High On Final?
Another aspect of this wiffodill is that I bet it wasn't done using the FMS. CFITs have reduced markedly because of GPWS and database approaches. In this case, where the crew or ATC has already ballsed-up the arrival, they are setting themselves up for an even bigger ballsup doing orbits to get down to the glideslope. And no, gittyiigtitiy, I don't have magenta skin and I'm quite happy to fly around in HDG and VS; just not in this scenario.
Only half a speed-brake
CB, you comment as if the 360 actually took place, and not in an appropriate manner. Do you have any leads in that regard?
I found nothing here:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls1247
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls657
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls123
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls215
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls1415
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls983
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls519
@giggity please check lingo. Radar Service (Contact) means very differently from Radar Vectors. I fell under the impression you may have interchanged the two recently? The difference between those - in this particular discussion - is essential.
I found nothing here:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls1247
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls657
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls123
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls215
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls1415
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls983
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ls519
@giggity please check lingo. Radar Service (Contact) means very differently from Radar Vectors. I fell under the impression you may have interchanged the two recently? The difference between those - in this particular discussion - is essential.
The difference between a 360 turn, (or two consecutive 180’s or four consecutive 90’s), and a hold of course is that with a hold you get an outbound one minute straight leg to adjust your tracking (3 x inbound drift) to allow for crosswind, placing you in the right position to roll out correctly on the inbound track. This will help you make sure you are where you think you are.
A manual 360 rate one turn does not give you this opportunity for tracking compensation, so the risk is that you might drift over to the non-holding side?
Having said that, if you press ‘Immediate exit’ on the FMGC having just flown over the fix, the Airbus FBW FCOM says it will exit the hold when next overflying the fix, and the diagram shows what looks like a 360 turn. So presumably it compensates for wind drift when doing this - by adjusting bank angle? If flying a 360 using heading mode, I guess this compensation would not occur?
I have flown this approach into Bodrum quite a few times and you had to watch very carefully where ATC vectored you.
A manual 360 rate one turn does not give you this opportunity for tracking compensation, so the risk is that you might drift over to the non-holding side?
Having said that, if you press ‘Immediate exit’ on the FMGC having just flown over the fix, the Airbus FBW FCOM says it will exit the hold when next overflying the fix, and the diagram shows what looks like a 360 turn. So presumably it compensates for wind drift when doing this - by adjusting bank angle? If flying a 360 using heading mode, I guess this compensation would not occur?
I have flown this approach into Bodrum quite a few times and you had to watch very carefully where ATC vectored you.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 59
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Squered
Now , my good Man , You are starting to scare me. That is if You are in the left seat in anything with more then one seat, in IMC!?
.
Your first quote of me was brilliant : I say, hypothetical error made
: And yes , it is likely it was made at high speed to loose altitude, we dont know. IF it was over 185kts busted protected area , most likely.
How do I adjust TRACK in a rasetrack: Depends, Seneca , Time Twist Turn Track,( Talk?) QDM QDR.
Magenta line AC. Check it is CORRECT and LNAV.
Kind Regards
Old and Hairy
Cĺpt B
.
Your first quote of me was brilliant : I say, hypothetical error made
: And yes , it is likely it was made at high speed to loose altitude, we dont know. IF it was over 185kts busted protected area , most likely.
How do I adjust TRACK in a rasetrack: Depends, Seneca , Time Twist Turn Track,( Talk?) QDM QDR.
Magenta line AC. Check it is CORRECT and LNAV.
Kind Regards
Old and Hairy
Cĺpt B
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 5° above the Equator, 75° left of Greenwich
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thought of "why the need for such sentence" is rather chilling. It means somebody probably tried, and the company should be lucky not learn from the news.
The 360 is not the problem. The height loss through the turn and the position where executed could be, if ignorant of the underlying safe altitude limits. I said before my first picture: the chart provides enough information to execute a 360 in an organized and well-controlled manner. Exactly that. Adding now: execute both safely and legally, definitely at least the first of the two. Fair enough, on the other side of the ring: The terrain, high temps, wind aloft, and GS angle ALSO provide for a mine-field battleground, where a stupid 360 would turn into an Air Crash Investigators episode faster than one can say "Sink-Rate".
The 360 is not the problem. The height loss through the turn and the position where executed could be, if ignorant of the underlying safe altitude limits. I said before my first picture: the chart provides enough information to execute a 360 in an organized and well-controlled manner. Exactly that. Adding now: execute both safely and legally, definitely at least the first of the two. Fair enough, on the other side of the ring: The terrain, high temps, wind aloft, and GS angle ALSO provide for a mine-field battleground, where a stupid 360 would turn into an Air Crash Investigators episode faster than one can say "Sink-Rate".
Yes, going to the hold would be safer (by doing something published) but I agree with FD, if done properly, taking care of the conditions that affect the manoeuvre (speed limit, safe altitude to descend, not going over to the non-holding side, doing it on the correct distance markers), I can't see anything unsafe with the 360.
I will agree with BSU in that speed is a doubt considering they were high. They would need to have the limit in check otherwise they'd surely miss the protected area.
Gender Faculty Specialist
Are all you naysayers just assuming the heading bug was wanged around without due regard to the wind or position?
