Inexperienced Pilots of LX 3597
Just a question on flying non-precisions: other than a requirement to use an autopilot and VS mode etc on FMC planes (i.e. B-757), do you pilots on older planes hand-fly such approaches or use the autopilot knobs and wheels until the MDA?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand fly, nearly all the time. Not difficult, provided you keep in practice. The problem is, espcially in heavy jets, the NPA is not used all that much.
When line training F/O's, always have them hand fly, and nearly all do quite well.
When line training F/O's, always have them hand fly, and nearly all do quite well.
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scrubba and Jumb o lino,
Radio Altimeter as a back up warning - there are good and bad things about this:
Good things -
You get a warning somewhere, in case you have misflown the descent.
Bad things -
If the RA is set to a low height it may be too late to react to as, as has been pointed out by Nigel on Draft, the terrain may be in an upslope at this point and if you have made the mistake of descending at the wrong point you may also have a high ROD, depending on your level of disorientation,
The RA callout or warning depends on mod. state of the GPWS and can give a call of Minimum (as seems to have been the case on the Crossair crash) when of course it is not really minimum. Hearing ( and if visual, flying through )this Minimum call as a routine and not making any appropriate cockpit callout, leads to people not taking the Minimum call seriously on an ILS approach - I've seen it happen.
So what is a reasonable conclusion? If the RA is to be used as a backup of terrain awareness it should be high enough - say 2500ft and it should not call the word Minimum. There should also be a standard cockpit call out (Mr Boeing recommends "Twenty five Hundred")to verify that the crew is correctly interpreting the warning or indication.
Sure it is a useful tool but it needs modification of the sound and integrating into the crew procedure to prevent a negative interpretation.
Radio Altimeter as a back up warning - there are good and bad things about this:
Good things -
You get a warning somewhere, in case you have misflown the descent.
Bad things -
If the RA is set to a low height it may be too late to react to as, as has been pointed out by Nigel on Draft, the terrain may be in an upslope at this point and if you have made the mistake of descending at the wrong point you may also have a high ROD, depending on your level of disorientation,
The RA callout or warning depends on mod. state of the GPWS and can give a call of Minimum (as seems to have been the case on the Crossair crash) when of course it is not really minimum. Hearing ( and if visual, flying through )this Minimum call as a routine and not making any appropriate cockpit callout, leads to people not taking the Minimum call seriously on an ILS approach - I've seen it happen.
So what is a reasonable conclusion? If the RA is to be used as a backup of terrain awareness it should be high enough - say 2500ft and it should not call the word Minimum. There should also be a standard cockpit call out (Mr Boeing recommends "Twenty five Hundred")to verify that the crew is correctly interpreting the warning or indication.
Sure it is a useful tool but it needs modification of the sound and integrating into the crew procedure to prevent a negative interpretation.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the Tearooms of Mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly, it seems that many of you like to use the RAD ALT during the approach, and if that’s what grabs you then fine. But I would strongly suggest that during your briefing you clearly state what radio height you intend to set it to, what it means, and what action you intend to take if your chosen parameter is busted. For me, it is still a distraction, and doesn’t add anything useful to the primary aim, which is to accurately and safely fly the intended non-precision approach.
As for being forced into an unfamiliar approach onto an unbriefed runway, then to hell with the tree-huggers and bunny-shaggers, you’re in charge. Tell ATC what you want. If you don’t like the weather for a particular promulgated approach, then do your preferred approach and tell ATC what you require of them. In this case I would have been quite prepared to justify my actions afterwards to anyone. The reason is SAFETY FIRST. This particular skipper would have had every justification in the world to use the ILS 14, particularly since the previous aircraft suggested that the weather was on minimums.
Remember, you’re in charge.
As for being forced into an unfamiliar approach onto an unbriefed runway, then to hell with the tree-huggers and bunny-shaggers, you’re in charge. Tell ATC what you want. If you don’t like the weather for a particular promulgated approach, then do your preferred approach and tell ATC what you require of them. In this case I would have been quite prepared to justify my actions afterwards to anyone. The reason is SAFETY FIRST. This particular skipper would have had every justification in the world to use the ILS 14, particularly since the previous aircraft suggested that the weather was on minimums.
Remember, you’re in charge.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another good post from Capt Peacock.
