Interesting Approach
 

At the weekend I was subjected to a rather interesting approach by the Scottish BA franchise holder. The cloud break procedure was flown to position visually on base leg. The turn onto final was only completed at less than .5nm from touch down at a height I estimated to be around 200' above the nearest obstacle. The aircraft was full and there was a downwind component. It all seemed a bit rushed (without reason) and would have worried nervous passengers. Should I complain to the airline? Is too much pressure being put on crews to cut corners?

Too much pressure? Unlikely.
I wouldn't complain. Used to work for the airline I think you're referring to. Full of good 'stick and rudder' type pilots who could probably see a bit more out their windows than you could from yours.
visual apps much more common up there due to lack of traffic and use of NDB's Vor/DME arc procs etc.
Sometimes wish Iwas still flying for them.:ok:

Depends which airfield you are refering to if it was way up north then they were probably more like 50'-100' above the nearest obsticle and turning at .5 nm. 200ft would leave you to high and you'd probably float a little.

Droopystop - Were you on the jump seat? Because if you weren't, I think you can see where this response is going...:hmm:

Sumburgh, Loganair, approach over the lighthouse by any chance?

Mind you, because of the hill, I'm sure the final turn into that runway is less than 0.5 miles...

Ahhhhh... Sumburgh... What memories.. must have landed there 200 times and it was never the same place twice !

Sounds like you hadn't a clue about what was going on ,and the only one that was nervous was you?

How the heck can you tell if there's a tailwind or not by looking out of a passenger window? Did you spot some smoke??

How do you know the approach was "rushed" when you don't know the operators stabilzed approach criteria and don't have any instruments infront of you?

If I were the captain of that aircraft I would be extreemly annoyed if some passenger started kicking up such a fuss with no evidence. It's the sort of comment that could get the crew grounded and investigated with a black mark against them with no pay till the airline realizes you have no ground to stand on. It's not going to get anything done about any commercial pressure the crew are subjected too. The only one who would ultimately suffer from such negative feedback is the poor old captain.

In short, if you have an issue with the pilots flying, wait till the engines are shut down and go and talk to him about it before getting off. I'm sure he'll tell you where to go!

About 30 yrs. ago I was PAX on a DC9 on night approach to KBOS 4R . About 2 miles out the cpt added some power, stopped descent, and rolled into an "unconventional" right turn at a few hundred feet altitude. I was enjoying the view of the harbor lights when he reversed the roll to line up on 33, whereupon we landed without further ado, although he wasn't "wings level" until over the numbers.

Seems that some traffic didn't clear 4R in time. The whole episode was rather fun for me, although we probably didn't reach 30º bank.

the person indicating the concern has ever right to contact the airline and ask for an explanation.

chances are it will be a fine one showing good airmanship by the crew

there is an off chance that checking the FDR might show something amiss that the chief pilot would like to know about.

Barit1 has indicated one type of approach, and if properly done moves things along.


Having been based at both BOSTON and DCA, one can maneuver at relatively low altitudes in visual conditions to help ATC ...but one must be careful.

the normal approach to the southbound runway at DCA (formerly known as 18, now 19) is a kick with final maneuvering at low altitude.


I hope this person contacts the airline and he will probably get a letter of explanation.

I have never been annoyed at explaining something to a sincere passenger.

And sometimes landing with a 10 knot tail wind is safer than landing with a headwind...when the tailwind gives you an ILS and the headwind gives you an NDB. (runway length considerations of course)

Circling approach maybe? Runway obstructed?

Sounds SOP for the old Hong Kong, or Samos, or Heraklion (easterly) or Calvi (northerly). No doubt many others. Why do the C/A's insist on opening the window blinds for arrival? Leads to such letters. As the pilots are fed on mushroom mangement techniques, should we not adopt the same for pax? (only a joke)

Jack off

OK I was expecting that. Thanks everyone else for taking my post for what it was - an honest observation.

I won't be complaining since the last thing I want to do is to dump the commander and the co pilot in it.

As it happens, I am a professional pilot who is familiar with the approaches and airport in question. I know what the altimeter and DME should read at the land marks we were passing and what it should look like. I also happen to know what a wind sock is for, how it works and how to use it.

I think the approach was gash and was leaving the airline open to complaints from passengers. I won't be complaining, but that doesn't mean someone else will not. Who knows, Mr CAA might have been on board.

PS I wouldn't have batted an eyelid if it was R33 (IIRC) at EGPB

Droopystop,

Brilliant!

If the airfield in question is one of the northern outposts then it certainly sounds like cloud break to circle, (4.2nm radius), turning to keep within the terrain, as said operator does many times on a daily basis thoughout the year. Sounds like a perfectly stabilised approach to either 33/15

And even although the old Saab's getting on a bit, I'm pretty sure they're not operating with sufficiently big enough holes in the airframe for you to poke your dampened finger out to make a wind assessment.

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :mad: :ok: :ok:

Droopy - if it bothers you THAT much that you write about it here - in insufficient detail for anyone to make meaningful comment - then you SHOULD report it. NB MOST of the 'passengers' would be used to the type of flying 'up there'.

We do not know from your profile what your 'professional' flying experience is, and it may be that anything less than a straight-in ILS from 30 miles now-a-days will scare the pants off you.:) 'Stabilised ' criteria do NOT have to be lined up. 200' above an obstacle in that area is not uncommon - and is 200'. Tailwind landings do happen. 'Altimeter and DME' were probably not on the PF's menu at the time?

As someone else has said, the pilots in ?that? airline that I knew a couple of decades ago could have taken me anywhere.

- not that far back in history 'Mr CAA' had himself been one of the 'Islanders'.

There is very little point in asking the question the way you asked it.
Why not name the airfield?
Did the tailwind present a problem? I. E. did it almost go off the end?
Did the PF have to hurl the a/c about at 100' to get it lined up?

It sounds like a skilled piece of visual flying to me, but as I say, who knows?

Sounds like it was fun to me, i.e. real flying. If you thought that was hairy, you should have experienced some of the visual landings I made with the former AVIACO on their DC-9s. And they're not tame little Saab 340s.

OK, you asked an honest question with vague points which could have serious consequences. If you are so concerned, please post back with the airport, runway, met conditions etc and allow those with experience on flying that type onto that runway in those met conditions to allay or confirm your fears.

By all means PM me if you'd rather not post it on the board.

Better still, if you are a professional pilot and are perplexed by something that happened up front while you were fat, dumb, and (un)happy in the back, hang around until last when deplaning and then stick your head in and ask the crew about it - you'll probably get a much more timely and pointed response than asking here - after all, they were there...

Droopystrop,
You should have tried it in an ATP, even better!.
As a passenger of said airline at least 4 times a month, I couldn't fault these guy's flying capabilities. I've had a brilliant jump seat ride into a stormy GLA one evening, and everything was done by the book.
I don't think the SOP's would differ from the flight you were on.

Just a comment about estimating heights...

Some time ago I was a solo rated glider pilot. Got very used to making flights at between 1000 and 2000 feet on the flat in the UK. All our final turns were made about 350-400 and were mostly judged by eye. Then one day I went for a flight in the mountains of switzerland with an instructor and went a lot higher. On our return to the field my sense of altitude was shot. At one point I was convinced we were down to around 800 feet and couldn't understand why we were heading away from the high key point to over fly his house. I looked at the altimeter and was surprised to see it reading nearly 3000 feet. My point is that even when you are used to judging heights it's possible to be completly fooled.

Ahhhhhh them where the days...........................................:)
60kt fog, ovc/300,xwind 35kts and all in a shed - always got in though and never had a complaint from the SLF as it should be........