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

Arming both ap for approach

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

Arming both ap for approach

Old 20th Feb 2016, 12:31
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Birmingham
Age: 35
Posts: 143
Arming both ap for approach

Hello folks,

Regarding arming the autopilot for approach: why do we arm both autopilots for a normal cat I approach? On the 737 we always flew with the pf autopilot the ils. So is it because we could forget it?Or any technical reason?
Thanks!!
Speedwinner is offline  
Old 20th Feb 2016, 12:37
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 850
I don't know for which aircraft are you asking but on 737 if you arm both AP for approach, you get quite a bit of nose-up trim at ~ 400ft RA to help the aircraft with flare in autoland and could come as a nasty surprise as you disconnect the autopilot at Cat 1 minima in marginal weather for manual landing. I believe this is the reason why most operators choose to fly ILS approaches with only one autopilot unless conducting autoland.
FlyingStone is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 03:10
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,921
For the 737 Classics anyway there was never a Boeing requirement to use both AP for a Cat 1 ILS. It was two autopilots only for an autoland which is not required for a Cat 1. Some chief pilots are very fond of publishing their own particular egos in company operations manuals. Sounds like the problem exists in your operation.
Centaurus is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 04:03
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ...
Posts: 3,789
Because that is standard Airbus factory sop.
737Jock is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 05:59
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NAT
Age: 36
Posts: 68
At least on the classic 737 fleet, flying the ILS with 2 APs will give you the chance to do a go around with autopilot. So must guys that fly ILS with the 2 APs do so to reduce workload in case of a go around, it wasn't a SOP on my previous outfit but rather a personal choice.


Cheers
Capt. Flamingo is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 07:46
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 3,976
It was a SOP in the airlines i have flown the 737, both the classic and the NG. Originally the reason given was to prevent an aileron hardover, a few of which happened before that SOP was introduced. But of course the easier auto-go around is another reason. And of course, the only chance for an FO to fly an autoland was during CAT I conditions, which is an approved procedure.
Denti is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 09:48
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Here and there
Posts: 340
But of course the easier auto-go around is another reason

What could be more simpler for the average pilot than an all engines manual GA? No chance of an aileron hard-over there. After all, a one engine inoperative GA is flown manually so what's all the sweat about a two engine manual GA? You don't need a flight director for either. Unless of course one is the victim of automation addiction.
Judd is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 09:52
  #8 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's my turn
Posts: 1,709
What could be simpler? Pressing one button.
Chesty Morgan is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 11:01
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 3,976
After all, a one engine inoperative GA is flown manually
Why? I mean, automatic go around is available in a one engine inoperative scenario, same as autoland to CAT IIIa standards.

And yes, of course a dual engine go around is simple enough to fly without any help, but is very rarely trained and very uncommon in normal flight operation. And then, it is not that simple anymore if the last time you did it was 10 years ago during your initial type rating...
Denti is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2016, 12:03
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,509
I'm curious why Speedwinner asks the question on here and not to the in-house training dept. When the answer is given please inform us; plus was type you are on. It always help to be complete with the specific type in questions.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 03:30
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Birmingham
Age: 35
Posts: 143
Sorry! A320! Have been on the 737 and now 320
Speedwinner is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 03:38
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,035
not recommended in the FCTM or mentioned for a normal cat 1.

would be hesitant to do it.

views?
Pin Head is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 09:37
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: France
Posts: 168
not recommended in the FCTM or mentioned for a normal cat 1.

would be hesitant to do it.

views?
Again...on which type?
seen_the_box is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 11:57
  #14 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Birmingham
Age: 35
Posts: 143
So the goal of my question was: why do we arm on a a320 Airbus aircraft both ap in a cat1 approach?
Speedwinner is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 12:55
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 389
Pure guess here...so shoot me down....haven't looked it up....(A320 related by the way)

Could it be so that in the case of an FMGC failure (FMS), and one AP 'kicks out', that we automatically have a downgrade from CAT 3 DUAL, to CAT 1 using the remaining AP (1 or 2) and still able to continue the auto flight regime down to CAT 1 minima....

I'll get my coat lol....

F/o

Last edited by First.officer; 22nd Feb 2016 at 12:56. Reason: Added the A320 bit!
First.officer is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 13:51
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,249
What defines a "classic" 737? Seems like that would be the old clunker that had only one primitive auto-pilot. I never flew any model of the 737 but I did fly the 727. It had a lousy auto-pilot. Then, the advanced 727 came along with a slightly less lousy auto-pilot that was supposedly good for limited CAT III with a DA. It didn't auto-land. It just flared (sort of).
aterpster is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 14:10
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ???
Posts: 233
classic = 737-300/400/500 series.

it has an advanced autopilot capable of autoland, unlike the original series 737-100/200
InSoMnIaC is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 14:18
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,035
BOEING 737 NG
Pin Head is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 16:33
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mercer Island WA
Posts: 139
Follow the FCOM and company policy.

Follow the FCOM and company policy.

In the NG it is virtually always best to use the best and full protection of the AP which is derived from using FAIL OP (with EDFCS) or dual channel FAIL PASSIVE for pre-EDFCS APs without LAND 3 capability.

The failure tolerance and protection against AP anomalies is vastly superior when using the best AP mode possible, which is achieved by using both APs.

Bottom line is follow the FCOM and company policy.

On the NG, ...EDFCS with using either LAND 3, or LAND 2 is an amazing robust system... and even the earlier dual-channel Fail Passive system was quite good.
7478ti is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2016, 20:55
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: My views - Not my employer!
Posts: 989
Fairly sure I have been in a -200 (jurassic BTW...) for a Cat III autoland.

As for A320, I don't think it matters for CAT I conditions. However, if you arm both for every approach, muscle memory means you'll arm both when it counts (real CAT IIIb conditions...)

This discussion becomes rather irrelevant in more modern Boeings...
Cough is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

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