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

Rationale of the altitude*3 theory

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

Rationale of the altitude*3 theory

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10th Jul 2012, 07:00
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: toulouse
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
.The rate varies a lot when you make idle descents. But, for 3 deg slope, If you want to calculate if you are making 3 deg or not, try this, using GS:

300 kt aprox 1700 fpm
250 kt aprox 1500 fpm
200 kt aprox 1000 fpm
wrong, 3°is 5%, so divide your GS by 2
300kt. 1500fpm
250kt. 1250fpm
200kt. 1000fpm
tony montana is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2012, 10:31
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Uh... Where was I?
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
wrong

3º is not 5%

we use 5% for the glideslope, though, because it is much simpler and is always approximate, and glideslopes are not always exactly 3º. For a descent from thousands of feet, there is a difference between a 5% and a 5.24%
Microburst2002 is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2012, 12:21
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: toulouse
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ok fair enough, so if you like maths, lets have a close look:

200kt*tan3°=A(rate of descent in NM/h)
A/60*1852/0,3048=1061ft/min

300kt=>1592ft/min
250kt=>1326ft/min

so if you like rocket science you use that, personnally i divide GS by 2
300kt=>1500ft/min
250kt=>1250ft/min
200kt=>1000ft/min

simple and useful rule of thumb, but anyway you and me are not so far from the truth

like a 3° path is exactly 318ft/nm 300 ft for me 330ft for you

Do you use mach number * 3= V/S for 3° path without too much wind and high mach number

mach number ruffely *10= nm/ min
tony montana is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2012, 21:30
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,555
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Do you do this when you're hand flying?
wiggy is online now  
Old 10th Jul 2012, 21:48
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: toulouse
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
actually yes, it comes in my scan to check GS and my V/S, i found it really easy to check, don t you?
tony montana is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2012, 23:57
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,555
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
i found it really easy to check, don t you?
Yes, I do, and I've done over 10 miles a minute and agree your Mach approximation is fine, , and after over 35 years of flying I reckon using the 5 and 3 times table works fine as well.......FWIW I'm a great believer in KISS, especially when teaching newbies, so I'm not sure I'd bring the tan function into it.

BTW do you really live near/in Toulouse? - 'cos if you do we're probably neighbours.

Last edited by wiggy; 11th Jul 2012 at 00:06.
wiggy is online now  
Old 11th Jul 2012, 08:36
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: toulouse
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Toulouse, is homebase. I agree with out with KISS, the tan function is useless is just to proove that a simple rule iof thumb is good enough

so you fly military A/C
tony montana 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.