VB Smooth Landing Kings
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, MATS (Chap 3) Speed Control (Annex ?)
Nothing to with TAAATS profile speeds. They use a separate data file as part of MAESTRO as far as I am aware.
These speeds can also be applied in non-TAAATS environments.
Were these speeds not once included in the AIP? (or somewhere else?)
Nothing to with TAAATS profile speeds. They use a separate data file as part of MAESTRO as far as I am aware.
These speeds can also be applied in non-TAAATS environments.
Were these speeds not once included in the AIP? (or somewhere else?)
Nunc est bibendum
Uncommon, climb speed for the 763 is out a bit. We'll use econ if we're on time and it looks like it'll stay that way. ECON can generate speeds between 280 and 355 depending on the weight of the aircraft and the cost index. Most CI is 40 and so that should be 280-300ish.
If we're running late then it'll go between 300-330 on climb depending on the boss, the day, the weather, fatigue levels, etc, etc, etc. Most guys will 'hard wire' the speed at this stage rather than leave it to the CI to sort out.
Glad to be of service one ball!
If we're running late then it'll go between 300-330 on climb depending on the boss, the day, the weather, fatigue levels, etc, etc, etc. Most guys will 'hard wire' the speed at this stage rather than leave it to the CI to sort out.
Glad to be of service one ball!
Spotlight. You asked about Vref additives and their reduction? I presume you refer to the addition to Vref of half the steady headwind component for approach.
While Boeing state that this additive should be bled off approaching touch-down, they don't define the term "approaching touch down". This in turn results in different interpretations as to the true intent of the term. It is anyone's guess. Check captain's opinions take precedence when an interpretation is required.
In fact, very few pilots will deliberately bleed off the additive and invariably will cross the fence with the HW component additive still applied. Gust factor is another subject - here I am talking half the steady HW component.
With long runways and excellent automatic braking capability, the tendency is for crews to adopt the "near enough is good enough" mentality. In turn, this can result in touch down speeds significantly faster than need be - albeit perfectly safe under the conditions. The bean counters should be alerted to the general rule that 7 knots faster touch down speed results in 10% extra wear and tear on the tyres. LCC take note!
The pursuit of excellence perhaps is limited to just a few keen types, and touch down speeds 10-15 knots above Boeing recommended figures caused by reluctance to follow FCTM guidlines is par for the course and by default become SOP.
While Boeing state that this additive should be bled off approaching touch-down, they don't define the term "approaching touch down". This in turn results in different interpretations as to the true intent of the term. It is anyone's guess. Check captain's opinions take precedence when an interpretation is required.
In fact, very few pilots will deliberately bleed off the additive and invariably will cross the fence with the HW component additive still applied. Gust factor is another subject - here I am talking half the steady HW component.
With long runways and excellent automatic braking capability, the tendency is for crews to adopt the "near enough is good enough" mentality. In turn, this can result in touch down speeds significantly faster than need be - albeit perfectly safe under the conditions. The bean counters should be alerted to the general rule that 7 knots faster touch down speed results in 10% extra wear and tear on the tyres. LCC take note!
The pursuit of excellence perhaps is limited to just a few keen types, and touch down speeds 10-15 knots above Boeing recommended figures caused by reluctance to follow FCTM guidlines is par for the course and by default become SOP.
Guest
Posts: n/a
For those of you that like to accept and use high speed (above 250 knots) below 10,000, just keep in mind that a bird strike at those speeds is potentially deadly. Almost certainly if injuries from a bird strike should occur, where the pilot has deliberately used a high speed option below 10,000, you had better get a good lawyer fast.
HSWL
My understanding was a transport category airliner is certified to hit a 3kg bird at design cruising speed and at sea level. FAR reference anyone?
Are you suggesting the 250kt below 10000' is a bird strike limitation?
So much in aviation is potentialy "deadly". I suppose we all need good lawyers.
My understanding was a transport category airliner is certified to hit a 3kg bird at design cruising speed and at sea level. FAR reference anyone?
Are you suggesting the 250kt below 10000' is a bird strike limitation?
So much in aviation is potentialy "deadly". I suppose we all need good lawyers.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Over 250 posts so far. Perhaps I support Pprune by posting regularly.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
250 KIAS below 10 000ft is a limitation on some aircraft for the purposes of birdstrike protection, when the window heat is U/S.
Certification covers higher speeds with window heat systems functional (except in the case of steggles frozen chickens).