I am still waiting for the day when I hear a pilot refuse a late runway change.An unbriefed approach(and departure for that matter) is asking for trouble.Of course,we all like to please ATC and we should be flexible up to a point.The crash of the AA 757 in Cali is a very good example of what can happen when a last minute runway change is accepted.It is perfectly correct for any pilot to say "Negative.Request vectors for holding at the IAF.Will advise when ready for approach."
I am still waiting for the day when I hear a pilot refuse a late runway change.An unbriefed approach(and departure for that matter) is asking for trouble.Of course,we all like to please ATC and we should be flexible up to a point.The crash of the AA 757 in Cali is a very good example of what can happen when a last minute runway change is accepted.It is perfectly correct for any pilot to say "Negative.Request vectors for holding at the IAF.Will advise when ready for approach."
Who's in Charge?
Quite right. Just locked on to 25r at munich at about 7 miles & told to side step to 25l due our parking posn. NAH! carried on to land 25r and said so as wx O/600' No problem from ATC when we said we would continue for 25r.
ATC are there for you and are a great bunch of guys. Guess if the crew had requested rwy 14 they would have got it no problem.
I have never met anybody who has any authority argue over safety with a Captain. (Note with authority not pen pushers)
Lets slow down and keep it safe "guys"
There but for the grace of God go I.
Quite right. Just locked on to 25r at munich at about 7 miles & told to side step to 25l due our parking posn. NAH! carried on to land 25r and said so as wx O/600' No problem from ATC when we said we would continue for 25r.
ATC are there for you and are a great bunch of guys. Guess if the crew had requested rwy 14 they would have got it no problem.
I have never met anybody who has any authority argue over safety with a Captain. (Note with authority not pen pushers)
Lets slow down and keep it safe "guys"
There but for the grace of God go I.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC is there for the airplanes and not the airplanes for ATC.
If you think, you can not comply, just say so, they will figure out a new way to get you safe on the ground. And if you have a few bytes left, you can always come with a sugestistion.
If you think, you can not comply, just say so, they will figure out a new way to get you safe on the ground. And if you have a few bytes left, you can always come with a sugestistion.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Spain
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good sense and posting in this topic.
When you declare something (directly and/or indirectly) on ATC frequency they know very well that if something happen they will be "part of the loop".
Normally everywhere in EU ATC is responding positively when we ask for help or attention.
As other have said safety first and remember, we are on a "flying table".
Cheers.
Fly safe & enjoy life.
When you declare something (directly and/or indirectly) on ATC frequency they know very well that if something happen they will be "part of the loop".
Normally everywhere in EU ATC is responding positively when we ask for help or attention.
As other have said safety first and remember, we are on a "flying table".
Cheers.
Fly safe & enjoy life.
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While we are all here, the ZRH ATC (TWR) make a great point that it is not their responsibility to monitor Alt readout on the squawk (although technically possible on the Tower radar.)
The Alitalia crash on App RW14 could have been prevented if the Alt readout had been monitored by the tower, too. And indeed it is my understanding that the tower controller prevented a possible CFIT accident at ZRH on at least one other previous occasion.
In order to do this some changes would be needed:
1) the terms of reference for the ATC contoller would have to include this work,
2) at times of medium/peak traffic, where the controller just doesn't have the capacity to monitor the Alt readout, additional personnel would probably be required,
3) some standard fixed point(s) would have to be established for the crosscheck to be made.
This post is not to imply that ATC should have spotted the mistake(s) - at present it really isn't their job. Maybe it should be though... A car passenger watched me drive through a red light last week - my stupid mistake but he could have saved the day.
The Alitalia crash on App RW14 could have been prevented if the Alt readout had been monitored by the tower, too. And indeed it is my understanding that the tower controller prevented a possible CFIT accident at ZRH on at least one other previous occasion.
In order to do this some changes would be needed:
1) the terms of reference for the ATC contoller would have to include this work,
2) at times of medium/peak traffic, where the controller just doesn't have the capacity to monitor the Alt readout, additional personnel would probably be required,
3) some standard fixed point(s) would have to be established for the crosscheck to be made.
This post is not to imply that ATC should have spotted the mistake(s) - at present it really isn't their job. Maybe it should be though... A car passenger watched me drive through a red light last week - my stupid mistake but he could have saved the day.
411A: Good idea to practice at real airports what we mostly just do in the simulator. At smaller airports we must plan ahead with ATC in order to be on speed in the landing configuration by the FAF, without causing problems for fast traffic behind us. It sure helps if we can switch to tower a few miles from the FAF, not to mention with timing, tail de-ice requirements etc. One of our FOs practiced an NDB approach in clear weather once at Edmonton, Canada (YEG), in order to warm-up for his annual sim. training.
