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

Use of FL LVL CH versus TOGA for a B737 go around

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

Use of FL LVL CH versus TOGA for a B737 go around

Old 23rd Feb 2019, 14:03
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 36
Posts: 421
I once used LVL CHG instead of TOGA flying a RNAV approach (with autopilot engaged) at 2000 feet established we were instructed to turn right 90 degrees and climb to 3000 feet, it went very smooth. However I wouldn't use that technique on an ILS or if at a lower altitude.
Jumbo744 is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 14:13
  #22 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's my turn
Posts: 1,709
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
After disconnecting the AP why the blinding hurry to re-select the AP and FD when surely any competent pilot would go "Click Click" and simply hand fly? This would minimize the well known risk of mis-selection of multiple modes? That was the message behind that splendid Children of the Magenta Line briefing, still valid from over 20 years ago.
All well and good until you're with a newbie who's hanging off the elevators anyway. Sticking George in frees up some of their mental capacity allowing them to better monitor and or fly the MA correctly and safely.

Chesty Morgan is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 14:27
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here and there
Posts: 331
All well and good until you're with a newbie who's hanging off the elevators anyway. Sticking George in frees up some of their mental capacity allowing them to better monitor and or fly the MA correctly and safely.
Which brings up the question who certified the "newbie" as competent to be a first officer on line flying when clearly he should be given more simulator training rather than be second in command of an aircraft he is not competent to fly. Captain's incapacitation comes to mind. Using "George" as an excuse to hide lack of flying ability is not the answer..
Judd is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 14:32
  #24 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's my turn
Posts: 1,709
Well that'll be why there's a safety pilot on the jump seat for the first few sectors of line training.

​​​​​​And there's a big difference between the SIM and reality.
Chesty Morgan is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 12:05
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 914
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
After disconnecting the AP why the blinding hurry to re-select the AP and FD when surely any competent pilot would go "Click Click" and simply hand fly? This would minimize the well known risk of mis-selection of multiple modes? That was the message behind that splendid Children of the Magenta Line briefing, still valid from over 20 years ago.
I guess you havenít flown a 737. All go arounds are manual unless you are conducting a dual autopilot approach to autoland, so I donít see your point.

I donít disagree that a competent pilot ought know how to hand fly all flight regimes safely.

But pressing TOGA resets the flight director for goaround, and apart from pitch guidance also provides LNAV goaround guidance to take you around those mountains from the RNP-AR approach you were just doing.

If you were doing an ILS you will still have to either press TOGA or reset NAVís as described.

Hand flying simply because you donít understand the automatics does not make you a competent pilot. In my experience, it tends to makes the situation worse. I can think of a couple of 737 fatalities to support this theory.
Derfred is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 20:05
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 296
I donít fly the 737 these days but do fly another Boeing type. Both of my previous airlines have come extremely close to crashing Boeing, aircraft on two engine go-arounds, probably closer than either airline has ever come to an accident. Both times with pilots with 10+ years on type. To me there are four reasons why this happened

1. The Boeing go-around automation is overly complex, especially when going around at anything other than minima.
2. The FCTM and FCOM are very vague about go-arounds and really only cater for going around at minimums. Given the number of go-around accidents and incidents on Boeing types, you would thing that Boeing, would be all over these issues.
3. Very little training on go-arounds by many airlines other than going around at minimums. Lots of talk about airmanship and hand flying but not much black and white guidance and simulator practice.
4. Very few go arounds flown in a year. My previous airline was doing about one, per airframe, per year.

So, to me it isnít surprising that trainers, train all sorts of things, wires get crossed, pilots get confused, land off unstable approaches because they donít know how to go-around and even crash off go-arounds. Itís all a big training issue. Going around does not seem to be a big issue on Airbus, types.
Fair_Weather_Flyer is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 20:41
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,855
FWF

Much sense in what you say !
beamer is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 20:58
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 783
Going around does not seem to be a big issue on Airbus, types.
Hull losses on G/A's (usually due to modal issues) albeit low are not far off Boeing stats, granted given the recency of some of the Boeing (almost exclusively 737) accidents/incidents it may not seem that way.
flash8 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


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.