737NG Descent Tables.
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 570
Likes: 21
From: Another Planet.
737NG Descent Tables.
Why has Mr McBoeing removed the 2-engine (most days in line service?) descent tables from the "Performance Inflight" section of the B737NG QRHs and consigned them to some obscure manual, or folder in the inevitable laptop, which is supposed to give us RAPID access to info we require?
Bearing in mind CDAs and descent planning has been a theme regularly cropping up in this site, does anyone know what was the reasoning behind this move?
Rushed approaches detected by FDM events are a depressingly regular item in airlines' safety reviews, yet the basic info to avoid is either hard to locate and diverse in its presentation and plain maths. Yet particularly the newcomers to type are relying on complicated extracts from the Boeing FCTM or "rule(s) of thumb" given them by one of the "old fart" brigade, me being one of them!
I have my own method of calculating track miles needed for energy management purposes, but that's not much help to all those studying/converting onto the type. The tables previously published were at least an officially sanctioned source of data for E M purposes, enabling crew to have some idea of how to control the craft from varying altitudes with variable weights (masses if you insist!), though they carefully omitted the effects of HW/TW on the outcome!
And yet for some odd reason Mr McBoeing chooses to give us GEAR DOWN tables, which I would suggest are of NIL interest and value in everyday ops.
Anyone with a direct line to Seattle out there who can explain please?
Or is it just a simple publication error............................................
Bearing in mind CDAs and descent planning has been a theme regularly cropping up in this site, does anyone know what was the reasoning behind this move?
Rushed approaches detected by FDM events are a depressingly regular item in airlines' safety reviews, yet the basic info to avoid is either hard to locate and diverse in its presentation and plain maths. Yet particularly the newcomers to type are relying on complicated extracts from the Boeing FCTM or "rule(s) of thumb" given them by one of the "old fart" brigade, me being one of them!
I have my own method of calculating track miles needed for energy management purposes, but that's not much help to all those studying/converting onto the type. The tables previously published were at least an officially sanctioned source of data for E M purposes, enabling crew to have some idea of how to control the craft from varying altitudes with variable weights (masses if you insist!), though they carefully omitted the effects of HW/TW on the outcome!
And yet for some odd reason Mr McBoeing chooses to give us GEAR DOWN tables, which I would suggest are of NIL interest and value in everyday ops.
Anyone with a direct line to Seattle out there who can explain please?
Or is it just a simple publication error............................................
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
From: London
Sorry no direct line unfortunately, but I suspect that which perf inflight data is included in the QRH is, to a degree, an operator specific thing.
Either way, you should find two engine gear up descent tables in the performance inflight section of FCOM1. If so then those new to type should have sufficiently easy and timely access to the info.
Either way, you should find two engine gear up descent tables in the performance inflight section of FCOM1. If so then those new to type should have sufficiently easy and timely access to the info.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,575
Likes: 4
From: UK
BM - you are OBVIOUSLY still thinking for yourself, so we will have to remove even more next time until you relent and join the 'Children of the Magenta Line' fold. You are persisting in this fallacy..................
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 570
Likes: 21
From: Another Planet.
WHERE THE FLOCK IS IT?
Kefuddle, thanks for the tip re FCOM1, but the company for whom I work have taken a reasonably constructed set of Boeing manuals and split them into so many Fcoms and OPs and sundry other pubs that I'm losing the will to live.
AND they're in a laptop, making the access even more laborious to a wrinkly like me. Once upon a time one came back from a flight with a query re systems or ops which was quickly resolved by hauling out the PAPER manual from its easily accessable location, opening the relevant chapter and hey presto, query resolved and off to sleep. But that leads me down the rant about how much info is thrown at us, how it's presented and even graphic design issues, which is another thread. Our QRH claims to be Boeing but has almost as many paragraphs and pages redacted as the 9/11 commission report. That's something I've NEVER seen in 26 years in civil aviation!
BOAC, I'll take the advice re thinking for myself. I asked my authorised medical examiner whether I could have that facility inhibited til retirement and he sadly shook his head at me (a frequent occurrence!) and said it would have to be a complete lobotomy, as per management qualification, and I might not then get a Class 1 certificate for the six months. We must meet for an exchange of info 6 Bells or equivalent soon?
Seriously, I understand the info lies in a paper book hiding in the compartment under the spare jumpseat, something for me to hunt which will help me stay awake on the next Egypt and return trip. However, the location of that info and it's convenience for consultation doesn't help on the day for descent planning, especially for the rookies?
Rarely do I hear the phrase ENERGY MANAGEMENT uttered these days, nor good solid guidelines for the uninitiated as to how to assess a particular 'frame full (or empty) on the day, including wind allowance, which receives barely a mention.
And now back to that dark room for a lie down...........................
AND they're in a laptop, making the access even more laborious to a wrinkly like me. Once upon a time one came back from a flight with a query re systems or ops which was quickly resolved by hauling out the PAPER manual from its easily accessable location, opening the relevant chapter and hey presto, query resolved and off to sleep. But that leads me down the rant about how much info is thrown at us, how it's presented and even graphic design issues, which is another thread. Our QRH claims to be Boeing but has almost as many paragraphs and pages redacted as the 9/11 commission report. That's something I've NEVER seen in 26 years in civil aviation!
BOAC, I'll take the advice re thinking for myself. I asked my authorised medical examiner whether I could have that facility inhibited til retirement and he sadly shook his head at me (a frequent occurrence!) and said it would have to be a complete lobotomy, as per management qualification, and I might not then get a Class 1 certificate for the six months. We must meet for an exchange of info 6 Bells or equivalent soon?
Seriously, I understand the info lies in a paper book hiding in the compartment under the spare jumpseat, something for me to hunt which will help me stay awake on the next Egypt and return trip. However, the location of that info and it's convenience for consultation doesn't help on the day for descent planning, especially for the rookies?
Rarely do I hear the phrase ENERGY MANAGEMENT uttered these days, nor good solid guidelines for the uninitiated as to how to assess a particular 'frame full (or empty) on the day, including wind allowance, which receives barely a mention.
And now back to that dark room for a lie down...........................
