Below the GS at SFO again
Thread drift...
West coast,
What is the problem with deadheading crew, not in uniform, operating more than 12 hours after paxing, having an alcoholic drink whilst paxing?
Not trying to take the
, just seriously curious
What is the problem with deadheading crew, not in uniform, operating more than 12 hours after paxing, having an alcoholic drink whilst paxing?
Not trying to take the
, just seriously curious
Originally Posted by Bugg
How's that 'dive for the dirt/water' working out there, Bloggs? 
quidquid excusatio prandium pro
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lot of opinions on that Bloggs, I cut my teeth on drive n' dive, that was the way things were done not so long ago. With the advent of FMS generated glide slopes, the stabilized 3 degree approach became the recommended way of doing things.
Pluses and minuses, everything is a trade off. Arriving at the MAP on a three degree path doesn't really give you much time to evaluate the approach environment, visually speaking, when the weather is at absolute minimums.
Drive n dive allows you to get beneath it all, but it brings you frighteningly low, a very long way from the airport. Many mates of mine have had their BBQ parties disrupted by the jet blast from a DnD heavy at low altitude, the sheer affrontery of it all, guess they shoulda picked somewhere else to live. Tends to deflate the Soufflé, if ya get my drift.
In any event, I work for an airline that publishes recommended practices, as opposed to must-do SOP's. We recognize cockpit authority, that which is vested in the Captain, Capitol C, which will not be usurped by the desk jockeys, in any way, shape, of form.
Standard wisdom Bloggs, as long as yer safe, and bring the metal home, whichever way you choose to do it, nobody will bother you.
**** it up, God Speed.
Pluses and minuses, everything is a trade off. Arriving at the MAP on a three degree path doesn't really give you much time to evaluate the approach environment, visually speaking, when the weather is at absolute minimums.
Drive n dive allows you to get beneath it all, but it brings you frighteningly low, a very long way from the airport. Many mates of mine have had their BBQ parties disrupted by the jet blast from a DnD heavy at low altitude, the sheer affrontery of it all, guess they shoulda picked somewhere else to live.
Tends to deflate the Soufflé, if ya get my drift.In any event, I work for an airline that publishes recommended practices, as opposed to must-do SOP's. We recognize cockpit authority, that which is vested in the Captain, Capitol C, which will not be usurped by the desk jockeys, in any way, shape, of form.
Standard wisdom Bloggs, as long as yer safe, and bring the metal home, whichever way you choose to do it, nobody will bother you.
**** it up, God Speed.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: U.K.
Age: 75
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recommended practices?
bugg smasher, Quote " Drive n dive allows you to get beneath it all, but it brings youfrighteningly low, a very long way from the airport" and
" In any event, I work for an airline that publishes recommended practices, as opposed to must-do SOP's. We recognize cockpit authority, that which is vested in the Captain....."
I wish you would let us know who you fly for - so that I could avoid flying with your company.
Recommended practices as opposed to SOPs???? Now that leaves a lot of second guessing as to who is going to do what next.
Surely the object of a Non-precision approach is to arrive at the MAP and MDA at the same time, i.e. a constant descent and not dragging the aircraft in frighteningly low (and slow). Then, not much to evaluate at the MAP really, see the lights, continue - don't see the lights, go around. Or is that only a recommended practice in your Company?
I don't much enjoy being frightenened in an aeroplane, not as a passenger nor even before I retired.
" In any event, I work for an airline that publishes recommended practices, as opposed to must-do SOP's. We recognize cockpit authority, that which is vested in the Captain....."
I wish you would let us know who you fly for - so that I could avoid flying with your company.
Recommended practices as opposed to SOPs???? Now that leaves a lot of second guessing as to who is going to do what next.
Surely the object of a Non-precision approach is to arrive at the MAP and MDA at the same time, i.e. a constant descent and not dragging the aircraft in frighteningly low (and slow). Then, not much to evaluate at the MAP really, see the lights, continue - don't see the lights, go around. Or is that only a recommended practice in your Company?
I don't much enjoy being frightenened in an aeroplane, not as a passenger nor even before I retired.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely the object of a Non-precision approach is to arrive at the MAP and MDA at the same time,
aircraft in frighteningly low (and slow).
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: U.K.
Age: 75
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low and slow, but for how long?
A Squared -"Frighteningly low" was the term used by bug smasher. Now if dragging a large aircraft in low and slow (MDA and Vref) "a very long way from the airport" is frightening for the pilot then, surely, this is not a good thing.
A constant descent angle also provides a more stabilised approach, does it not?
Cows getting bigger - for the same reasons.
My own Instrument Rating has long expired and I have been retired for a few years now and so memory fades. But I do know that the airline with which I spent my last twenty years of working life NEVER flew a level segment on a non precision approach.
I was never frightened!
A constant descent angle also provides a more stabilised approach, does it not?
Cows getting bigger - for the same reasons.
My own Instrument Rating has long expired and I have been retired for a few years now and so memory fades. But I do know that the airline with which I spent my last twenty years of working life NEVER flew a level segment on a non precision approach.
I was never frightened!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, I'm not disagreeing with there being huge advantages from a stable approach. All I'm saying is that your assertion that "the object of a Non-precision approach is to arrive at the MAP and MDA at the same time" doesn't work in a lot of circumstances.
