West Atlantic ATP runway excursion in Birmingham
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: South of the Watford Gap, East of Portland
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Developed their AIRMANSHIP and handling skills to the full.'
Irrelevant to the HR desk-wallahs who recruit. They want 'our pilots' in the top 90% in verbal reasoning.
Most at fault are chief pilots, or DFOs or whatever guise they go under these days, who have become so spineless as to yield to HR departments which, of course, have the full support of the other 'humanities' graduates running airlines, for the recruitment of 'their' pilots; recruiters who wouldn't know one end of a 747 from the other.
Irrelevant to the HR desk-wallahs who recruit. They want 'our pilots' in the top 90% in verbal reasoning.
Most at fault are chief pilots, or DFOs or whatever guise they go under these days, who have become so spineless as to yield to HR departments which, of course, have the full support of the other 'humanities' graduates running airlines, for the recruitment of 'their' pilots; recruiters who wouldn't know one end of a 747 from the other.
So perhaps the roller-coaster description isn't that far off.
de minimus non curat lex
Manchester RW 23R has a down slope at an inconvenient point,
as does Carlisle RW 24.
Add Knock to the list; one long slope.
Something Threat & Error management briefing should mitigate?
Local knowledge can play a very useful part.
as does Carlisle RW 24.
Add Knock to the list; one long slope.
Something Threat & Error management briefing should mitigate?
Local knowledge can play a very useful part.
The overall average runway slope (threshold-to-threshold) is a relatively modest 1.1% (0.6°). But if the AIP is to be believed, the gradient between the final 15 TDZ marker and the intersection with the old cross runway is a whopping 6.8% (3.9°).
So perhaps the roller-coaster description isn't that far off.
So perhaps the roller-coaster description isn't that far off.
Yes it's a proper hill alright ! Much worse than the hump at EGCC. You actually have to 'drive' down the Birmingham one, otherwise you risk taking off again !
The issue is not the bumps the runway, but the lumps in the air; wind, crosswind, gusts, and associated assumptions.
Either pilots are not experiencing a sufficient range of conditions or unable to relate training / experience to the real conditions, … or, … or,
It would be interesting to review the extent of experience, how many crosswind landings, against the depth of experience, how close to the 'limit' or range of gust intensity. Just because 15kts X was 'easy', then so too will be 30kts X with gusts; not so for every aircraft type. Every wind encounter is different, all situations must be treated as such.
Previous posts cited difficulties with simulators; many lack representative roll-yaw interaction and most do not have the ability to induce side-force, lateral acceleration - 'seat of the pants' feedback; yet we believe that they are sufficiently representative of the aircraft. Then there is the 'jump through the hoop' training; time for management / regulator to look at 'work as done', vice what they imagine.
Do First Officers get to fly a sufficient rage of conditions; or are they always limited to xx kts. How are they to generate experience; when do they see higher X winds - when they become Captain, and fly in limiting situations, without further experience.
Either pilots are not experiencing a sufficient range of conditions or unable to relate training / experience to the real conditions, … or, … or,
It would be interesting to review the extent of experience, how many crosswind landings, against the depth of experience, how close to the 'limit' or range of gust intensity. Just because 15kts X was 'easy', then so too will be 30kts X with gusts; not so for every aircraft type. Every wind encounter is different, all situations must be treated as such.
Previous posts cited difficulties with simulators; many lack representative roll-yaw interaction and most do not have the ability to induce side-force, lateral acceleration - 'seat of the pants' feedback; yet we believe that they are sufficiently representative of the aircraft. Then there is the 'jump through the hoop' training; time for management / regulator to look at 'work as done', vice what they imagine.
Do First Officers get to fly a sufficient rage of conditions; or are they always limited to xx kts. How are they to generate experience; when do they see higher X winds - when they become Captain, and fly in limiting situations, without further experience.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
fredthedog.
Advice on technique / procedure may be aircraft / manufacturer specific.
Note info below on takeoff, and discussion of alternatives; crab, de-crab, mixed, for crosswind landings.
Boeing info: http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Cro...Guidelines.pdf
Airbus info from testing: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/t...tification.pdf
Joint A+B view of testing: https://www.dropbox.com/s/zq6lxugvoc...ation.pdf?dl=0
Advice on technique / procedure may be aircraft / manufacturer specific.
Note info below on takeoff, and discussion of alternatives; crab, de-crab, mixed, for crosswind landings.
Boeing info: http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Cro...Guidelines.pdf
Airbus info from testing: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/t...tification.pdf
Joint A+B view of testing: https://www.dropbox.com/s/zq6lxugvoc...ation.pdf?dl=0
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The B737 FCTM allows touchdown with full crab up to max crosswind limits. It also goes on to suggest it is the more preferable technique on very slippery runways but its not recommended to use this technique on a dry runway at max crosswind (which incidentally is generally more in the FCTM than in operator's limitations).
It may well have been your trainers preferred crosswind technique but labelling them as clueless is a bit harsh.
It may well have been your trainers preferred crosswind technique but labelling them as clueless is a bit harsh.
I think it is the phrase "Kicking it straight" that some object to; nothing needs to be actually kicked.
However, yawing your aircraft to align with the runway as you flare is entirely sensible and desirable. as fredthedog says, it only takes a gentle movement of the rudder pedals to achieve this, coupled with slight into-wind wing down to counter any secondary roll.
Regarding SIMs, well OK they cannot reproduce all the forces one would experience, but they could still be used to practise the coordination of the crab-to-flare-to-yaw-straight manoeuvre.
However, yawing your aircraft to align with the runway as you flare is entirely sensible and desirable. as fredthedog says, it only takes a gentle movement of the rudder pedals to achieve this, coupled with slight into-wind wing down to counter any secondary roll.
Regarding SIMs, well OK they cannot reproduce all the forces one would experience, but they could still be used to practise the coordination of the crab-to-flare-to-yaw-straight manoeuvre.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hotel time zone
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The B737 FCTM allows touchdown with full crab up to max crosswind limits. It also goes on to suggest it is the more preferable technique on very slippery runways but its not recommended to use this technique on a dry runway at max crosswind (which incidentally is generally more in the FCTM than in operator's limitations).
.
.
I'd agree - nothing wrong with"kicking it straight" (meaning aligning with the runway using rudder keeping wings level) ... But it requires perfect timing, just before the mains touch. More often I see the rudder go in too early, they float, and the airplane quickly starts drifting towards the downwind edge of the runway, and it gets messy from there
Last edited by Time Traveller; 25th Jun 2020 at 13:15.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
