At what IAS was the "bleeding airspeed" procedure started?
Basically, if I do not misunderstand the procedure, it would remove the 1000´ stabilisation gate and replace it with the same at about 50´, thereby slightly speeding up an individual approach.
Not having operated this procedure, I´d assume that returning to or reassuming this procedure would require a solution to the following questions:
- What influence does it have on airport capacity and ATC? A steady flow of aircraft at constant, controller-given speeds would appear much easier to handle and to allow much more traffic per time than allowing every aircraft to bleed off its airspeed as it sees fit.
- How about engine spoolup time and go-arounds? A stabilized approach flown at a steady speed and with spooled-up engines will usually allow for much quicker engine reaction than (essentially) a glide approach with engines at or near idle all the time.
- How are different speeds between types catered for? An airport that sees a steady flow of traffic ranging from say ATRs to the odd A380 will have to solve the issue of very different speed reduction profiles with (usually) the turboprop able to keep up speed the longest. A military airfield that has only fast jets of comparable performance or even of only one type operating will likely be only marginally affected by this.
In total, this procedure would seem to bring individual aircraft down an approach in a marginally shorter time at the price of a noticeably reduced airport capacity. So it is a minimal gain for a few but a loss overall...