Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Glideslope dot deflexion = which angle ?

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Glideslope dot deflexion = which angle ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 19th Jan 2012, 17:32
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: marseille
Age: 42
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Glideslope dot deflexion = which angle ?

Hi there,

Just wondering on the A320 or even other aircraft, which angle deviation correponds to one dot deflexion on the glide slope ?

and for the localiser ?

Cheers
airsp is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2012, 18:23
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Posts: 5,795
Received 116 Likes on 56 Posts
http://www.pprune.org/engineers-tech...lope-dots.html
Originally Posted by Clyde Parthangel
Without getting too technical, it depends on the glidepath angle. For the Glidepath, full scale deflection of the CDI - five dots or 2.5 dots depending on the type of instrument - is defined by the Displacement Sensitivity of the Glidepath. This is known by ILS tecchies as the 'Width'. It is dictated by ICAO Annex 10 as ±0.48 Theta, where Theta is the Glidepath angle (between 2° and 4°). For a 3° Glidepath angle, this works out for full scale deflection as 4.44° (full scale fly down) and 1.56° (full scale fly-up). However, linearity across this span is not guaranteed. It is reasonably linear to half scale but outside that all bets are off! For this reason, the engineers and flight inspectors measure at ±0.24 Theta. However, please bear in mind that despite what the CPL textbook diagrams show, a glidepath is not sharply defined. It is produced by the mixing of signals reflected off an imperfect surface (the ground in front of the glidepath) so if you imagine the quality of the reflection that you see in a creased and crumpled piece of aluminium foil that has been flattened out, you might get some idea of what the glideslope signal 'looks like' in reality.
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/45538...ction-cdi.html
Originally Posted by ft
The LOC course sector width does depend on runway length, and you are correct that the nominal width is to have full deflection 105 m (350 ft) either side of the threshold*.

The width is, however, limited to six degrees. On shorter runways, this creates a problem which is solved by instead having full deflection equal to the same displacement at point B, which is 1050 m (3500 ft) from the threshold.

This is specified in ICAO Annex 10 Vol I §3.1.3.7.

The 2.5 degree figure often given is just another "close enough and won't confuse the public" figure.

Cheers,
Fred

*) Or the ILS reference datum, if we are to be strict about the definitions. That's where you'll be when crossing the threshold.
Checkboard is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2012, 23:32
  #3 (permalink)  
ft
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: N. Europe
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The bit about the glide path quoted above is incorrect, I'm afraid. Try this one instead.

Originally Posted by ft
For a glide path, half scale deflection should correspond to 0.12 times the glide path angle.
Can't really agree on the poor shape of the GPs either. Sure, there can be plenty of structure but when within tolerances they provide good guidance - as they should.

That geezer rambling on about the LOC got it about right though, as far as I can see Bet it was more dumb luck than anything else...
ft is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.