BARKINGMAD
14th May 2013, 21:28
Why has Mr McBoeing removed the 2-engine (most days in line service?) descent tables from the "Performance Inflight" section of the B737NG QRHs and consigned them to some obscure manual, or folder in the inevitable laptop, which is supposed to give us RAPID access to info we require?
Bearing in mind CDAs and descent planning has been a theme regularly cropping up in this site, does anyone know what was the reasoning behind this move?
Rushed approaches detected by FDM events are a depressingly regular item in airlines' safety reviews, yet the basic info to avoid is either hard to locate and diverse in its presentation and plain maths. Yet particularly the newcomers to type are relying on complicated extracts from the Boeing FCTM or "rule(s) of thumb" given them by one of the "old fart" brigade, me being one of them!
I have my own method of calculating track miles needed for energy management purposes, but that's not much help to all those studying/converting onto the type. The tables previously published were at least an officially sanctioned source of data for E M purposes, enabling crew to have some idea of how to control the craft from varying altitudes with variable weights (masses if you insist!), though they carefully omitted the effects of HW/TW on the outcome!
And yet for some odd reason Mr McBoeing chooses to give us GEAR DOWN tables, which I would suggest are of NIL interest and value in everyday ops.
Anyone with a direct line to Seattle out there who can explain please?
Or is it just a simple publication error............................................:confused:
Bearing in mind CDAs and descent planning has been a theme regularly cropping up in this site, does anyone know what was the reasoning behind this move?
Rushed approaches detected by FDM events are a depressingly regular item in airlines' safety reviews, yet the basic info to avoid is either hard to locate and diverse in its presentation and plain maths. Yet particularly the newcomers to type are relying on complicated extracts from the Boeing FCTM or "rule(s) of thumb" given them by one of the "old fart" brigade, me being one of them!
I have my own method of calculating track miles needed for energy management purposes, but that's not much help to all those studying/converting onto the type. The tables previously published were at least an officially sanctioned source of data for E M purposes, enabling crew to have some idea of how to control the craft from varying altitudes with variable weights (masses if you insist!), though they carefully omitted the effects of HW/TW on the outcome!
And yet for some odd reason Mr McBoeing chooses to give us GEAR DOWN tables, which I would suggest are of NIL interest and value in everyday ops.
Anyone with a direct line to Seattle out there who can explain please?
Or is it just a simple publication error............................................:confused: