PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - The 160 knot thread
View Single Post
Old 11th Sep 2006, 08:45
  #4 (permalink)  
typhoonpilot
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not sure now
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by inverter
Hey TP, try this R/T pharseology with the controller, "DUBAI APPROACH, EMIRATES (what ever) UNABLE 160Kts. Plus try to explain it while they tell you to unwind before 4NM.
Regards
INV
I've said that phrase more than 50 times now. One would think they would begin to see a trend. I've written a CSR or two, e-mails, etc, but the problem persists. Heathrow Director seems to be the only ATCO that understands and can plan accordingly.


It may be obvious to you or me why that is a problem, however any ATCO's reading this may need a bit more explanation of the problem
You're right of course, but needed an attention getter to start the thread. The problem is thus: A Boeing 777-300 at max landing weight ( which is what we often arrive at ) has a min clean speed of 229 knots; flaps 5 speed of 189 knots; and flaps 15/20 speed of 169 knots. To go any slower than 169 knots we have to put the landing gear down. That is something that we would like to avoid prior to the normal glideslope intercept point.

It seems that even when a controller uses 170 knots they haven't actually planned the spacing based on that and you end up very close to the preceeding aircraft. The tower tells you to slow to min speed on initial contact, ( which is 154, by the way ). It gets very uncomfortable with a late landing clearance and in some cases a go-around ensues.

I know the controllers are doing the best they can and have limited airspace with which to work us. It takes a lot of extra radio time to explain to them that we would prefer not to accept 220, 180, 160. Wouldn't it be better to just plan 777-300s based on 230, 190, 170 ? It would save a lot of extra radio calls and reduce the number of go-arounds.



TP
typhoonpilot is offline