"no FLARE" call out in LVO autoland

[Microburst2002]

Hi there
(this is an Airbus question)

I can't find where in the FCOMs is the "no FLARE" call out by the PNF when the FLARE mode does not activate at 40 RA.

I have been searching without success. I have been trained to say that in every airline since I fly, but now I just can't find anything in the Airbus literature…

Anyone?

[esvdx]

There isn't one. Each airline you have flown for must have customised the SOPs to insert this call. My airline is currently moving to full Airbus SOPs and we wanted to retain the NO FLARE call.

We asked Airbus for advice as surely the NO FLARE call is more useful than the FLARE call mandated by the raw Airbus SOPs. Their answer was that the flare will happen in more than 99.999% (there was an actual value given circa this figure) of autolands; hence the NO FLARE call has no value.

Furthermore what do you do when you hear NO FLARE, it's probably too late to do anything useful?

[ahramin]

From Getting to Grips with Cat II Cat III

At flare height
If FLARE does not come up on FMA, a go-around must be performed. If visual references are sufficient and a manual landing is possible, the PF may decide to complete the landing.
The CM1 should be looking outside so airlines must put in place some way of getting the lack of flare mode communicated to the CM1.

[nick14]

Certainly the 737 it is critical that the PM call no flare as the touchdown is hard with out it. The call should trigger a go around and with the increase in thrust the possible touchdown during the missed approach shouldn't be a bone cruncher.

Surely the Airbus has the same intention? What are the possible causes and implications of the flare not engaging. For us it's usually an autopilot or RA problem which needs action.

[OhNoCB]

I don't fly Airbus, so apologies for silliness as I don't know how it works, but coming from a Boeing point of view are we talking about flare being armed or actually active/engaged?

Last SOPs I saw have calls for flare armed/not armed but nothing for it being active.

[aterpster]

OhNo:

Last SOPs I saw have calls for flare armed/not armed but nothing for it being active.

With Boeings if you have Land 3 and no adverse messages above 400 feet flare is certain to an extremely high probability as stated above for the AB.

It's an unproductive diversion of human resources at a critical time in the flight to be looking for no flare.

[Denti]

Still an item that is trained in the simulator though. As the PM is heads down anyway the flare FMA is in his direct field of view.

We still have that callout on both 737 and airbus, although it should be extremely rare as mentioned above since both types are fail operational anyway and single failures shouldn't disable the normal autoland sequence including the flare function.

[titaniumwings]

Is there any possibility in drawing a parallel with the scenario of a commander encountering a no flare when giving away a sector to a FO. Is there time to disconnect to land (if SOP allows it) or 'take over' n GA when no flare is perceived visually.

ps: In the first place I m not sure whether it is possible to perceive a lack of flaring in Cat 2 or Cat 3 situation.

[despegue]

We do not go around for a no flare callout. the touchdown is within g-limits.
We just disconnect. Works like a charm.

Also backtrim at 370' will normally always trigger the Flare green mode.
No backtrim, no flare and this is something you will be aware of at 370'. So yes, then go-around.

[mcdhu]

Cat3b only, PF should be watching for no FLARE FMA because there is no point in looking out of the window because there is no requirement to see anything and in 75M RVR he won't! If FLARE is not annunciated by 40'RA, go around because it normally comes in around 45'RA.

Cat3a and 2, clearly the PF should be looking out of the window and should therefore pick up no FLARE visually in conjunction with the RADALT.

[FlightDetent]

mcdhu: What about IIIb with DH then?

[mcdhu]

Extremely good question FD! I don't really have an answer to that one except to say that the 3b with 25' DH - which are peculiar to La Belle France - are disappearing slowly as the French align their AIP with EASA. The 25' DH on TLS 14R has already gone leaving only LYS with these troublesome fellas.

[Denti]

And then there's that weird thing with 50ft DH and 125m RVR which puts it into the CAT IIIb domain (as it is less than 200m RVR) that 737s can do under certain circumstances (LAND 2 indication, all engines operating). And it seems that the DH for CAT IIIb with DH ops depends on ops spec and aircraft anyway, it's 20 ft for our bus fleets, not 25ft.

[FlightDetent]

Denti: quite close!:D

[mcdhu]

Denti - you're right, the A320 ac limit is 20', but the only ones on my network are the French 25' ones.
mcdhu
Postscript - in the sim the other day, I briefed the FO (by definition the PM) to call "No Flare" at 30'RA (having inserted it as a malf) and the captain to firewall the TLs as soon as he heard the call. We hit the RW doing around 600fpm before taking to the air again. Interestingly, the AP stayed in throughout! Not a pleasant experience.

[FlightDetent]

That sounds strange. Was not A320 18 ft as per AFM? Also, though I will need to re-check, my materials do not prescribe a DH value for Cat3+DH. And neither does AIP France I guess.

[mcdhu]

"A320 CFM LIM-22-20 "ILS Category III Fail Operational (Dual)

-Cat III with DH
Minimum decision height.............20 ft"

[Uplinker]

(Airbus) In my company we have to call "Flare" at 30', if there is no flare !!!

How confusing is that ??? Completely bonkers. It gives the Captain about 0.0001 second to react, and then he has to process the call, process what it means and process a response.

For a start, as has been pointed out; 'Flare' should appear at 40', so that would give a fraction of a second longer for Cap to react. Secondly, the call should not be "Flare" it should be "Go Around". There is not enough time for a human to process the implications of a "Flare" call, but on hearing "Go Around" the response is automatic and virtually instantaneous.

[Denti]

Just checked a random AFM, in this case of an older A321 and it actually does say

- CAT III with DH:

Minimum Approach Break-off Height: 18ft AGL based on demonstrated height loss from when TOGA is selected in a go-around and windspeeds of 5kt tail, 15kt head or below.
Two autopilots must be engaged in APPR mode and CAT 3 DUAL capability must be displayed on FMA.

In that light a minimum DH of 20ft does make sense. But interestingly enough the FCOM uses 18 ft as DH for CAT IIIb with DH, however our regulatory approval for A319 through A330 is for 20ft, for 737 it is 50ft. Usual operation outside france is of course no DH/75m RVR on all fleets.

[FlightDetent]

mcdhu: thanks. Got it now, same place LIM-22-20 B.

ILS CATEGORY III FAIL OPERATIONAL (DUAL)

CFM Honeywell A321: 18 ft
CFM Honeywell A320: 20 ft
CFM Honeywell A319: not applicable


IAE Thales A321: 22 ft
IAE Thales A320: 25 ft
IAE Thales A319: not applicable


Removing the Cat 3+ DH from the A319 part [CFM] is a change for better, it used to be 0 ft some time ago. Imagine that excercise! :ok:
cheers,