Capt Peacock: Excellent reminders, so that we don't blindly follow ATC clearances or sudden runway changes.
Pardon my wandering here from the specifics of the Crossair tragedy. Guys (male pilots) often have a psychological need to show that we can handle any changes without arguement. We are typically "mission-oriented", to show that we can meet challenges. That can lead us into trouble sometimes, because others are always watching us and listening, sometimes much younger pilots, whether as FO or on the jumpseat. Is this not true?
Is the situation more potentially dangerous for guys whenever the other pilot is a lady, especially an attractive, younger type? Or do we find it easier to slow down and be more questioning in the perfumed presence of female pilots, finding it easier to stay well within our "comfort level"? In my opinion, they look better, sound better and smell better. I'm not kidding here. Just how do these factors affect safety in our cockpits?
Do Air Traffic Controllers have any idea how much planning we do for an ILS OR any non-prec. approach in the weather? Some seem to be in need of enlightenment: more frequent rides on the jumpseat would really help.
These questions might be too subjective for many pilots, but what do you all think about these human factors?
[ 13 December 2001: Message edited by: Ignition Override ]
[ 13 December 2001: Message edited by: Ignition Override ]
Capt Peacock: Excellent reminders, so that we don't blindly follow ATC clearances or sudden runway changes.
Pardon my wandering here from the specifics of the Crossair tragedy. Guys (male pilots) often have a psychological need to show that we can handle any changes without arguement. We are typically "mission-oriented", to show that we can meet challenges. That can lead us into trouble sometimes, because others are always watching us and listening, sometimes much younger pilots, whether as FO or on the jumpseat. Is this not true?
Is the situation more potentially dangerous for guys whenever the other pilot is a lady, especially an attractive, younger type? Or do we find it easier to slow down and be more questioning in the perfumed presence of female pilots, finding it easier to stay well within our "comfort level"? In my opinion, they look better, sound better and smell better. I'm not kidding here. Just how do these factors affect safety in our cockpits?
Do Air Traffic Controllers have any idea how much planning we do for an ILS OR any non-prec. approach in the weather? Some seem to be in need of enlightenment: more frequent rides on the jumpseat would really help.
These questions might be too subjective for many pilots, but what do you all think about these human factors?
[ 13 December 2001: Message edited by: Ignition Override ]
[ 13 December 2001: Message edited by: Ignition Override ]
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's in the airplane brief it and use it. If a light comes on and confuses you, you don't know the system and you should try and put as much speed and air between you and the ground 'till you do
ENTREPPRUNEUR
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The 60s
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again is staggers me how people keep dying because this business is so overpriced and under-developed.
For these types of approaches you already have distance and height plus you have track/deviation. The cost of producing and instrument that converts this into an 'ils' display is so trivial as to be laughable.
But not in the airline business.
For these types of approaches you already have distance and height plus you have track/deviation. The cost of producing and instrument that converts this into an 'ils' display is so trivial as to be laughable.
But not in the airline business.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Spain
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again condolences for the victims.
Being constructive and realistic:
Re: ATC radar alt readouts.
How many times did you get a TCAS alert?
Do you take actions or don't care since it is ATC duty to keep a/c separated?
Re: enviroment.
Do you think the million pax travelling to the sunny beaches really care about noise?
I would like to see more interst on safety issues from the pubblic opinion rather than looking only to pilots for their salaries and mistakes.
Cheers.
Fly safe & enjoy life.
Being constructive and realistic:
Re: ATC radar alt readouts.
How many times did you get a TCAS alert?
Do you take actions or don't care since it is ATC duty to keep a/c separated?
Re: enviroment.
Do you think the million pax travelling to the sunny beaches really care about noise?
I would like to see more interst on safety issues from the pubblic opinion rather than looking only to pilots for their salaries and mistakes.
Cheers.
Fly safe & enjoy life.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
capn peacock,
i guess i wasn't clear enough - for us it is an sop. there is only one setting for an ils and only one for an npa. what it means is survival and what you do when it activates is also sop.
it is not a crew prerogative for us and it works
But I would strongly suggest that during your briefing you clearly state what radio height you intend to set it to, what it means, and what action you intend to take if your chosen parameter is busted.
it is not a crew prerogative for us and it works
