Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

Turning engines off before landing

Wikiposts
Search
Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

Turning engines off before landing

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 16th Aug 2009, 16:42
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Turning engines off before landing

Bizarre report in the STImes today that SAS to save fuel will switch their engines off and glide the aircraft into land. This has to be a joke or some seriously bad reporting? Anyone know any more?
manintheback is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 16:48
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: HALIFAX
Age: 39
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surely a joke - what would happen if they had to go around? Would they not need the engines powered up for reverse thrust too?
NEW-CREW is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 16:49
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,223
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
What the items ACTUALLY says

Cut the engines, we’re landing

The Scandinavian airline SAS has announced a radical pilot scheme to save fuel and cut carbon-dioxide emissions — by effectively switching off the engines as aircraft come in to land. The new technique, in which planes will glide into airports along a satellite-mapped flight path, could save about 100kg of fuel on a twin-engined jet.

at

News in Brief -Times Online

Reading between the lines I identify this as a methodology that is becoming a fairly standard method of operation - it requires co-operation from ATC so SAS is probably only applying it at a small number of airports.

Continuous Descent Approach - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/68/Basic_Principles_CDA.pdf
Hartington is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 16:52
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In transit
Age: 70
Posts: 3,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There's another thread where it's referred to as 'putting the engines into neutral' for landing. Hope they remember to double declutch as they change down!
Capetonian is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 17:54
  #5 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's just running the engines at idle (= minimum power). The idea is that no power is needed until landing. That is what we try and do now, but you have to fit in with circuit patterns and other traffic. All very well if everybody has to get out of their way so they can have a clear unobstructed and unrestricted minimum power descent! But what about the rest of us? We are all trying to do that anyway. It's just a load of hype and hot air. Maybe they are trying to use this as a means 'to get priority approaches'! Not over my ass they ain't!
Rainboe is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 19:18
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah, I guess it never gets windy in Scandinavia. Or the guy behind never catches up, or you don't care about the poor bu**ers lined up for departure.

Just fit some winglets and have done with this nonsense
PaperTiger is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2009, 22:54
  #7 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 67
Posts: 10,155
Received 62 Likes on 50 Posts
Yes, it's the Silly Season.

Since no pilot 'turns off' engines whilst they might just be useful for the purpose of flight - the story is clearly tripe. No need to take time explaining the truth, as folks have been doing continuous approaches for many years - where circumstances permit.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2009, 11:18
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tsui Wah, Orchard rd branch
Posts: 80
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
sure its not the 'Who Dares Wins' variety of SAS?
FairlieFlyer is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2009, 12:13
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Malvern, UK
Posts: 425
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It is only really the same as driving a car without using brakes. A good aspirational philosophy that saves fuel (and brakes) and teaches you to think ahead.

But make it a hard-and-fast rule and you'll quickly run into the back of someone!
Dont Hang Up is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2009, 13:16
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"160 to 4 " springs to mind.
betpump5 is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2009, 07:54
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Essex
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've experienced lots of these "idle thrust"-type landings at Stansted on Ryanair. The reduction in thrust sometimes starts well before landing and I'm always impressed by the pilots' skill as we quietly glide in. Imagine, for example, knowing exactly when to take the foot of the accelerator of your car so as to roll on to your driveway neither too slowly nor too fast (and not come to a halt - or have to touch the accelerator - yards from the driveway, either)!
Seat62K is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2009, 10:23
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: the OFCR......and probably somewhere over China zzzzzzzz
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The reduction in thrust sometimes starts well before landing and I'm always impressed by the pilots' skill as we quietly glide in.
well lets hope thats from 30-50ft max. Coz if its from 4 miles out i would be sceptical about the stble approach criteria being met at eith 500 or 1000ft ( depending on what FR use).

I remember Dan-Air's 737's into LGW and MAN flew an early version of CDA's, not really for fuel benefit, but to be good neighbours. They kept the speed up and started configuring a little later on so thatat 500' they had fully configered, done checks and and approach power with the speed Vref + 5 or so. As soon as BA took overwith the LGW guys and girls the training capts blew fuses when they saw this happening.......and now what do we have.....CDA's and 170 to 5 miles at LGW.
BUGS/BEARINGS/BOXES is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2009, 14:40
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Work associated address
Age: 42
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BUGS/BEARINGS/BOXES
well lets hope thats from 30-50ft max. Coz if its from 4 miles out i would be sceptical about the stble approach criteria being met at eith 500 or 1000ft ( depending on what FR use).
I'd more say that what the person means is actually idle thrust from TOD until finals rather than idle during whole of approach or we'd have more Amsterdam instances ocurring.


Regards
EGAC_Ramper is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2009, 15:07
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Age: 58
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why stop with the engines, shut down the hydraulics and get the passengers to move about. 'We need to bank would all passengers please move to the port side'


Last edited by phineas; 18th Aug 2009 at 15:07. Reason: speeling
phineas is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2009, 16:33
  #15 (permalink)  
regle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
regle

A modest first thread. In a 747 in 1981 , and very early in the morning, coming from New York at around 30,000 ft. I was passed from Dover to Brussels and cleared straight in to land and did so without touching the throttles again until I applied reverse on the runway. There is a Belgian Captain, now retired, who was my First officer that day who will vouch for me. Regle
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.