Airbus FLS Mode
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 2,997
Likes: 35
From: Oztrailia
Capn Bloggs:
Try this link. Go directly to page 38 for FLS description.
http://www.dream-air.ru/new/pilotam/NON-PREC-APPR.pdf
Try this link. Go directly to page 38 for FLS description.
http://www.dream-air.ru/new/pilotam/NON-PREC-APPR.pdf
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
From: uk
Currently standard on A380 & A350, optional on others. Only available/certified for 320 since 2010 and there are some specific equipment requirements, so I imagine that operators with fleets that don't (all) meet the requirements will have choosen not to (retro)fit.
Guest
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
From: On the Beach
BTW, this RNP AR IAP does not meet FAA RNP AR criteria because the DA is in a turn (still in the last RF leg). Thus, it is a special only for those operators who have specific training in this procedure. At one time that was only Jet Blue. Don't know about today.
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,563
Likes: 35
From: I wouldn't know.
Not according to the Link provided by ACMS above. GLS does not necessarily need a database coding as the approach geometry is transmitted on the selected channel and decoded and compared against the corrected GPS position in space in the MMR and the result shown as normal ILS position. FLS seems to use a FMS database coded procedure to construct an ILS lookalike lateral and vertical path. In that it is very much like IAN which uses a FMC database coded NPA for the same thing.
And of course GLS approaches are "just" normal precision approaches, albeit currently only approved to CAT I although they have been tested to CAT IIIb with very good results. Accordingly, autoland is possible from that. No idea if FLS allows autoland, boeing IAN, at least in the 737, on NPAs levels off at 100ft and an autocallout "AUTOPILOT" reminds one to disconnect the autopilot.
And of course GLS approaches are "just" normal precision approaches, albeit currently only approved to CAT I although they have been tested to CAT IIIb with very good results. Accordingly, autoland is possible from that. No idea if FLS allows autoland, boeing IAN, at least in the 737, on NPAs levels off at 100ft and an autocallout "AUTOPILOT" reminds one to disconnect the autopilot.
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 48
From: sincity
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 32
From: France
Integrated Approach Navigation. A way of flying an NPA with lateral and vertical guidance. Like FINAL APP in the Airbus.
Lateral mode is “FAC” (Final Approach Course);
Vertical mode is “GP” (Glide Path).
Provided that the final approach (from the FAF to the MAPt) is a straight line, we can use IAN by loading the approach from the FMC and using the “LOC/FAC” button on the MCP to capture the FAC, then the “APP” button to capture the GP.
The PFD/HUD displays pointers (triangles) to show FAC and GP deviations, like an ILS (which uses diamond-shaped deviation pointers).
For a LOC only approach, you can use “LOC” and “GP”, instead of “FAC” and “GP”.
In that case the lateral pointer will be a diamond and the vertical pointer will be a triangle.
Lateral mode is “FAC” (Final Approach Course);
Vertical mode is “GP” (Glide Path).
Provided that the final approach (from the FAF to the MAPt) is a straight line, we can use IAN by loading the approach from the FMC and using the “LOC/FAC” button on the MCP to capture the FAC, then the “APP” button to capture the GP.
The PFD/HUD displays pointers (triangles) to show FAC and GP deviations, like an ILS (which uses diamond-shaped deviation pointers).
For a LOC only approach, you can use “LOC” and “GP”, instead of “FAC” and “GP”.
In that case the lateral pointer will be a diamond and the vertical pointer will be a triangle.
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,563
Likes: 35
From: I wouldn't know.
In the 737NG i was flying there was actually no difference at all to the ILS display, same diamonds display. And the same behavior, the pointers became more sensitive the closer one was to the runway. The display was not dependent on the FD being on, so flying an approach manually without FD in a way similar to raw data based on the IAN pointers was possible. Only downside were the frequent GPWS „GLIDESLOPE“ callouts, as the computed vertical glide path is based on baro information it often was off on short final. Which shouldn’t matter as below DA one has to fly visually anyway, but the path is computed until 50 ft AGL and can trigger GPWS warnings. Only difference for LOC was the FMA, which showed LOC/GP instead of FAC/GP.
In my view therefore quite different to the old FINAL APP on the airbus, but probably very similar to FLS. Not to mention that FINAL APP is not available for LOC/BC approaches on the minibus.
Now, i stopped flying boeing three years ago, so there might have been changes in the meantime of course. Avionics wise the A320 was a step back in time, as an everyday office i prefer it.
In my view therefore quite different to the old FINAL APP on the airbus, but probably very similar to FLS. Not to mention that FINAL APP is not available for LOC/BC approaches on the minibus.
Now, i stopped flying boeing three years ago, so there might have been changes in the meantime of course. Avionics wise the A320 was a step back in time, as an everyday office i prefer it.
