For single engine approach for NPA in A320
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2023
Location: none
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For single engine approach for NPA in A320
Is that must be in landing configuration before pass the FAF in NPA？What is SOP said in your company?
If so, means that only use CONF 3 in NPA?
If so, means that only use CONF 3 in NPA?
If no level off expected during final approach, delay CONFIG FULL until established on final descent. If a level of is expected, use CONF 3. This isn't specific to NPAs and whether you used CONF FULL or CONF 3 would depend on exactly how the approach was coded.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem in OEI is with selecting flap full in level flight i.e. at platform altitude. It has too much drag, the thrust will go to MCT causing problems with directional control and maintaining speed. So if landing in full the final flap should only be selected once established in final descent. Second problem could be with the NPA having step down descent. In that case obviously flaps to be maintained at three till the level step and then it's too late to change configuration so just land in Flap3.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: United States of Europe
Age: 40
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You’re missing the point, you need to adapt to the context of the situation to achieve the safest outcome. Which is possible while balancing the different requirements.
There are three requirements that have to be considered and balanced, different weightage depending on the operational/environmental context. (e.g.: OEI 2D approach, OVW, ISA+30)
1. There is no requirement to fly a 2D approach with an Early Stabilized approach speed technique. ref: FCOM/PRO/NOR/SOP/Approach/Approach General/Approach Speed Technique. Nowhere it is mentioned that the crew should or must opt for an early stabilized approach, nor is it necessarily recommended. Early Stabilized approach may be beneficial under certain conditions in order to improve vertical guidance and/or to manage the workload more effectively - but never at the expense of safety.
3. ref: FCTM/PRO/AEP/ENG/One Engine Inoperative Landing:
There are three requirements that have to be considered and balanced, different weightage depending on the operational/environmental context. (e.g.: OEI 2D approach, OVW, ISA+30)
1. There is no requirement to fly a 2D approach with an Early Stabilized approach speed technique. ref: FCOM/PRO/NOR/SOP/Approach/Approach General/Approach Speed Technique. Nowhere it is mentioned that the crew should or must opt for an early stabilized approach, nor is it necessarily recommended. Early Stabilized approach may be beneficial under certain conditions in order to improve vertical guidance and/or to manage the workload more effectively - but never at the expense of safety.
“EARLY STABILIZED APPROACH
Under certain circumstances, the flight crew may decide to reduce the speed down to VAPP in the landing configuration at the Final Descent Point (i.e. approach via selected guidance, high glide path angle, low altitude intermediate approach, etc.). In order to obtain a valuable deceleration pseudo waypoint and to ensure a timely deceleration, the flight crew should enter VAPP as a speed constraint at the Final Descent Point.”
2. ref: QRH One Engine Inoperative - Straight In Approach does not imply an early stabilized approach, rather supporting the notion that Flaps Full should not be selected in level flight before or after the FDP for performance reasons. But this doesn’t mean you should be dragging the aircraft in level flight with L/G down @ Flaps 3 unnecessarily. (see 3)3. ref: FCTM/PRO/AEP/ENG/One Engine Inoperative Landing:
“With flap selected and above this threshold value, the indicator becomes the blue beta target. This is a visual cue that the aircraft is approaching its maximum thrust capability.
The flight crew should not select the gear down too early, as large amounts of power will be required to maintain level flight at high weights and/or high altitude airports.”
Now add Overweight and ISA+XX to increase the complexity and reduce the performance margins, and you’ll see that you cannot have a dogmatic prescribed model on how to configure your aircraft - you need some adaptation and flexibility.Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: United States of Europe
Age: 40
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear SB,
You are completely right. Missed that paragraph… thanks!
In any case the same message stands: we cannot look at things in isolation. The notion of delaying the L/G still stands.
Brgds
You are completely right. Missed that paragraph… thanks!
In any case the same message stands: we cannot look at things in isolation. The notion of delaying the L/G still stands.
Brgds
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What it means is with OEI on ILS or fully managed NPA decelerating approach can be considered but without vertical guidance not recommended.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: At home
Age: 42
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