Perhaps a small amount of credit might be given for a bit or airmanship and the 360 was completed to ensure they stayed within the protected hold area by adjusting the heading and, therefore, the rate of turn accordingly.
Either way way you’d have to actually know how and what rather than just pontificating from a position which lacks actual knowledge of the event.
Perhaps a small amount of credit might be given for a bit or airmanship and the 360 was completed to ensure they stayed within the protected hold area by adjusting the heading and, therefore, the rate of turn accordingly.
Either way way you’d have to actually know how and what rather than just pontificating from a position which lacks actual knowledge of the event.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly. Like assuming that they did exceed the published holding speed, despite there being no evidence that they did.
Capn. Blogs
That's different: the ATC is actively controlling you. It's his job to keep you clear of terrain.
Two hull loses in Rio and a mid air at montpellier..
Only half a speed-brake
Besides, FR24 has no record of any such 360 taking place. The links I posted above show the history of all J2 city pairs that go to Bodrum/Milas, the only exciting thing to see is that one lucky flight did land on 10.
Only half a speed-brake
CB: thanks for correcting. For the RACE-TRACK.
------
Unconnected to the above correction of terminology, the last chart missing that a pilot would have:
------
Unconnected to the above correction of terminology, the last chart missing that a pilot would have:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: MAN
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS you'll enjoy this - come check the chart with me. 185 kt is the restriction for race-track reversal procedure. The holding pattern published over the same position has no speed restrictions at all: so max IAS 280 knots in turbulent conditions is perfectly fine. Allowance for wind mandatory, indeed.
Besides, FR24 has no record of any such 360 taking place. The links I posted above show the history of all J2 city pairs that go to Bodrum/Milas, the only exciting thing to see is that one lucky flight did land on 10.
Besides, FR24 has no record of any such 360 taking place. The links I posted above show the history of all J2 city pairs that go to Bodrum/Milas, the only exciting thing to see is that one lucky flight did land on 10.
It happened, its not an IFR procedure, its not acceptable. I may proceed with CHIRP to get the issue brought into the minds of all Pilots. The CAA and UKFSC continues to provide zero leadership. Thanks to the more professional contributors
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: where I lay my hat
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
. holding pattern published over the same position has no speed restrictions at all: so max IAS 280 knots
All academic discussion of course. No aspersions cast!
Only half a speed-brake
Dogma, please do. Especially if it happened on the final approach stage, as you may have suggested by the title of the thread.
Also please read my sentence again. Saying there's no record of a flight with an orbit on that public, open data, website - which I certainly did, is very different from what you label me with. Show a pair, give us the date. You had the resolve to name the airline.
If it happened on a shortened base, under vectors above MRVA 5600' it is perfectly fine,
If it happened on the intermediate segment, over the published RACETRACK and NATKU HP(160°L MHA 6000') under severe CAVOK of the last month - different people different tastes, but still fine. (you never said unsafe, that's well observed!)
midnight cruiser: Comment noted, PANS-OPS VOL I table I-6-1-1 reviewed for the second time, which is where the number comes from, i.a.w. the "3" index note. Irrelevant to the thread, though I went un-necessarily far for that point.
About the distance limits: I think we may not be seeing the same HLDG in our respective paperwork. Cheers.
I'd still love to see Jepp / Navtech for that approach. Curious how the vertical profile and MNM altitudes are presented.
Also please read my sentence again. Saying there's no record of a flight with an orbit on that public, open data, website - which I certainly did, is very different from what you label me with. Show a pair, give us the date. You had the resolve to name the airline.
If it happened on a shortened base, under vectors above MRVA 5600' it is perfectly fine,
If it happened on the intermediate segment, over the published RACETRACK and NATKU HP(160°L MHA 6000') under severe CAVOK of the last month - different people different tastes, but still fine. (you never said unsafe, that's well observed!)
midnight cruiser: Comment noted, PANS-OPS VOL I table I-6-1-1 reviewed for the second time, which is where the number comes from, i.a.w. the "3" index note. Irrelevant to the thread, though I went un-necessarily far for that point.
About the distance limits: I think we may not be seeing the same HLDG in our respective paperwork. Cheers.
I'd still love to see Jepp / Navtech for that approach. Curious how the vertical profile and MNM altitudes are presented.
Last edited by FlightDetent; 29th Aug 2018 at 17:47. Reason: shortened for clarity; removed "professional" until I learn to spell it right
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: N5109.2W10.5
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd still love to see Jepp / Navtech for that approach.
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Uk
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you’ve been left high, it would be good airmanship to ask for some extra track miles in order to lose the height. All about anticipation too. Failing this enter the hold - at least you are at a known position.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How often have you been told to hold at the IAF and then, almost immediately "Hold is cancelled, continue the turn onto a heading of..."
What's the difference?
Indeed, I’ll merely offer a general example sometimes heard at somewhere known to be protective of it’s holding airspace “ON reaching XXX, do one orbit, then leave XXX on a heading of”..
(oh, a belated answer to a question somebody asked: yes, ever since 1978...got my first examiners ticket in ‘ 86)
(oh, a belated answer to a question somebody asked: yes, ever since 1978...got my first examiners ticket in ‘ 86)