steep approach?
steep approach?
Guest
Posts: n/a
DT-I am curious as to why you ask?
Anyway I doubt If you will find anyone flying fare paying punters who would even consider it.The best I have been able to do was in a modified BAe J41 into London City max at 7nm 4,200 aal.Even then we had to intercept the glideslope fully configured to land at minimum approach speed;10 knots fast = go around as you could not get the speed off.
In my Emb 145 a ROD >3,100' is more than three times what I could accept for an approach,several reasons.
1 Not enough drag producing devices to prevent rapid increase in speed,beyond flap limiting speed.
2 Engines would have to be at flight idle and the spool up time would prevent a safe go around from anywhere below 500'
3 GPWS would pop it's circuit breaker as it wanted to tell you terrain,pull up,sink rate and glideslope from 2,000' onwards.
4 Even upper air you dont exceed 3,000'/min as the pressurisation system can't restrict the cabin rate of change to less than 650'/min.
5 Most importantly,in a swept wing a/c this would be little more than a controlled crash.The angle of attack required to arrest such a descent would be horrific.The only time you are going to use this kind of landing technique is if you all your engines quit.
Anyway I doubt If you will find anyone flying fare paying punters who would even consider it.The best I have been able to do was in a modified BAe J41 into London City max at 7nm 4,200 aal.Even then we had to intercept the glideslope fully configured to land at minimum approach speed;10 knots fast = go around as you could not get the speed off.
In my Emb 145 a ROD >3,100' is more than three times what I could accept for an approach,several reasons.
1 Not enough drag producing devices to prevent rapid increase in speed,beyond flap limiting speed.
2 Engines would have to be at flight idle and the spool up time would prevent a safe go around from anywhere below 500'
3 GPWS would pop it's circuit breaker as it wanted to tell you terrain,pull up,sink rate and glideslope from 2,000' onwards.
4 Even upper air you dont exceed 3,000'/min as the pressurisation system can't restrict the cabin rate of change to less than 650'/min.
5 Most importantly,in a swept wing a/c this would be little more than a controlled crash.The angle of attack required to arrest such a descent would be horrific.The only time you are going to use this kind of landing technique is if you all your engines quit.
Guest
Posts: n/a
DT,
Don't know if you're meaning an IFR app or VFR/visual, but acc to PANSOPS the steepest grad for a non prec app is 6,5% ie 65 m/1000 m. Serious consideration about the terrain has to be taken on tough.
[This message has been edited by askop (edited 15 May 2001).]
Don't know if you're meaning an IFR app or VFR/visual, but acc to PANSOPS the steepest grad for a non prec app is 6,5% ie 65 m/1000 m. Serious consideration about the terrain has to be taken on tough.
[This message has been edited by askop (edited 15 May 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Any Gulfstream 1 drivers out there? 
I've heard it bandied about that you could supposedly cross any outer marker at 6000' above the airport elevation with a G1 and still land straight in. The technique was to get the aircraft in the landing configuration, cross the marker and stall it, and ride down to about five hundred feet AGL in the stalled condition. At 500' add power to break the stall and land normally. I never had the balls to do it except in the sim. Worked great. Musta been one helluva ride in the real thing.
The airport here used to have an NDB at 12.7 nm from the ILS runway threshold. You could cross that at 9000' at 290 KIAS with the G1 and make a beautiful approach without touching the power levers once, except on roundout, if the conditions were right. You'd set the power at 100 lb torque, cross the beacon at 290 clean and throw out the speed brakes. At 215 kt add takeoff flap, at 190 throw out the gear, 165 approach flap and finally full flap at 140. If you did everything right, the last 500' or so was at 120 and all you did was a nice normal landing. No bad for a nearly fifty year old airplane.
