Swiss Avro Greaser in LCY
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Inside the roster matrix
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At touchown the usual, but the trick is timing.
With a groundspeed of 160kts your ROD should be 1560FPM and 120kts 1170FPM, so about twice the normal ROD for a 3deg approach.
If this ROD is taken to the threshold and not timed correctly, inertia will win and the aircraft will just keep coming down, which is why I mentioned 2 reds and a pink to give you a bit of room to flare and hold off (unless the runway is wet and it is gusting 85deg to the runway when a +ve arrival is the safest. This does not mean a carrier landing, but just no greasing). I tend to start the gentle flare with the speed slowing from Vref+10 to Vref+5 at about 10-15' (less speed-less ROD reqd. to maintain the Glide Path). With the throttles closed at 5' Vref is only seconds away leaving only a brief flare, which is really only a few extra deg than a normal approach. The other option is to flare at the last moment quickly, checking the attitude from a few deg nose nown, to a few deg nose up. This makes me a bit nervous at that ROD and things can go wrong (too fast, balloon, hit the deck, etc...). This may seem to the uninitiated as the same as landing on a carrier, but broken down, with practice, not a great deal different (...once you are used to hanging into your -ve g strap all the way down
).
The windshear and the narrow runway make it a challange.
Please comment if you do it another way as all aircraft are different, and indeed individual's methods.
With a groundspeed of 160kts your ROD should be 1560FPM and 120kts 1170FPM, so about twice the normal ROD for a 3deg approach.
If this ROD is taken to the threshold and not timed correctly, inertia will win and the aircraft will just keep coming down, which is why I mentioned 2 reds and a pink to give you a bit of room to flare and hold off (unless the runway is wet and it is gusting 85deg to the runway when a +ve arrival is the safest. This does not mean a carrier landing, but just no greasing). I tend to start the gentle flare with the speed slowing from Vref+10 to Vref+5 at about 10-15' (less speed-less ROD reqd. to maintain the Glide Path). With the throttles closed at 5' Vref is only seconds away leaving only a brief flare, which is really only a few extra deg than a normal approach. The other option is to flare at the last moment quickly, checking the attitude from a few deg nose nown, to a few deg nose up. This makes me a bit nervous at that ROD and things can go wrong (too fast, balloon, hit the deck, etc...). This may seem to the uninitiated as the same as landing on a carrier, but broken down, with practice, not a great deal different (...once you are used to hanging into your -ve g strap all the way down
).The windshear and the narrow runway make it a challange.
Please comment if you do it another way as all aircraft are different, and indeed individual's methods.
Guest
Posts: n/a
OK
For me. 2 reds 2 whites. there's no need to go lower.
50' power off
30' do something
10' finesse it.
Always works good but in calm conditions better to 'do something' slightly earlier than 30'.
+hand fly a bit when you can. always helps.
no charge.
For me. 2 reds 2 whites. there's no need to go lower.
50' power off
30' do something
10' finesse it.
Always works good but in calm conditions better to 'do something' slightly earlier than 30'.
+hand fly a bit when you can. always helps.
no charge.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Inside the roster matrix
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am talking about the last 50'. Just saves using up the whole runway to help ATC. With the amount of traffic these days, every little helps....and they are looking at ways to increase flow to even higher levels per hour.
I bet that was fun with the door open.
I bet that was fun with the door open.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just saves using up the whole runway to help ATC.
Interesting video though.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 56
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just back from my first Glasgow-London City and found what upset the fellow passengers the most was the clearly audible shouts of FIFTY, FORTY shouted from the cockpit.
I remained a steely eyed hero on the outside.
I'm only 40 but that route reminded me of flying out of smaller airports in the Bahamas and US of A.
Fifteen minute checkins, double tinned on the beer front, preflight the A/C on the way out....
I remained a steely eyed hero on the outside.
I'm only 40 but that route reminded me of flying out of smaller airports in the Bahamas and US of A.
Fifteen minute checkins, double tinned on the beer front, preflight the A/C on the way out....
