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

How many sectors do you handfly?

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

How many sectors do you handfly?

Old 3rd Aug 2013, 19:21
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
CAT II
So what about CAT II on aircraft with no autoland?

I'm confident in my ability to fly an NDB approach down to minimums with max crosswind, on raw data and with all the automatics switched off. Would I actually do it? Of course not, as it's a situation where it's simply not appropriate to do so.
Why not?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 19:30
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: North of Antarctica
Posts: 117
reading this thread how privileged am I that for ten years, approx 6000 hours and roughly 10000 landings I hand flew every sector, it was in an Islander mind you!
VP-F__ is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 20:01
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 120
I'm obviously missing something here. Why on Earth would anyone choose to deliberately use reduced automation in marginal conditions?
jamie1985 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 20:32
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
I'm a pilot and it's my job, that's why.

Would I be correct in surmising that the first time you'd want to hand fly a raw data NDB to minima in a 35 knot crosswind would be when you're forced to, possibly by a surprising technical problem half way down the approach? Or maybe you think practicing once in a blue moon in benign weather is adequate preparation?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 20:38
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hot and high EGLL
Posts: 108
You are absolutely full of Spandex.

Last edited by antonov09; 3rd Aug 2013 at 20:39.
antonov09 is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 20:43
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Which bit? I'm a pilot or its my job?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 21:04
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: farmm intersection, our ranch
Age: 53
Posts: 209
What about cat3 with no autopilot...
flyingchanges is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 21:11
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Indeed, so the only time you shouldn't hand fly is in RVSM.

FC - CRJ or EMB, or something else?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 21:21
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In my seat
Posts: 823
Well, regarding RVSM...
The regulation actually tells you that you need to have autopilot AVAILABLE
despegue is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 21:23
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Indeed, so the only time you shouldn't hand fly is...never!

Glad we got that cleared up.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2013, 23:48
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: farmm intersection, our ranch
Age: 53
Posts: 209
We are forced to hand fly our CATIII approaches.
flyingchanges is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 07:11
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: A tropical island.
Posts: 455
You love your automation... I get it.

I have hardly any use for it besides altitude hold (we don't have CAT II or CAT III anyway).
aviatorhi is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 07:12
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: On the couch
Posts: 15
I don't think you need to be in actual IMC to practice an instrument approach. You can practice just fine in VMC. Just don't look outside.

If I'm doing it in IMC I don't think that counts as "practice" I think I'm actually doing it. Not so?

Unless the A/P F/D are of no help at all, I would feel much better sitting in the back of someone's airplane if they would use them in actual conditions.

As an intermediate step, new guys can learn A LOT about hand flying their airplanes with the flight directors on but the auto-thrust should be off for it to be really effective. With auto-thrust on it's almost pointless.

(Edited to fix the font size. Sorry Sabena, didn't know I was shouting. As time passes I have to tilt my head further and further back to get more and more magnification from my progressive lenses... also, I thought ALL CAPS was shouting... also I'm new to posting and I didn't know how it would look... I'm full of excuses and can keep going if need be... stop me before I excuse again! )

Last edited by Ultra Glide; 5th Aug 2013 at 06:18.
Ultra Glide is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 09:21
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 382
Thumbs up

There's a time and place for everything. If you read through my posts, you can easily see that I'm a big fan of manual flight. In the A320, I only use auto thrust for automated cat II or III landings and I switch off the A/P and F/D on almost all approaches. The important word is "almost".

I'm absolutely, positively sure that I can get my A320 down to cat I ils minima with 550 m vis in a 35 kts gusty crosswind with A/P, F/D, A/T and one engine off with the needles centered. I even believe that I can land the A320 in actual cat III minima without A/P, F/D or A/T. (Done it in the sim) But, I do think that anybody who fails to see that there are sometimes conditions where using some or all of the autoflight systems is the most appropriate thing to do, are even more dangerous then the guys who always fly through the A/P.. (Unless your flying old equipment, without a modern, reliable autoflight system of course)

There's nothing wrong in using the A/P because it makes your life and work easier in certain conditions, as long as you don't need the A/P to fly the plane, because you're not good enough at flying it yourself.

Oh, and please, when ATC offers you do a visual approach in Corfu in ideal conditions, don't turn the offer down!

(Ultra Glide? why are you shouting?)

Last edited by sabenaboy; 4th Aug 2013 at 09:23.
sabenaboy is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 09:33
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Oh, and please, when ATC offers you do a visual approach in Corfu in ideal conditions, don't turn the offer down!
Why? If it means that you're going to be extended, stuck into the hold or whatever and use a load more gas then I shall make sure that happens. No skin off my nose as I won't be using anymore fuel than planned, but you will. If its a company aircraft following me then I'll do my absolute best to make sure they don't have to fly any further than necessary.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 09:51
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 382
Originally Posted by Lord spandex Masher
unless you can state how much extra fuel they used because of the way they flew their approach you're talking nonsense.
Do I really need to explain to you how the 737 could have saved fuel and time by flying a nice visual instead of flying the aprox 22 miles after GAR during the full VOR procedure in the given conditions?

Last edited by sabenaboy; 4th Aug 2013 at 09:56. Reason: spelling
sabenaboy is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 10:06
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
No, but you can tell me how much extra fuel they used by doing so. You can tell me why we should give a damn how much extra fuel you used. Maybe they did it just to wind you up and make you burn your extra 200 kilos. I do that sometimes.

We're they low enough to shorten their approach and not screw it up? Maybe they'd have had to fly the exact same track miles on a visual approach in which case what would be the point?

It's also possible to fly that whole procedure at flight idle, that'll still save fuel over the planned burn, maybe even over a visual approach which most people tend to fly flatter and with a bit of power on.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 10:21
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 382
Maybe they did it just to wind you up and make you burn your extra 200 kilos. I do that sometimes.
Oh, what a nice professional and collegial attitude! Keep up the good work!

...maybe even over a visual approach which most people tend to fly flatter and with a bit of power on.
As I said, it takes some piloting skills to do a nice visual approach, but it's not that difficult. A little bit of airmanship suffices! I guess that's getting rare.
sabenaboy is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 10:32
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
But you haven't said how much extra fuel they used by flying the procedure! Of course, they may have had to burn off that extra fuel to get under MLW, who knows? Not you.

Keep up the good work!
It's like this you see. I could save 50 kilos by shortening my approach. This might allow you to save 50 kilos too. Or I can fly what I've planned to fly, but more efficiently saving perhaps 40 kilos, which might make you use 2 or 300 kilos more. Net result - your lot spend more money. That's competition.

Or I could fly a bit faster, get in front of you and save myself 2 or 300 kilos by using a little bit more than planned and not having to extend miles downwind while you happily fly around in circles using up your reserves. Maybe you should've done that into Corfu.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2013, 10:56
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Why, you think I should be bullied into a visual approach to save your airline some fuel? You think I'm not perfectly entitled to fly my flight planned route? If it causes you to use a bit more fuel why does that make me any less professional?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.