Operational non-compliance involving a Boeing 777, VH-VPH, near Melbourne Airport
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: deutschland
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Practicing using the automatics properly is just as important as practicing hand flying
There is just not enough track miles to recover to a stable approach if it goes wrong.
It would be interesting to know how often go-arounds occur on 34 compared to the other runways. The only place that I have had to do more GA's is MCY. 34 ML comes second. Probably I'm not as good as the other hotshots on this thread but any approach that requires a sink rate of greater than 1000'/min just to get on profile is fundamentally flawed.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In a burrow
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both sides of the argument here have been flogged to death.
Any chance to do some hand-flying should obviously be taken where appropriate, and this approach can be one of those opportunities. Whether hand-flown, or autopilot flown in LNAV/VNAV - SITUATIONAL AWARENESS is required to do it well. (As well as programming the box correctly, and cross-checking it).
As has been said here before, from SHEED at 2500' to a 2.8nm runway extension and then to RWY34, and configured over SHEED will work every time no problems. Too fast and not configured over SHEED, then you you are setting yourself up for an unstabilised approach.
Basic flying skills and situational awareness seem to be in decline these days.
Any chance to do some hand-flying should obviously be taken where appropriate, and this approach can be one of those opportunities. Whether hand-flown, or autopilot flown in LNAV/VNAV - SITUATIONAL AWARENESS is required to do it well. (As well as programming the box correctly, and cross-checking it).
As has been said here before, from SHEED at 2500' to a 2.8nm runway extension and then to RWY34, and configured over SHEED will work every time no problems. Too fast and not configured over SHEED, then you you are setting yourself up for an unstabilised approach.
Basic flying skills and situational awareness seem to be in decline these days.
setting yourself up for an unstabilised approach.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since we have been doing this approach for over 25 years ( that I know of )
WTF has changed to make it so difficult?
I have done it in 747s, 737s and A330s, you just need to be prepared!
WTF has changed to make it so difficult?
I have done it in 747s, 737s and A330s, you just need to be prepared!
25 years ago pilots could also do straight in visual approaches without stuffing it up, its called the lowest common denominator. We also used to do 300kts at 3000' to 16 miles tracking to ROC from the west. As a way of saving fuel and improve the traffic flow it is a far better way of coming from the west instead of the Wendy arrival. With current technology and reduced experience levels the arrival over SHEED doesn't need to be done at all.
DFDR, FOQA etc now scrutinise flight operations like never before. To make assumptions that these events never happened at this level in the past is a little presumptuous. For better and for worse, the domain of the flight deck has become one of the most recorded and scrutinised workplaces on the planet. This makes the daily job a balance of avoiding the interview and enjoying the actual job. Not at all what it used to be. The thrilling, sporting approaches of the past are gone. Deal with it.
Statistically, we may be better or we may be worse, the question is... at what?
Statistically, we may be better or we may be worse, the question is... at what?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lookleft, the approach over SHEED, does not require a rate of descent greater than 1000fpm. I have plotted the distances, tracks and turn radius accurately using google earth. Also flown it a few times in an A330.
You need to be at SHEED, 2500 ft, with gear down, take full flap as you arrive over SHEED. Then wind in ROD of 1000 fpm, this will have you arriving at the finals turn point which is just prior to South centre road, ( the road parallel to RWY 34) at around 1450ft, (1000 agl). Disconnect AP, reduce ROD TO 700 fpm turn onto finals and you roll out on finals on a stabilised approach on a 3 deg path.
I prefer to use the AP for the initial descent as it allows you more time to scan and build up the finals picture.
You need to be at SHEED, 2500 ft, with gear down, take full flap as you arrive over SHEED. Then wind in ROD of 1000 fpm, this will have you arriving at the finals turn point which is just prior to South centre road, ( the road parallel to RWY 34) at around 1450ft, (1000 agl). Disconnect AP, reduce ROD TO 700 fpm turn onto finals and you roll out on finals on a stabilised approach on a 3 deg path.
I prefer to use the AP for the initial descent as it allows you more time to scan and build up the finals picture.
Nunc est bibendum
Depends on the wind doesn't it. Sometimes you need a bit more rate of descent, sometimes a bit less. Either way, as Lookleft points out, an approach that requires 1000 fpm RoD from 2000' above the airfield until 1000' above the airfield with a turn before intercepting a visual approach to an up sloping runway is fundamentally flawed.