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either method works well, but having a 'pink' can help avoid the situation in the video, although the higher GS with a flatter approach argument is valid, the detremental effect depends on distance to touchdown I've found. The last 50 odd feet of the appraoch shouldn't increase your Landing Distance by too much! Either way, as long as it's down by the lights and not knackered by the touchdown it's good enough for goverment work. And the HMS LCY remark, pure class!
Atreyu
Atreyu
“two reds two whites are the only correct way”
IIRC there are some less obvious differences in the PAPI setting and obstacle clearances at LCY, which require the glidepath to be followed accurately.
Due to the steeper approach angle the actual altitude difference between PAPI ‘beams’ will be larger than that for lower angle approaches, i.e. at LCY you are further below the glidepath with 3red 1white – closer to the obstacles, than for a 3 deg approach. In order to maintain a similar relationship with a 3 deg approach, the angle between the PAPI lights at LCY may have been changed; can anyone confirm/refute this.
Also, I recall that the ILS obstacle clearance surface uses the equivalent of a CAT 2 installation to provide clearance over all of the obstacles (some may have been removed now); this required the use of a higher accuracy ILS GS beam (possibly also a ‘tighter’ beam for the same reason as the PAPI above).
There should be a note somewhere about the need to use either an electronic or visual glideslope for all approaches into LCY.
“having a 'pink' can help avoid the situation in the video”
First, a well set up PAPI system has no ‘pink’ zone – only red or white with a sharp transition between the two (beware frosty mornings where ice or lamp warm up may appear pink).
Second, flying below the approved glidepath does not prevent an inadvertent harsh touchdown. In addition, it might invalidate any landing distance credit for the steep approach – check the performance section of the AFM.
“Landing on the right spot … I don't believe you need to do anything else than the right thing.”
Much better than thinking about how you were helping others - from the overrun area whilst they all divert!
IIRC there are some less obvious differences in the PAPI setting and obstacle clearances at LCY, which require the glidepath to be followed accurately.
Due to the steeper approach angle the actual altitude difference between PAPI ‘beams’ will be larger than that for lower angle approaches, i.e. at LCY you are further below the glidepath with 3red 1white – closer to the obstacles, than for a 3 deg approach. In order to maintain a similar relationship with a 3 deg approach, the angle between the PAPI lights at LCY may have been changed; can anyone confirm/refute this.
Also, I recall that the ILS obstacle clearance surface uses the equivalent of a CAT 2 installation to provide clearance over all of the obstacles (some may have been removed now); this required the use of a higher accuracy ILS GS beam (possibly also a ‘tighter’ beam for the same reason as the PAPI above).
There should be a note somewhere about the need to use either an electronic or visual glideslope for all approaches into LCY.
“having a 'pink' can help avoid the situation in the video”
First, a well set up PAPI system has no ‘pink’ zone – only red or white with a sharp transition between the two (beware frosty mornings where ice or lamp warm up may appear pink).
Second, flying below the approved glidepath does not prevent an inadvertent harsh touchdown. In addition, it might invalidate any landing distance credit for the steep approach – check the performance section of the AFM.
“Landing on the right spot … I don't believe you need to do anything else than the right thing.”
Much better than thinking about how you were helping others - from the overrun area whilst they all divert!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So your saying the last 50' of the approach would invalidate landing distance calculations? I'm not so sure if I agree there, besides if you touch down before the lights, surely LD calculations are valid? That's the whole point of having those lights. (correct me if I'm wrong)
wo ping's comment about the last 200' of the PAPI's being unreliable seem's to ring a bell from somewhere
"i.e. at LCY you are further below the glidepath with 3red 1white – closer to the obstacles, than for a 3 deg approach"
PAPI-74 isn't talking about flying the whole 5.4 miles below the glide here! Just the last 50' or so, and being over the runway surface at this height, how many obsticles are you likely to encounter?
As an F/O I don't get to land into LCY, so I really can't qualify my observations, and I guess it is just down to individual technique and A/C Type
Happy Landings nontheless!
