737 CAT II
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
737 CAT II
Latetonite, he said a manual Landing from an autoland. Never done it, not even in the sim. We have SOPs saying to GA. Off course you Should be able to cope, but non-standard and maybe even challenging it probably is.
Denti, i had to read that twice to find the hidden "auto" SE GA. We dont have that.
Denti, i had to read that twice to find the hidden "auto" SE GA. We dont have that.
There are Airports that have LVP approaches to a CAT 2 DH that require manual landing with disconnect no later than 80', Johannesburg is one.
Anyway you guys are taking 737 NG and I'm on the 330 so I'll leave you to it.
Anyway you guys are taking 737 NG and I'm on the 330 so I'll leave you to it.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mind you that on a dual channel approach at 400 feet the aircraft will trim nose up. Reverting to manual flight to attempt a landing after this point can be quite a challenge and you are better of going around even when visual.
Due to the up trim, a manual go-around on B737 below 350' will require a significant downwards force on the yoke by the PF.
You need to know what you are doing or you WILL stall and burn.
Anyway a system failure on a CATII or III approach will most of the time lead to a go-around.
So which is it? G/A before 400': G/A after 400' even if visual and avoid the crash & burn stall: continue after 400' to CAT 1 DA - visual- land with all your muscles pushing against the nose up trim? What a drama? In B732 it was a CAT 2 autopilot approach to manual landing. Thus a nose up out of trim A/P disconnect & land was trained. It was no big deal. You controlled the pitch of the a/c with the elevator and pretended you really were a pilot after all. The same would be true if you made a G/A at 100'; the nose up trim would be in force and the A/P would disconnect. You controlled the pitch as per the first scenario. If you feel you can not control the attitude on the EADI/PFD etc. during a IMC G/A or visual landing then perhaps you are in the wrong profession, or should go to the gym more often. Neither of these problems should come as a surprise as you should have pre-weaned yourself, and colleague, before either event. Good pilots are proactive and forewarned. They lead & guide the a/c and do not follow it hanging on to the a bucking bronco.
Due to the up trim, a manual go-around on B737 below 350' will require a significant downwards force on the yoke by the PF.
You need to know what you are doing or you WILL stall and burn.
Anyway a system failure on a CATII or III approach will most of the time lead to a go-around.
So which is it? G/A before 400': G/A after 400' even if visual and avoid the crash & burn stall: continue after 400' to CAT 1 DA - visual- land with all your muscles pushing against the nose up trim? What a drama? In B732 it was a CAT 2 autopilot approach to manual landing. Thus a nose up out of trim A/P disconnect & land was trained. It was no big deal. You controlled the pitch of the a/c with the elevator and pretended you really were a pilot after all. The same would be true if you made a G/A at 100'; the nose up trim would be in force and the A/P would disconnect. You controlled the pitch as per the first scenario. If you feel you can not control the attitude on the EADI/PFD etc. during a IMC G/A or visual landing then perhaps you are in the wrong profession, or should go to the gym more often. Neither of these problems should come as a surprise as you should have pre-weaned yourself, and colleague, before either event. Good pilots are proactive and forewarned. They lead & guide the a/c and do not follow it hanging on to the a bucking bronco.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: A few degrees South
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rat 5: totally agree. Bear in mind that the A/C would not be certificated otherwise.
And then, flying does't seem a required skill anymore. People are following SOP's, learned by heart, blindly.
Scary, in my point of view.
And then, flying does't seem a required skill anymore. People are following SOP's, learned by heart, blindly.
Scary, in my point of view.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@JeroenC, if it is your SOP you have to follow that of course. However it seems that it really just covers up a rather low standard training department, high turnover or both.
Since we do fly every ILS dual channel (if we use autoflight at all), every manual landing could be defined as manual landing from an autoland, it therefore is completely normal procedure, especially with marginal CAT I weather.
Since we do fly every ILS dual channel (if we use autoflight at all), every manual landing could be defined as manual landing from an autoland, it therefore is completely normal procedure, especially with marginal CAT I weather.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...what about including reading and writing in those "superior" skills of yours.
I feel hesitant about rising to the bait of childish comments on a technical subject, but; my skills are NOT 'superior' they are what have been considered the standard norm for 40 years. I don't put them to use any more, but often I and my fellow aviators did on a regular basis. If you didn't have then you could not do the job properly. Times & attitudes have changed, but not necessarily for the better.
And there I leave it.
I feel hesitant about rising to the bait of childish comments on a technical subject, but; my skills are NOT 'superior' they are what have been considered the standard norm for 40 years. I don't put them to use any more, but often I and my fellow aviators did on a regular basis. If you didn't have then you could not do the job properly. Times & attitudes have changed, but not necessarily for the better.
And there I leave it.