Thanks for the flying lesson Mr Wooby. I must admit I have never gone to the trouble of plotting it on google earth but I have looked at the FMS when it says 6 track miles from overhead SHEED. Rough calculations are 3x plus HAA should give a starting height of 2100' on a 3degree path. I'm sure winding in 1000'/min does a good job, what if you have a wind from the NE at 40kts? Have your few times doing the approach been in daylight or darkness? When you disconnected and manually flew the aircraft your support pilot was now having to turn off the F/D, possibly select FPA,set runway track and monitor the speed as GS mini swung into action. In the 330 I doubt that you have an F/O with anything less than 3000 hours TT so he will be on top of it all but if you have a cadet with less than 500 hours it just all adds up to a situation that could be avoided by making it an RNP approach. Other than "that's the way we've always done it" I have not seen anyone present a case for why it should continue to be done the way it is now. I haven't got any evidence other than anecdotal but how many G/A are conducted on 34 compared to ML other runways?
In a medium-sized, high-performance, manoeuverable drag-bag like mine, that STAR would be doable by day (good for reduced track-miles). I would expect a comprehensive entry in the Port Info Manual to prep crews as to what to expect, as things would turn pretty ugly pretty quickly if you weren't on top of it. In a big thingee, I would be very hesitant.
By night, it would be silly. See previous thread re earlier Jetstar incident:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3529338...28.pdf#page=30
(Interesting that the ATSB failed to identify the dive-bomb design of the approach as being the main reason for incident!).
By my calculations, track miles from SHEED via a 2.9nm final flyby to the 34 threshold would be about 5.5nm (6.2nm via straight-lines). That's not far to lose 2170ft...
By night, it would be silly. See previous thread re earlier Jetstar incident:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3529338...28.pdf#page=30
(Interesting that the ATSB failed to identify the dive-bomb design of the approach as being the main reason for incident!).
By my calculations, track miles from SHEED via a 2.9nm final flyby to the 34 threshold would be about 5.5nm (6.2nm via straight-lines). That's not far to lose 2170ft...
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: australia
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Create a WPT -Airbus PB/PB- SHEED-256/IMS-160.
Over head SHEED almost fully configured, at least gear down and F3, disconnect push over Flap Full/40 (whatever) 1200 ROD initially then back to less than 1000' turning at said WPT around 1250'. 4x DME I think.
Checklist done early, both eyes out front/RHS and the PAPI shows the story if hi/low.
Most problems I see are late configuration after SHEED and not enough early ROD.
3* Deg slope only works when your on it. If your level at SHEED the ROD is not instantaneous when descent starts so workings on distance/ROD etc are grey at best.
FFRATS
Over head SHEED almost fully configured, at least gear down and F3, disconnect push over Flap Full/40 (whatever) 1200 ROD initially then back to less than 1000' turning at said WPT around 1250'. 4x DME I think.
Checklist done early, both eyes out front/RHS and the PAPI shows the story if hi/low.
Most problems I see are late configuration after SHEED and not enough early ROD.
3* Deg slope only works when your on it. If your level at SHEED the ROD is not instantaneous when descent starts so workings on distance/ROD etc are grey at best.
FFRATS
Sounds like the visual STARs are less than ideal. Would it be preferable to use the instrument STARs by default with the visuals available on pilot request/ATC request and pilot agreement? Not being a TMA controller I'm not sure if they'd prefer one over the other, but then that's our problem, not yours.
A few airlines such as Emirates get the instrument by default. Noticed a Jetstar requiring it the other day.
A few airlines such as Emirates get the instrument by default. Noticed a Jetstar requiring it the other day.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Well I'm glad ATC have never tried that on with me going into MEL, it would violate at least 2 of my outfits stab criteria, why is everyone on here seemingly happy with a high ROD so close to terra ferma? Or is that the point? should we be comfortable with it because its the best thing to do?
If I tried it in my 777 at close to max LW, I'd be struggling unless everything was out very early....so I'd be making a shed load of noise and burning a heap more gas than a nice easy CDA.
Just sayin...
If I tried it in my 777 at close to max LW, I'd be struggling unless everything was out very early....so I'd be making a shed load of noise and burning a heap more gas than a nice easy CDA.
Just sayin...
Last edited by haughtney1; 2nd Sep 2013 at 15:50.
The safest solution (apart from everyone doing the full instrument approach) would be to offset the track 2 or 3 miles south to give a 5 nm final. I haven't followed the Essendon localiser for over a decade.
The fact that this arrival keeps coming up in discussions is enough for me to realise there is a definite threat here.
The fact that this arrival keeps coming up in discussions is enough for me to realise there is a definite threat here.