have made myself clear, an ideal vector or other nav to join an apch below glideslope is rare in real life. Flying the approach well is not rare.
The subject is drones near apch paths. This drone obviously was near the apch and someday a drone will get sucked into an engine, or bounce off your windshield. Transponders should be on drones flying above 400'agl.
I don't agree with you, whilst it's not unknown to get vectored to intercept the G/S from above it is far from the normal in Australia, Asia, and Europe. I've operated into a lot of major Airports in the US as well and never had to intercept from above. Maybe I'm just lucky? ..........maybe the US controllers are nicer to international wide bodies?
Either way we are capable to handle such events and are trained in doing so, big deal!!
99.9% of my flying is in Wide bodies so maybe I don't worry as much about wake turbulence as you guys in light and medium Jets? I've certainly experienced it on approach following other heavies and it's a serious subject but I repeat we do not fly high on the approach OR land long to avoid it. That has the serious potential to create bigger problems than the one you were trying to avoid in the first place......
ICAO has mandated separation standards for takeoff and landing to mitigate wake encounters, designed via testing and in service experience. Works for me
Now back to topic on drones in LAX.....
Either way we are capable to handle such events and are trained in doing so, big deal!!
99.9% of my flying is in Wide bodies so maybe I don't worry as much about wake turbulence as you guys in light and medium Jets? I've certainly experienced it on approach following other heavies and it's a serious subject but I repeat we do not fly high on the approach OR land long to avoid it. That has the serious potential to create bigger problems than the one you were trying to avoid in the first place......
ICAO has mandated separation standards for takeoff and landing to mitigate wake encounters, designed via testing and in service experience. Works for me
Now back to topic on drones in LAX.....
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes, US controllers are nicer to international widebodies. Even before Asiana214.
And please remember this forum is for many pilots, not all widebody international pilots who get very little 'stick' time and usually couple their approaches. ;-)
And please remember this forum is for many pilots, not all widebody international pilots who get very little 'stick' time and usually couple their approaches. ;-)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: B.F.E.
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Turn right heading 200, maintain 2500 until established localizer cleared ILS 24R".
Now the glideslope intercept altitude at JETSA there is 2200. If you get vectored at the approach gate you should still grab the glide from below HOWEVER this frequently does not QUITE happen, especially if it is a VMC day and you are doing an "ILS backed up by the Visual". Solution? Configure and slow as appropriate, V/S 1300-1500 down, arm APPR, spin the altitude window up to something above you. Catch glideslope, land.
That is if you insist on using (or are required by an emasculating SOP to use) the autopilot and autothrust. Much easier to simply turn it all off, grab a fistful of throttle, idle it, look out the window, pick an aim point and land the damned airplane.
Now the glideslope intercept altitude at JETSA there is 2200. If you get vectored at the approach gate you should still grab the glide from below HOWEVER this frequently does not QUITE happen, especially if it is a VMC day and you are doing an "ILS backed up by the Visual". Solution? Configure and slow as appropriate, V/S 1300-1500 down, arm APPR, spin the altitude window up to something above you. Catch glideslope, land.
That is if you insist on using (or are required by an emasculating SOP to use) the autopilot and autothrust. Much easier to simply turn it all off, grab a fistful of throttle, idle it, look out the window, pick an aim point and land the damned airplane.