Atreyu
(correct me if I'm wrong)wo ping's comment about the last 200' of the PAPI's being unreliable seem's to ring a bell from somewhere
"i.e. at LCY you are further below the glidepath with 3red 1white – closer to the obstacles, than for a 3 deg approach"
PAPI-74 isn't talking about flying the whole 5.4 miles below the glide here! Just the last 50' or so, and being over the runway surface at this height, how many obsticles are you likely to encounter?
As an F/O I don't get to land into LCY, so I really can't qualify my observations, and I guess it is just down to individual technique and A/C Type
Happy Landings nontheless!
Atreyu
wo ping, you appear to be mixing up VASI with PAPI, not surprising as many installations are misidentified or ill defined e.g. “PAPI-VASI”. Each system provides a visual glidepath via different mechanisms. There are other sources of confusion, e.g. ‘T’ VASI, a good system found in Australia, but different again.
VASI, Visual Approach Slope Indicator, is the older system based on 2 sets of lights (red and white) set to the required glidepath angle. The boxes are located down the length of the runway, spaced either side of the GS origin (not to be confused with a second set of ‘long body’ PAPIs at the larger airports). Due to the type of light and installation, the VASI beam width is relatively wide resulting in a diffuse red/white mix near the change over point, i.e. ‘pink’ appearance. This and the deteriorating beam accuracy at low altitude (relatively large beam width) results in VASI being of little use below 200ft, i.e. they are not reliable.
PAPI, Precision Approach Path Indicator, is based on a set of 4 lamps located at right angles to the runway usually just beyond the GS origin. Each lamp unit provides both a red and white section of the beam. The changeover between the two is ‘sharp’ as the lamp unit uses a focussing lens and colour filter (like a projector) giving each a narrow beam width; this eliminates any pink zone and in theory enables the system to be used at much lower altitudes. Small differences in the beam setting either side of the required glidepath provide the 2 red / white etc combinations. A limiting factor is usually the narrow beam width at low altitude (small vertical displacement for colour change), but PAPI is still reliable although not very easy to follow.
Atreyu, to achieve a ‘slightly’ below glidepath position at 50 ft implies an earlier manoeuvre. In addition to any ‘unstabilising’ effect (either by reducing power or nose down pitch, both ill advised at low altitude), the obstacle clearance is reduced. IIRC the lights on the bridge just short of rwy10 are quite close – then you could consider the height of a London double-decker bus (which I believe was considered in the hazard assessment).
VASI, Visual Approach Slope Indicator, is the older system based on 2 sets of lights (red and white) set to the required glidepath angle. The boxes are located down the length of the runway, spaced either side of the GS origin (not to be confused with a second set of ‘long body’ PAPIs at the larger airports). Due to the type of light and installation, the VASI beam width is relatively wide resulting in a diffuse red/white mix near the change over point, i.e. ‘pink’ appearance. This and the deteriorating beam accuracy at low altitude (relatively large beam width) results in VASI being of little use below 200ft, i.e. they are not reliable.
PAPI, Precision Approach Path Indicator, is based on a set of 4 lamps located at right angles to the runway usually just beyond the GS origin. Each lamp unit provides both a red and white section of the beam. The changeover between the two is ‘sharp’ as the lamp unit uses a focussing lens and colour filter (like a projector) giving each a narrow beam width; this eliminates any pink zone and in theory enables the system to be used at much lower altitudes. Small differences in the beam setting either side of the required glidepath provide the 2 red / white etc combinations. A limiting factor is usually the narrow beam width at low altitude (small vertical displacement for colour change), but PAPI is still reliable although not very easy to follow.
Atreyu, to achieve a ‘slightly’ below glidepath position at 50 ft implies an earlier manoeuvre. In addition to any ‘unstabilising’ effect (either by reducing power or nose down pitch, both ill advised at low altitude), the obstacle clearance is reduced. IIRC the lights on the bridge just short of rwy10 are quite close – then you could consider the height of a London double-decker bus (which I believe was considered in the hazard assessment).
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Inside the roster matrix
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...yes but the amount in question is still within limits (1 dot) and at 50' you are nowhere near the road, which is at least 200m away on either runway. There is also a displaced TH. which the ILS and PAPI are leading you past. What bus are you on about at 50'...the one on Flight Sim?