Unlike HSWL, I'm not a lawyer but I'd imagine if anyone is going to be a good target for court action, it'd be the airline since they're responsible for the Ops Manual which allows higher speeds below 10 000ft. The drivers are within their rights... (aren't they???)
Nothing wrong with going fast below 10, unless you're a wuss. Maybe the VB lads out of GA are nervous of high speeds??
320 KIAS to 1500 ft and idle onto base, ready to configure. Piece of piss.
Certification covers higher speeds with window heat systems functional (except in the case of steggles frozen chickens).
Unlike HSWL, I'm not a lawyer but I'd imagine if anyone is going to be a good target for court action, it'd be the airline since they're responsible for the Ops Manual which allows higher speeds below 10 000ft. The drivers are within their rights... (aren't they???)
Nothing wrong with going fast below 10, unless you're a wuss. Maybe the VB lads out of GA are nervous of high speeds??
320 KIAS to 1500 ft and idle onto base, ready to configure. Piece of piss.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How did we get here from smooth landings?
Missy, Please tell me you were kidding with the #2 sequencing of VB aircraft?
TBT
Missy, Please tell me you were kidding with the #2 sequencing of VB aircraft?
TBT
Join Date: Jul 1998
Location: brisbane
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for the hell of it!
Discovery Channel ran a program last week debunking the frozen chicken thing.
Same weight, same area, same speed = same force.
Frozen or not, the chook came second.
Discovery Channel ran a program last week debunking the frozen chicken thing.
Same weight, same area, same speed = same force.
Frozen or not, the chook came second.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Over 250 posts so far. Perhaps I support Pprune by posting regularly.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JQ aircraft, just like its parent's, are limited to 250 KIAS below 5000' and 210 KIAS below 3000'.
Sounds more like they're worried about unstable approaches. Rather than teach them to fly properly, they restrict them with speeds.
The bit on the original thread - Time Bomb Ted: nice try at a wind-up, but keep rating those touchdowns wherever they may be! I'm sure it is important to someone.
The thread tangential - HSWL: another wind-up merchant methinks. 250k below 10000 [unless higher speed required for manoeuvre safety margin] is more [but not limited to!] a stabilised /ATC sequencing thing. Birdstrike risk management has been exercised - including the frozen chook method. Subsequently some windscreens were limited, some to 313kts below 8200ft [dunno where these numbers come from]. perhaps this is where somebody chose 312kts??
The real fact is that 300+ below 10000 is not really all that fast. The problem is the groundspeed/brainspeed/terra firma equation. As has been said in a previous life; Speed, Altitude, Ideas - pick two!
The max targets set by airlines [as recommended by the ICAO working group] are appropriate for safety/experience/oversight margins to help in stabilised approaches.
Itchybum; you're on the right crack, but your ass is on fire - cool it before you become a smoking hole
The thread tangential - HSWL: another wind-up merchant methinks. 250k below 10000 [unless higher speed required for manoeuvre safety margin] is more [but not limited to!] a stabilised /ATC sequencing thing. Birdstrike risk management has been exercised - including the frozen chook method. Subsequently some windscreens were limited, some to 313kts below 8200ft [dunno where these numbers come from]. perhaps this is where somebody chose 312kts??
The real fact is that 300+ below 10000 is not really all that fast. The problem is the groundspeed/brainspeed/terra firma equation. As has been said in a previous life; Speed, Altitude, Ideas - pick two!
The max targets set by airlines [as recommended by the ICAO working group] are appropriate for safety/experience/oversight margins to help in stabilised approaches.
Itchybum; you're on the right crack, but your ass is on fire - cool it before you become a smoking hole
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Over 250 posts so far. Perhaps I support Pprune by posting regularly.
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why not take all 3
But it's really not that hard... IS IT?!?!?!
Put up your hand if you've already had the training wheels taken off and can use experience and minor brain-power to land the aircraft, even if doing, and I know it is hard to believe, more than 250 < 10000!!!
Put up your hand if you've already had the training wheels taken off and can use experience and minor brain-power to land the aircraft, even if doing, and I know it is hard to believe, more than 250 < 10000!!!
The Pom's also figured out that if you hit terra firma at 330kts your brain has no time to register pain.
In my humble expereince, 250 below 10000 is an ATC thing as mentioned or a restriction by an airline concerend about CFIT.
Why did high speed descents become so dangerous all of a sudden?
Spleener
A very low, lowest common denominator.
In my humble expereince, 250 below 10000 is an ATC thing as mentioned or a restriction by an airline concerend about CFIT.
Why did high speed descents become so dangerous all of a sudden?
Spleener
A very low, lowest common denominator.