ASR's
 

Seriously guys...

What's with these "scared of your own shadow" ASR's. I had a quick glance at last weeks weekly ASR's and I'm embarrassed at what my fellow aviators are putting in print.

One crew wrote about a Go Around at 2000'.... Ummm, in case you didn't notice, above 1000' an ASR is not required. You had track shortening and misjudged the energy. No big deal. Happens to the best of them.

Another crew wrote about landing below Final Fuel + Alternate Fuel. They touched down with 7.4 Tons to be exact. Which means they were at least 3T above Final Fuel. Umm, committment to Dest is allowed and does not require an ASR. Is anyone home McFly??

Don't get me started on the infinite amount of ASR's with a momentary ROD exceedance of 5000'/min. Guys... It is allowed. End of story. Just don't maintain that ROD for 5 mins.

Or my favorite is final flap not set until 1450'... Guys 1000' is the cutoff point for configuration and stabilization (exceptions for speed + checklist confirmation). It's not 1500'. Hasn't been for 3+ years.

Seriously guys... I'd be embarrassed to put my name next to some of these ridiculous ASR's. :ugh:

Rant over...

New captains or FOs a few months from command. Its a way to see which fleet is upgrading. Far greater things to worry about I think.

The magnetised cutlery one is my all time favourite - bless 😊

RIM
Since you are being embarrassed remember it speed OR checklist below 1000' ;-)

Noted Payscale...

But that's why I put "exceptions"... meaning plural... Meaning two separate items independent of the other. Had I put exception (singular) then I most def would be in the wrong as that would have linked them together.

;)

Hey Joe Bloggs...

Who's talking about 250 kts below 5000'?? No where in my post did I reference that. I was referencing the "momentary" 5000'/min ROD. And the 5 min reference was a little tongue in cheek but obviously that went wrote over your head there smarty pants.

And how was I wrong about the stabilization criteria? Please enlighten.

Chances are its guys like you who can't even understand the original post that are submitting these "waste of time" ASR's.

Take it easy brother. Go read your OMA and you will see where you are wrong. After you have read it come and read my first post again; If you thing you can exchange posts without getting excited and casting aspersions, I will be happy to engage. Good luck.

Many confuse the 'should' as being a 'must' for the gear and final stage of flap no later than 1500 AAL.

I agree with Emma Roys. Guys are completely confusing the two key words, "should vs shall". "Shall" is a must comply. "Should" is, well, a should... Do it if you can but its not the same as a must.

Joe Bloggs... I think this is maybe what you are confusing. I stand by my statement 100%. I've read the OM-A, I know the stabilization criteria. I ask again, please enlighten me where you think it is I was incorrect.

joe.bloggs

Your 'friend' will have told you the story from his perspective. Very often, there is more to it than people readily admit to. It will probably have been linked to inappropriate energy management rather than just for that. Flying more than 250kts below 5000' is not unsafe. If it was, we'd all have to keep flap out on a ULR departure for longer than desired. I suspect the full story behind his warning has not been fully divulged to you.

As for the topic itself, I actually think the standard of ASR's has improved and we're moving away from the ACR's that we used to read but there will always be the 5% who don't quite get it. EK is not unique in that respect.

I couldn't agree more with the OP but I know one thing...Emirates will NEVER discourage these types of ASR's because they'd rather have people reporting all kinds of nonsense than not reporting on what might actually matter. Discretion would mean judgment and we just can't have that here, oh no.

And of course it employs people.

Never worked anywhere else where you write yourself up!!

Out of interest, has anyone ever submitted an ASR that didn't make the weekly list for whatever reason?

Best ever was the Harrowgate water bottle and it's ability to prevent the opening of the 380 cockpit window.......:ugh::ugh::ugh:

retard,retard

^^^^ Hahaha @curry goat

What ever did happen to that ASR about the Dakar 777F??? seems we employ test pilots, even Boeing hadn't flown the 777 that far outside the flight envelope.

What I heard (rumours of course), is that an airline even opened up their crisis centre and the CEO sent an ACARS message once they had landed in FRA!

Over to you guys :ok:

SyB :zzz:

And what about the "Syrian space programme" Anyone remember the one about the liftoff of said ballistic device? I particularly enjoyed that description. The magnetised cutlery is also a favourite.

Contents of Company ASR's discussed on a public forum? := Not a great idea, save this topic for the dedicated Emirates group. Yes, we do actually have one!

Harry

RIM-JOB is absolutely right about the 1500FT, it is a "SHOULD ( recommended) not a SHALL (mandatory) for the landing flaps selection". 1000FT AAL is the cut-OFF except for the speed witch is 500FT AAL.

END OF STORY.

Harry,

Fair point indeed but nowhere has anyone named an airline. Assumptions yes, but that is just it, assumption. Hardly would hold up in a court of law me thinks. We are just discussing ASR's here, nothing negative about any one company in particular. Just the pilots writing them.

And for what it's worth, how do you know we aren't talking about Iraqi Airways... :}

The discussion is very broad and general and the incidents/examples are shared by every other airline

Pilots and ASRs are the same everywhere (unfortunately)

There is interpretation in the way the policy is written and I take the point about shall/should for the flap selection. I do not agree about being able to carry it to a 1000' as the 1000'relates to 'stable approach criteria' which are listed in the previous paragraph. The selection of landing flap is not a part of the 'stable approach criteria' but rather the 'stable approach requirements'. The best interpretation from the lesser conservative view rim has taken would be that the requirement to have the flap set does not have a mandated minimum altitude. I would guess that is more a result of shoddy policy writing and proofreading rather than intent.

Joe Boggs..

That is my point exactly. You have to be fully configured and stabilized by 1000'. I'm not saying to put the final flaps in at 1100'. Personally, I do it above 1500' however, on the day, should I or my CM2 for whatever reason not get fully configured until 1300'-1400', i will def 'not' be submitting an ASR!!! No need to.

I'm merely stating that an ASR is not required should you (for whatever reason - GS from above, tight vectors, total loss of SA, tailwinds) select them at 1400' or whatever the altitude. I've seen too many to count ASR's about flap selection below 1500'. Which is wrong as the stabilization cutoff is 1000' as mentioned in my previous posts.

Now if you are not stabilized by 1000' (aside from speed and/or checklist confirmation) and require a GA, then by all means an ASR is most def required.