737 when reduce speed?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Where eagles dare
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry if someone allready added, just read the first few posts in this thread.
-Ask controller for free speed, increase to 330 and use speedbrakes at 50, slow down to 250 and you should be back on track again
!! When convinient just let the speed drop to normal approach and land!
-Ask controller for free speed, increase to 330 and use speedbrakes at 50, slow down to 250 and you should be back on track again
!! When convinient just let the speed drop to normal approach and land!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The Block
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speed limitation for speedbrakes is 320kts.
I would slow down with to around 190kts and use speedbrake/F10/gear to get down. Don't like speeding up idea as you'll only have to slow down again. Just be cautious of excessive sink rate or you might have some forms to fill out on the ground!!
I would slow down with to around 190kts and use speedbrake/F10/gear to get down. Don't like speeding up idea as you'll only have to slow down again. Just be cautious of excessive sink rate or you might have some forms to fill out on the ground!!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Over the Moon
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats flying TolTol speed up to take off then slow down to land.
At what point are you going to reduce to 190 etc ? Surely not straight away ?
Energy management is key in this scenario. Clearly steaming in high speed at close range is inapropriate and risks an unstable approach and go around but dirtying up v early is wastefull of time, fuel, is noisy and potentialy stuffs up other traffic.
Neither is a good solution.
At what point are you going to reduce to 190 etc ? Surely not straight away ?
Energy management is key in this scenario. Clearly steaming in high speed at close range is inapropriate and risks an unstable approach and go around but dirtying up v early is wastefull of time, fuel, is noisy and potentialy stuffs up other traffic.
Neither is a good solution.
! Unless there is a company procedure, or if Your airline hasīnt installed the 6 hinges stabilizer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The Block
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats flying TolTol speed up to take off then slow down to land.
There is no speed limit for sbīs
What planet do you live on? I notice from your profile you do not appear to actually fly this aeroplane.
Why would you speed up now? Your at 11,000ft, good airmanship to be 250kts < FL100. I would start to configure at around 8000ft after using speedbrake.
Now enough of the pathetic replies.
737... the slower she gets (clean) the harder it is to get her down. Aerodynamics: stay away from best glide speed. Keep the speed or even accelerate, go down, and reduce only at level off at lower altitude. I don't see any problem in the suggested situations.
You can make the 737 descend and you can make it slow down, but combining both is time and distance consuming.
You can make the 737 descend and you can make it slow down, but combining both is time and distance consuming.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Over the Moon
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TolTol
You sound rather rattled. If you qoute the wrong limitation you can expect to be corrected and rightly so however innocent your excuse. Nothing wrong or pathetic about that. If you claim to fly the space shuttle, as you do, then you will also attract a few comments, do not be surprised. The tongue in cheek remarks will come if you have a tongue in cheek profile. Commercial 737 pilot to space shuttle, I must freshen up my CV I might be in with a chance. Do they advertise in flight ?
Your solution will work but in practise its very unlikely to be appropriate in a normal traffic environment. Its also inefficient in terms of fuel,time and noise and will almost certainly annoy other aircraft and ATC to high heaven.
It is true the NG does not go down and slow down particularly well but increasingly ATC, environmentalists and regulators are expecting CDA's and keep stats on them and publish league tables to demonstrate which companies are doing well and which aren't. So going down and slowing down is the name of the game nowdays.
You sound rather rattled. If you qoute the wrong limitation you can expect to be corrected and rightly so however innocent your excuse. Nothing wrong or pathetic about that. If you claim to fly the space shuttle, as you do, then you will also attract a few comments, do not be surprised. The tongue in cheek remarks will come if you have a tongue in cheek profile. Commercial 737 pilot to space shuttle, I must freshen up my CV I might be in with a chance. Do they advertise in flight ?
Your solution will work but in practise its very unlikely to be appropriate in a normal traffic environment. Its also inefficient in terms of fuel,time and noise and will almost certainly annoy other aircraft and ATC to high heaven.
It is true the NG does not go down and slow down particularly well but increasingly ATC, environmentalists and regulators are expecting CDA's and keep stats on them and publish league tables to demonstrate which companies are doing well and which aren't. So going down and slowing down is the name of the game nowdays.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is another factor to consider in this scenario, how much airspace do you have avail / want to use. My preference is to level off, slow right down , get as dirty as possible, as I prefer the radius of turn / time / that I have at Vref 40 - 162kt rather than guzzling track miles @ 310 or more. If you are in turbulence ( try a Kanig arrival to LEGE with a strongish Northerly wind) it is going to be a bit kinder to the airframe too if you avoid the very high speed stuff below F100.With 737 cockpit noise levels, it is also easier and less stressful if you can hear your other crew members anguished comments on your profile ( or even the aircraft's profile. . .) while you sort it all out.
