Visual Approaches in Transport Jets - are they appropriate?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 63
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure how many ppruners will agree with me here, but I feel that if you can't fly your a/c on to the runway visually, you have no business in the cockpit.
Yes, I know 'piloting' skills are not the whole job nowadays, but you are paid to fly and putting the a/c neatly on the runway- any runway- once you can see it, is a basic skill that must be in every pilots repertoire.
Frankly, as someone hinted earlier, the more you do, the easier they are.
Yes, I know 'piloting' skills are not the whole job nowadays, but you are paid to fly and putting the a/c neatly on the runway- any runway- once you can see it, is a basic skill that must be in every pilots repertoire.
Frankly, as someone hinted earlier, the more you do, the easier they are.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: South of the Watford Gap, East of Portland
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brainfade - I'm in complete agreement with you. If a professional pilot is incapable of managing his/her aircraft in terms of configuration, speed and approach profile achieved by the mark one eye ball talking directly to the hands and feet via the grey bit between the ears he/she really should not be at the pointy end.
As you rightly say, practise does make perfect as does good instruction in the first place. I've been surprised (and shocked) by the extreme reluctance of some FOs to disconnect the automatics and simply fly the aircraft. Conversely, there have been some who are all too ready to 'pole' it under inappropriate situations. As with most things in avaition there is a time and place for most things and visual approaches ceratinly have their place.
As you rightly say, practise does make perfect as does good instruction in the first place. I've been surprised (and shocked) by the extreme reluctance of some FOs to disconnect the automatics and simply fly the aircraft. Conversely, there have been some who are all too ready to 'pole' it under inappropriate situations. As with most things in avaition there is a time and place for most things and visual approaches ceratinly have their place.
Quite apart from the technical proficiency that a pilot should have to be able to do a visual approach (especially with the aids in the cockpits of the latest jets), we should be, environmentally, cutting as many track miles off each flight as possible. That means a visual base join at 3nm instead of 8nm final/arc or a downwind join instead of way out over the top wasting dinosaurs.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because a lot of 'pilots' out there can't.
In fact, a lot of 'pilots' can't even manage an approach from TOD without total reliance on the FMGC.
I sometimes wonder why they got into aviation in the first place. Deep down it must be terrifying for them.
In fact, a lot of 'pilots' can't even manage an approach from TOD without total reliance on the FMGC.
I sometimes wonder why they got into aviation in the first place. Deep down it must be terrifying for them.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My company forbids turning the FD off under normal operations unless rearming it when visual on a non precision approach
It is good to read in these pages that there are operators out there that actually encourage their crews to keep fully current at manual no FD and no AT approaches and landings. These are the safe pilots when the chips are down in contrast to the automatic monkeys who rely blindly on the automatics because they sadly lack the basic skills to fly an aeroplane. The Garuda 737 fatal over-run is a case in point.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I sure am glad that I fly for a company that allows and encourages manual raw data app's and visual landings! It's just a matter of company culture.
In my company every new guy (or girl) will be happy to handfly the A320 without A/T, A/P or F/D once line-training is completed. That's the way it should be. (Most of them start training on the A320 freshly out of flight academy with around 300 hrs total time) We'll fly visual app's whenever it's appropriate and possible to do so. That's where pilot judgement comes in!
So I (and my colleagues) switch off the automatics whenever the conditions permit to do so. We'll leave the A/P on when there's a good reason to do so. (Weather, traffic density, fatigue...)
I can assure you that no-one in my company worries about handflying a single-engine ILS app. with all automatics switched off during the SIM-checks. Oh, and yes, "my" company has an excellent safety record!
Regards,
Sabenaboy
In my company every new guy (or girl) will be happy to handfly the A320 without A/T, A/P or F/D once line-training is completed. That's the way it should be. (Most of them start training on the A320 freshly out of flight academy with around 300 hrs total time) We'll fly visual app's whenever it's appropriate and possible to do so. That's where pilot judgement comes in!
So I (and my colleagues) switch off the automatics whenever the conditions permit to do so. We'll leave the A/P on when there's a good reason to do so. (Weather, traffic density, fatigue...)
I can assure you that no-one in my company worries about handflying a single-engine ILS app. with all automatics switched off during the SIM-checks. Oh, and yes, "my" company has an excellent safety record!
Regards,
Sabenaboy
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 63
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Judge 11
Dead on.
What really hacks me off is arriving at your destination in CAVOK and 100 miles vis, to find everyone busy doing the bleeding ILS!
