High speed on finals

[leon737]

Will you accept 170 by 4 or even maybe greater?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Who are you addressing? I've known higher speeds than that on final when things were quiet!

[leon737]

Little bit uncomfortable to be Vapp+30 one mile off the the point where I should be stabilized in the IMC.

[mbucholski]

Many airports (e.g. EPWA) expect 160 to 4 nm final, so nothing unusual. Plus, if you're flying a heavy, Vapp's close to 150-155 are common.

[737aviator]

170 to 4 no problem in a 737 anyway and is pretty much the standard speeds we'd do almost every day when relatively heavy and VMC (with 500ft landing gate).

[ZeBedie]

I've seen a successful 220 to 4 in a Jetstream - it was interesting to watch!

But to answer your question, there will be operator resistance to anything more than 160/4 or 170/5.

[safelife]

Where's the point when everyone will be doing Vref+little at 2 miles.
There's no capacity gained by asking for higher speeds.

[Chesty Morgan]

I've seen a successful 220 to 4 in a Jetstream - it was interesting to watch!

Pfffft. 250 to 4 in a 146 was child's play.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

And in a 727!

[leon737]

Thanks for all your responses! Give me a minute to sort them out ;) one by one:

Who are you addressing? I've known higher speeds than that on final when things were quiet!The flying community - to obtain some stats about the issue.


Remember it is technically a request.. if you are unable let ATC know. It may bugger about their timing a little but so does an unexpected go around.Sure, but the chances are growing to become a person who will break the queue....


170 to 4 no problem in a 737 anyway and is pretty much the standard speeds we'd do almost every day when relatively heavy and VMC (with 500ft landing gate).Agreed, but please note that I inquired about IMC when the gate is much closer.

But to answer your question, there will be operator resistance to anything more than 160/4 or 170/5. Not indeed. We just have to be stabilized upon reaching 1000' agl in IMC and keep it stable all way down.

[ZeBedie]

Pfffft. 250 to 4 in a 146 was child's play.

But a slight distraction, eye taken off the ball at 4.1 miles and...oh dear!

[vector4fun]

I once asked a G2 for 250 and 10,000' to the OM, straight in, worked fine.

It was slightly modified however.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/109903main_S96-06240.jpg

[Chesty Morgan]

But a slight distraction, eye taken off the ball at 4.1 miles and...oh dear!
One does not get distracted.

[Right Way Up]

Just out of interest......for a turboprop and 146/RJ....what does it feel like to the passengers?

[DaveReidUK]

Just out of interest......for a turboprop and 146/RJ....what does it feel like to the passengers?

It feels like you're slowing down.

Like you do after you've touched down, except that you're still flying.

[Talkdownman]

I always used to put the turboprops into London City first, they'd keep the speed up until much, much later, and disc-up the props about 2 miles from touchdown (e.g. KLM Fokker 50s). The RJs etc would faff about slowing down early without telling you and waste runway capacity. I don't think the passengers feel a thing...until some of the touchdowns...

[DaveReidUK]

Many years ago I used to give talks to the controllers at LATCC explaining why, despite being low/slow PITAs, the Shorts 330 and 360 were the only aircraft that could make routes like LHR/EMA and LHR/NWI profitable.

To be fair, they did concede that being able to maintain cruise speed up to the outer marker often made their life a bit easier. :O

[Eau de Boeing]

My extremely "heavy" plane has a Vapp of around 130 so nowhere near 150-155!

You also have to consider not just what the aeroplane is capable of but the individual companies stabilisation policy and a pilots understanding of it.

When I fly into Heathrow, Gatwick or Manchester it is not normally a problem for 160 to 5 or 4 as all you do is configure slightly earlier whilst maintaining the speed and then when reduction is required, you have the required drag out to help decelerate to Vapp.

However, it doesn't always work and when you have strong winds or a tech issue, it can not always be possible to comply with the often more restrictive stabilisation policy but all it takes is a bit of communication between controller and pilot. The lowest ground speed I have seen in an (empty) A380 with a strong headwind is under 100kts.

The sort of routine thing that used to take place with a cuppa on an airport standby.

[HeartyMeatballs]

180-8, 170-6 and 160-4 for A320. With sharklets they just don't want to slow down so I'll tend to slow it down a good mile or so earlier. The old ground speed mini can also make things interesting when you've a very strong headwind and you have a more conventional aircraft ahead of you.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<I'll tend to slow it down a good mile or so earlier.>>

No problem as long as you tell ATC in good time and they'll accomodate you with ease. However, slow down with someone 2.5nm behind without saying something makes for grey hairs!

[Del Prado]

It's not ATC imposing speed control rather than the airport operator agreeing with the airlines the most efficient speeds to fly (for runway utilisation).
If, as a pilot, you can't fly the speeds regularly then take that up with the airport operator via your chief pilot to lobby for changes rather than have a "them and us" situation at the sharp end which risks a go around or worse for following traffic.

This shouldn't be a pilot v ATCO issue.

[FullyFullyReady]

Unfortunately most of the guys I fly with (LGW) tend to take final approach speed at 5 miles, maybe even 6 sometimes despite a reasonable headwind without informing ATC.. When I discuss it with them they say it doesn't make much difference but it is a real pet-peeve of mine :(