I would prefer to say something like "The object of a non-precision approach should be to arrive at a decision point whereby the approach can be continued having achieved the required visual references without any significant change in configuration/power setting." All that said, 'dive and drive' is acceptable and works quite well with smaller GA aircraft types. I have no idea about wide-bodies but I suspect it isn't a good idea.
I would prefer to say something like "The object of a non-precision approach should be to arrive at a decision point whereby the approach can be continued having achieved the required visual references without any significant change in configuration/power setting." All that said, 'dive and drive' is acceptable and works quite well with smaller GA aircraft types. I have no idea about wide-bodies but I suspect it isn't a good idea.
Last edited by Cows getting bigger; 4th Aug 2013 at 18:50.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My approach into TGU, Tegucigalpa, Honduras came through a valley at a descent clearance to 2700 AGL, 6,000 MSL. If you didn't get down in the valley at 6,000 you would probably still be in the clouds because that is where they started to lower. You could do the constant descent approach and go around or get down a bit early and land, your choice. Once you had the airport in sight you could descend to 5,000 ft and make a normal visual landing. If you did the constant profile of 3 degrees with your profile descent you may have to go around. In over 600 approaches I only had to go around once because of the ceiling and no other airliner got in that day.
Dive and drive isn't exactly what we were doing but reaching MDA early let us land many times where the constant descent wouldn't have worked. Both are safe but both are legal. Once you are cleared to the next altitude use your own judgement on how rapidly you want to do it because the airspace is clear. Captains should use good judgement on how to conduct their approaches and not be forced to use SOP's when other options will work much better. Captains are in charge and shouldn't be handicapped by being forced to not use their skills because others can't do it safely.
Dive and drive isn't exactly what we were doing but reaching MDA early let us land many times where the constant descent wouldn't have worked. Both are safe but both are legal. Once you are cleared to the next altitude use your own judgement on how rapidly you want to do it because the airspace is clear. Captains should use good judgement on how to conduct their approaches and not be forced to use SOP's when other options will work much better. Captains are in charge and shouldn't be handicapped by being forced to not use their skills because others can't do it safely.
A Squared -"Frighteningly low" was the term used by bug smasher. Now if dragging a large aircraft in low and slow (MDA and Vref) "a very long way from the airport" is frightening for the pilot then, surely, this is not a good thing.
There is no question that, with cloud right on the minima, you stand a better chance of getting in if you are lower than the 3° profile by a bit (say 1-200ft). That allows you to actually get right to the MDA, have a look and then GA if you can't stay on slope. This is impossible on a true 3° CDA. I doubt Bugg Smasher is suggesting miles and miles at the MDA, except when he wants to annoy his mate's BBQ.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I gather "dive and drive " is fine if :
a. you know what you are doing
b. you are not 600 feet below the glide slope
c. the tower does not freak out
d. you are not an Asian airline (because then please see "a" above)
a. you know what you are doing
b. you are not 600 feet below the glide slope
c. the tower does not freak out
d. you are not an Asian airline (because then please see "a" above)
Last edited by armchairpilot94116; 5th Aug 2013 at 03:24.
One more input:
When flying a descent profile which brings you down to the MDA at the MAP or a point last suitable for landing, then you either have to make the go around decision prior to the MDA or you will drop below the MDa during go around.
If you fly a descent profile which brings you down to MDA early, you can level off on the MDA and make the go around later prior or at the MAP, but some feet lower then in the previous case.
When flying a descent profile which brings you down to the MDA at the MAP or a point last suitable for landing, then you either have to make the go around decision prior to the MDA or you will drop below the MDa during go around.
If you fly a descent profile which brings you down to MDA early, you can level off on the MDA and make the go around later prior or at the MAP, but some feet lower then in the previous case.
Flight Safety Foundation article on the dangers of 'dive and drive':
http://www.flightsafety.org/asw/nov0...13-17.pdf?dl=1
http://www.flightsafety.org/asw/nov0...13-17.pdf?dl=1
Last edited by BuzzBox; 5th Aug 2013 at 09:25.
Nice read, although in its context it deals with the task and asociated risks of NPA approaches in general. And due to the fact (as the article states) that they are not often flown they should be set up as close to a PA approach as possible.
One main cause of the dangers of a NPA is named as crew overload. I wonder, what they are saying about a NPA or even an PA followed by circling to another runway.
Bottom line i think it's again a training issue.
One main cause of the dangers of a NPA is named as crew overload. I wonder, what they are saying about a NPA or even an PA followed by circling to another runway.
Bottom line i think it's again a training issue.
Last edited by RetiredF4; 5th Aug 2013 at 11:04.
In a study performed during development of the FSF ALAR Tool Kit, several pilots were asked when they last conducted a nonprecision approach. Most pilots, especially those from the United States, replied, “When I had my last simulator ride.” Some pilots said that the dive-and-drive technique is markedly different from the way they normally fly approaches and that they get very little practice in this procedure to maintain proficiency.
Dive-and-drive is the antithesis of the stabilized approach recommended by the Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) Approach-and-Landing Accident Reduction (ALAR) Task Force.
I wonder, what they are saying about a NPA or even an PA followed by circling to another runway.
Last edited by BuzzBox; 5th Aug 2013 at 12:08.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: another place
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CDFA on a non precision approach, add 50 feet to MDA and treat as a DA. You won't bust minima and if you are visual you should be stable to continue.
This has been a policy at both of my jet employers.
This has been a policy at both of my jet employers.