FlightDetent, you are providing a welcome new insight into this forum. Can I confirm with you the implications of your description of the Russian procedures..
The approach is flown as a conventional NDB approach after ATC identifies the descent initiation point. The precision controller watches the glidepath but does not provide glidepath information to the pilot. He lets the pilot sort it out for himself and only intervenes to command a go-around.
The NDB approach at Smolensk North should have been flown at an average descent rate of 3.9m/s (780ft/min) from the 10km point assuming 280km/hr/140 kts. According to the analysis we have seen so far it would appear that they crossed the OM 100m too high having only achieved approx. 2m/s. Then they increased the descent rate to 6.8m/s (1350ft/min) which would have quickly corrected the profile if they readjusted their descent rate back to 3.9m/s. But they maintained this high rate for too long, and we may take a view on whether this was deliberate or inadvertent.
Throughout this apparently badly flown procedure, the controller was telling them “on glidepath”. So does “on glidepath” mean something like within a band of parameters which the controller judges to be satisfactory for a landing ? Whereas in the western world, “on glidepath” means strict adherence to a predetermined glideslope, e.g.3 degrees.
Please feel free to correct me if you think I have this wrong.
Last edited by Tagron; 14th Jun 2010 at 19:28.
Reason: Recalculation of descent rate