Continuous Descent Approaches
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Kent
Continuous Descent Approaches
Any ATC guys or gals have any info on CDA's @ STN. How as pilots are we meant to ensure we fly a CDA when most times we have no idea of how many track miles to touch down or when speed reduction will be required?
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 892
Likes: 6
From: southampton,hampshire,england
W2d
Track miles........ask, what speed required.......ask. Try it next time and if you get no joy put it in a voyage report for CAA attention. The more often a pilot makes such a request the sooner ATC will start to give the information as a matter of routine.
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: UK
CDA's are impossible on 05 but for 23 you'll be given a range from touchdown with the descent to an altitude, it's then up to you. As far as speed are concerned, expect 220 kts on intermediate approach with 180 on base, and then 160 on final to four miles. If in doubt ASK!
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
From: Bahrain
I regularly fly into LHR with 160 to 4. On the 340 and especially the 330 this is virtually impossible. My company has a 1000 stabalised approach policy. I recently asked a manager responsible for such matters his opinion. He advised me to cheat and take speed reduction at 5 nm. Sounds like one of those burnt or scolded situations??
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: EU
If you have performance concerns with your aeroplane [as has been said above] then let ATC know - preferably earlier rather than later! Certain 737 operators at our place routinely ask for 170 to 5d; not a problem at all as long as you ask early enough.
Ohcirrej
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,919
Likes: 0
From: This is the internet FFS.........
As 1261 says, if you have requirements on final approach, if you tell us with plenty of time, we can do something about it (eg: 777-300s and some 737s request 170kts on final).
I am a little concerned about MrBig's comment about being advised to cheat and reduce at 5 miles. In no way am I telling people how to fly jets or amI crusising for a flight, but reducing speed 1 miles early without telling the radar guy can be a major pain in the a$$ (wake vortex separation comes to mind).
I am a little concerned about MrBig's comment about being advised to cheat and reduce at 5 miles. In no way am I telling people how to fly jets or amI crusising for a flight, but reducing speed 1 miles early without telling the radar guy can be a major pain in the a$$ (wake vortex separation comes to mind).
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
From: Sunny Warwickshire
Bring back FAM flights.
Or maybe crews could visit ATC units and tell them that 160 to 4 is unrealistic for that type of aircraft, and tell us what they can realistically do.
I was training a guy the other day and he had no idea that the BRt E145 reduces to 240kts below FL100, if he had known, his plan (which worked in the end after a lot of vectoring) would have been different. I knew because I've talked to the crews that fly them, would never get to the pointy end, but they came to see us and we talked.
Anybody know about EZY operational requirement for 250kts below FL100???
They are required to be 250kts below FL100 UNLESS specifically asked by ATC to keep high speed which they will and frequently do.
Or maybe crews could visit ATC units and tell them that 160 to 4 is unrealistic for that type of aircraft, and tell us what they can realistically do.
I was training a guy the other day and he had no idea that the BRt E145 reduces to 240kts below FL100, if he had known, his plan (which worked in the end after a lot of vectoring) would have been different. I knew because I've talked to the crews that fly them, would never get to the pointy end, but they came to see us and we talked.
Anybody know about EZY operational requirement for 250kts below FL100???
They are required to be 250kts below FL100 UNLESS specifically asked by ATC to keep high speed which they will and frequently do.