I've heard it bandied about that you could supposedly cross any outer marker at 6000' above the airport elevation with a G1 and still land straight in. The technique was to get the aircraft in the landing configuration, cross the marker and stall it, and ride down to about five hundred feet AGL in the stalled condition. At 500' add power to break the stall and land normally. I never had the balls to do it except in the sim. Worked great. Musta been one helluva ride in the real thing.The airport here used to have an NDB at 12.7 nm from the ILS runway threshold. You could cross that at 9000' at 290 KIAS with the G1 and make a beautiful approach without touching the power levers once, except on roundout, if the conditions were right. You'd set the power at 100 lb torque, cross the beacon at 290 clean and throw out the speed brakes. At 215 kt add takeoff flap, at 190 throw out the gear, 165 approach flap and finally full flap at 140. If you did everything right, the last 500' or so was at 120 and all you did was a nice normal landing. No bad for a nearly fifty year old airplane.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I used to use a convenient techique at an airport with nasty turbulence (due to some big hills) on the 733. Turbulence normally started below around 6000 feet. Track was aligned with the crosswind leg. Descent terminated crosswind centreline at about 10000 feet ... then the aircraft was slowed down .... descent on downwind progressively slowly and reconfiguring ... turn base gear down and flap 25 .... spin up and landing flap ... once the aircraft was slow and dirty ...1 to 1.5 miles per thousand resulted without any real difficulty. Similar procedure worked well on the Electra .. except you needed power to maintain a mile a thousand ...
Guest
Posts: n/a
This sound like twin otter territoy,
For the twin Otter not a problem 7K at 7nm, once did a beta decent from 10k at 1dme to the keys and not a problem but not really pax friendly.
Dash7 can do pretty well, and have seen some of the crash 8 guys in png do some pretty neat flying as well.
Why do you ask?
For the twin Otter not a problem 7K at 7nm, once did a beta decent from 10k at 1dme to the keys and not a problem but not really pax friendly.
Dash7 can do pretty well, and have seen some of the crash 8 guys in png do some pretty neat flying as well.
Why do you ask?
Guest
Posts: n/a
thanx for all the info.....
international hog driver-there is a rumour going around that the authorities have issued such a restriction for approaches from the east ie. 30 and 26 due to unfriendly terrain below......
not that it's such a big problem since most landings are straight in to 12 from the sea.
I just wanted to hear your responce to this.
again-cheers for the help
DT
international hog driver-there is a rumour going around that the authorities have issued such a restriction for approaches from the east ie. 30 and 26 due to unfriendly terrain below......
not that it's such a big problem since most landings are straight in to 12 from the sea.
I just wanted to hear your responce to this.
again-cheers for the help
DT
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'll let you do the figures, but in a B733 at a medium landing weight in flap 40 landing configuration, a ROD of 2300 fpm can be achieved without the speed increasing past 150 knots. During a VMC day I see no reason why this wouldn't work in the 733.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Guest
Posts: n/a
Would like to hear if there are A319 drivers with IAE engines who would like to comment. Speaking Bar talk (not legal!) the 319 doen't like sitting on a 3deg glide, let alone any steeper. Along with the inability to land full flap in gusty conditions, I would be curious for their opinion.
CCCc....ough
CCCc....ough
Guest
Posts: n/a
Flight Safety,
Your quite correct that the possibility of the parameters not always being right exists, there is however a normal manuevre called a Go Around of which I certainly would not hesitate executing if the approach was turning pear shaped.
[This message has been edited by Ellion (edited 17 May 2001).]
Your quite correct that the possibility of the parameters not always being right exists, there is however a normal manuevre called a Go Around of which I certainly would not hesitate executing if the approach was turning pear shaped.
[This message has been edited by Ellion (edited 17 May 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
This would mean 2100fpm until touchdown..."we apologize for driving your spines through the top of your skulls...Welcome to Heathrow!"
Personally I would advocate telling whoever was trying to convince me to do it to get a reality check...
P.S. A "Beta" approach? I wouldn't tell that story in an interview....
Personally I would advocate telling whoever was trying to convince me to do it to get a reality check...
P.S. A "Beta" approach? I wouldn't tell that story in an interview....
Guest
Posts: n/a
That happens very often at AGA. You are told to fly to the 8 DME east fix at 4000ft for possible hold. Over the fix you get the approach clearence to complete the straight in ILS... no problem,if you are in landing configuration and VMC on a 737-400 and -800. But there is still the option to request a threesixty. Then you have a stabilzed approach and no panic. By the way, itīs very comfortable for the payload.