Think of all that wasted time/fuel/ money!
They should take up knitting!
Dead on.
What really hacks me off is arriving at your destination in CAVOK and 100 miles vis, to find everyone busy doing the bleeding ILS!
Think of all that wasted time/fuel/ money!
They should take up knitting!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I won't start in about the new crop of very low time chaps we have coming into the RHS these days as I expect every jet pilot to meet the standard and that should include the ability to hand fly a raw data visual approach - but that is what the sim is for.
Every pilot meets the basic requirements laid down by their regulatory authority in order to keep the type useable on their licence. But that is merely scratching the surface, a good pilot means to be able to do much more than the basic required standard and that comes with experience and time on type. Fly one visual approach every six months and I bet they are no good at visual approaches, fly them whenever the operation permits (wx, environment, crew etc) and they will soon get much better at them.
Any company that makes blanket rules about not hand flying the aircraft is storing up future problems and links in error chains. Take a look at your MEL once in a while and see what automatics not working constitute no-go items, better still, see when they don't! That day is not the day to 'wonder' how to fly the a/c to TOC, in the cruise and from TOD without said automatics.
PP
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: ZSPD
Age: 56
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pay Time
A full ILS approach adds about seven minutes to a straight in visual. Think of all the wasted time, fuel, money for the company. But also think of all the additional pay time for the pilots.
Sometimes the stated reason for a full ILS - Safety - is just an excuse to bring home more moolah at the end of the month.
Sometimes the stated reason for a full ILS - Safety - is just an excuse to bring home more moolah at the end of the month.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A full ILS approach adds about seven minutes to a straight in visual.
In that case, if you shortened your route appropriately in the FMC, the most you are going to save is about 8-10nm from joining downwind and turning base to accomplish a 4nm final as opposed to flying all the way out to fly the ILS from about an 8nm final. In effect what you have done is shortened your cruise segment by descending earlier to be lower than the full ILS platform. Bearing in mind you will be doing something like 7nm/min in the cruise I think you can see that you will not save anything like 7 minutes by taking a visual.
If you planned on the full procedure and were offered a visual from abeam, you will be too high to just turn in so will end up going further downwind having slowed down and taken some flap and gear (earlier than normal to get the height off) and will be able to turn in earlier than for the full ILS, but the saving is going to be minimal.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for appropriate visual approaches, but let's not exaggerate the true savings.
Sometimes the stated reason for a full ILS - Safety - is just an excuse to bring home more moolah at the end of the month.
PP
You could even just program it in the FMC so ast o be able to fly it on LNAV and autopilot. It is really easy to strip a couple of trackmiles of an approach by not flying the whole thing.
Flying, based on visual clues, is not dangerous.
Flying, based on visual clues, is not dangerous.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the most you are going to save is about 8-10nm
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough BOAC, but we could take this to ridiculous extremes, I was comparing a 'sensible' visual approach with about a 4nm final, to a 'sensible' radar vectored ILS which would be somewhere in the region of an 8-10nm final. My reply was to eight16kreug who reckons that flying the ILS adds 7 minutes over a visual, which I despute.
PP
PP
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would agree with PP most real world ILS's for commercial a/c tend to vector you in to 8-12 miles you do somtimes get 20-25 mile final but that is on a busy traffic day so you would not get a visual anyway.
A visual will only save you time from a full procedure, radar vector will generally bring you on to final in a more efficient manner ie. you dont have to fly over the beacon so you save time/miles there.
lets stop beating up on the 200hrs guys we ALL havd 200hrs at some point if they have a current lic and TR then thay can fly I can tell you there are some captains with over 10,000 hrs who b**ls up approches.
A visual will only save you time from a full procedure, radar vector will generally bring you on to final in a more efficient manner ie. you dont have to fly over the beacon so you save time/miles there.
lets stop beating up on the 200hrs guys we ALL havd 200hrs at some point if they have a current lic and TR then thay can fly I can tell you there are some captains with over 10,000 hrs who b**ls up approches.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Norfolk U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a 1200hr Microlight PPL with some 1500 landings under my belt I read this thread with some concern. Obviously if traffic and WX require use of the automatics then O.K, but as has already been said if you can't hand fly the plane in fine conditions then why are you doing the job? Not so long ago I used to see Air Europa 737's doing visual circuits to land at Norwich which wouldn't disgrace a C150 driver. I guess they spend much of their time visiting airfields with little or no nav/radar facilities, so this is second nature. If I was SLF on a flight experiencing real difficulties guess who I would rather have at the pointy end?