You do it your way and I will stick to mine!
Quote from a FAB doc.
The Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) is a simple visual aid that has been developed to assist pilots during their approach to landing. The development of the system by the RAE was reported in Ref 1 and the operational trials and technical evaluation by ICAO were reported in Ref 2. The PAPI system uses a set of four two-colour high intensity light projectors. Each beam consists of a white upper half and red lower half. The transition from one colour to the other occurs over a very small angle. This sharp transition is an essential feature of the PAPI system and it is therefore important that all units should exhibit this characteristic As the pilot’s vertical position changes, the color of the light as seen by the pilot changes instantaneously.
Well we all know that the transition is there and does appear as a soft Red or Pink. If it is such a small degree, how can one hit a bus for Christ sake, that is 200m away!
And how is the obstacle clearance reduced if the approach is within limits?
Unstabilised...how? By Tucking in at 50' by lowering the nose by LESS than 1/2deg...yer right.
You do it your way and I will stick to mine!
Quote from a FAB doc.
The Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) is a simple visual aid that has been developed to assist pilots during their approach to landing. The development of the system by the RAE was reported in Ref 1 and the operational trials and technical evaluation by ICAO were reported in Ref 2. The PAPI system uses a set of four two-colour high intensity light projectors. Each beam consists of a white upper half and red lower half. The transition from one colour to the other occurs over a very small angle. This sharp transition is an essential feature of the PAPI system and it is therefore important that all units should exhibit this characteristic As the pilot’s vertical position changes, the color of the light as seen by the pilot changes instantaneously.
Well we all know that the transition is there and does appear as a soft Red or Pink. If it is such a small degree, how can one hit a bus for Christ sake, that is 200m away!
And how is the obstacle clearance reduced if the approach is within limits?
Unstabilised...how? By Tucking in at 50' by lowering the nose by LESS than 1/2deg...yer right.
Ich bin ein Prooner.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Home of the Full Monty.
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse the slight thread drift, but whilst on the subject of the 146, what became of the example which I believe was landed downwind on a Scottish Isle by a Royal Personage (who, I believe, hung up his "Wings" thereafter?)
Was the machine written off?
Was the machine written off?
Was the machine written off?
to provide clearance over all of the obstacles (some may have been removed now)
Picture here The picture appears to be looking along the 28 approach at ground level.
The bridge will cross the river at the same point as the approach to 28 crosses the river. Its height is a squeeze between clearance above shipping in the river, and clearance under the flight path. There has been a great amount of shilly-shallying over the project over many years, still not certain it will ever be built.
how can one hit a bus for Christ sake
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
There has been a great amount of shilly-shallying over the project over many years
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Origae-6
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crosswind technique?
Do you mean the Take a deep breath, close your eyes and hope for the best technique?
Wow what a an airplane! It looked like they were close to smacking the belly on that one as well.
Glad everyone walked away!
Cheers
Wow what a an airplane! It looked like they were close to smacking the belly on that one as well.Glad everyone walked away!
Cheers
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I'm of the opinion any approach within halfscale is acceptable, not ideal, but acceptable and that obsticle clearance must take into account that an aircraft may be at Half scale fly up all the way. But I think the overriding factor in all of this discussion is to ensure that kind of incident shown in the video doesn't happen!
Happy Landings
Atreyu
Happy Landings
Atreyu
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Samsonite Avenue
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been told that the touchdown was just shy of 4G which is rather impressive.
Apparently the Swiss technique for landing the RJ is to select flight idle at 50 ft and then progressively flare. If that is true then they always carry extra speed on the approach or they like to live life on the edge!
That is how you land a heavy jet and not a 146/RJ!!!
Apparently the Swiss technique for landing the RJ is to select flight idle at 50 ft and then progressively flare. If that is true then they always carry extra speed on the approach or they like to live life on the edge!
That is how you land a heavy jet and not a 146/RJ!!!
What amount of g is a normal landing? and one say at 750ft/min. And what g would necessitate a heavy landing check? And what amount of g did the DC-9 that lost its tail experience?