737Jock
The problem with their experience levels is that they quickly loose the picture. But then again I have seen equally bad performance from guys with 5000+ hrs as well, the so-called career FO's. They really don't put incapable guys in the LHS in europe.
Jock, me old chukka and anyone else too who is quoting the FTM or FCOM.
I am a mere potato, what do I know - nothing!
In Europe, as with anywhere else, if you have a R/H seat man or woman with 300 hours or 5,000 hours, and they are not up to the performance (due to crap training, say) then train the b-----s up! Thats what you are there for. If you have not got the time to do that, then mark `em down and send them back for training.
Equal bs, according to you - perhaps. However, the fact - (not the bloody fcom) the fact remains that 20` is a good height to pitch up 2 degrees, judged visually, eyes to the end of the runway.
Back to the Old Man: Closing the thrust levers when he says "retard" is not going to do anyone wrong. Watch the a/p doing it and see what `it` does (somebody mentioned this observing of the a/p and emulating that - it is very good advice!)
You can get all creative and thoughtful closing the thrust levers at 50` say, some do, some do, it depends on the conditions, wind, weight and a whole number of WAT considerations. the capital of Mongolia in the summer - to Manston in the winter . . . ?
I still say, after having tried it, manually, again and again
50`
30` maintain the att (pressurise the sidestick)
flare by
20` with, a 2 deg nose pitch up - judged visually.
Retard, when the old man says so - and hey, do you know what, it lands very nicely.
When we get as professionally skillful as your good self then, there may well be variations on a theme and we can retard at different times - and hope we get the same result as this one, which, like it or not, works, time and time again. I`ve done it manually, with A/P followed by A/P disc, done it Raw Data and
still it works, so what do I say, "try this as I believe it is the best proven and tried method, but don`t try this because 737Jock thinks its bull**** - it works and is 100% effective, but 737Jock has issues with it". You are not flying a B737 by any chance are you Jock? That is a different kettle of fish, sir.
Not disputing the FCTM for one minute - except `airbus` who built the thing, don`t always get it right - like in the case of not resolving issues such as DC ESS Failure, no mention of how to restore comms there - neither on ECAM nor in the QRH . . .? Are we to suppose then that the ensuent loss of comms are to be lived with, or do we restore comms despite the fact that it is not written anywhere how to do it?
Overall airbus are most adept and professional at building lovely aeroplanes which fly really well and are as safe as they ever can be, using the highest of modern technology, how cool is that!
Tried and trusted methods of how to control the dang thang as it is different from conventional aircraft, seemingly by rote, seemingly by numbers, will get you though marvellously, until that time when the wings sprout from your shoulders, if that is at all possible, flying a whole bunch of computers and fly-by-wire divorcing the `feel` from the pilot to the outside air flow.
sake!