Stabilised approach criteria
 

Can somebody tell what are the stabilised approach tolerances, regarding speed, attitude, flight path, check lists completed etc, and when are you required to be stabilised on approach ( eg O.M. ),
What kind of weather requires that, that kind of approach should be executed?
Answers highly appreciated?
THNKS!!!

How long's a piece of string? Different companies have different criteria and for different a/c types.

Stabilised Approach
 

Here are the accepted atandard elements of a Stabilised Approach:

(In IMC, be stabilised by 1000' above touchdown and VMC 500' above touchdown.)

Correct flight path

Speed, Vref +20kts max, Vref min

Aircraft fully configured for landing

No greater than 1000' ft/min descent rate

All briefings & checklists completed

Power, not below as defined by AOM

The above applies to most types of approach, minor adjustment maybe needed for circling etc.

I find the above works rather well and is particularly good for low houred/inexperienced pilots to practise... and they usually get rather a good landing!

In IMC it's company policy to go-around with more than 1 dot LOC or G/S displacements at 500 feet HAT.

Thank you Glueball, that is pretty standard & I should have included it in the above list.

Also, only minor corrections should be needed to maintain the flight path whilst stabilised.

Bank angle should not exceed 15 degrees below 1000' in order to line up with the runway.

If any factor or combination, such as sudden rainshowers, gusty crosswinds (tower wind reports can state the opposite wind direction) and/or shrt runways can cause experienced pilots to be uncomfortable-we can just say "let's make a go-around....". If we are simply "mission-oriented" in terms of being totally committed to completing each takeoff and approach (whether for schedule reliability or to avoid the appearance of being a wimp etc), we might destroy our own careers.

One of our FOs knows a pilot whose fleets vary from B-727s through heavy widebody aircraft, hauling anything from Chinese Panda "bears" to express cargo.

Even though they had some unfortunate incidents involving widebody jets which ran off runways in the Pacific Rim, along with a very large plane which bounced and crashed upside down at EWR (everybody made it out ok), the company supposedly had no clear criteria for a stable approach. The comments about having no stable approach requirements were quite a surprise to me and seem hard to believe.

Was it true?


:suspect: