But somehow I don't think they would be doing a dive and drive in a widebody in 2013. My only point was that there is nothing on this particular RNAV approach chart that gives you a glide slope, this is not LNAV/VNAV nor is it LPV both of which would give you a slope. |
Many approaches that don't have VNAV/LNAV minimums published, are still encoded in the database....however in FBW bus...(dont know about the A300) it is prohibited to fly these in Final Approach mode...looking at the approach chart posted on Avherald, it sure is a less than optimally designed approach especially if flying the transition from TDG VOR
|
My point was that there is nothing on this particular RNAV approach chart that gives you a glide slope, this is not LNAV/VNAV nor is it LPV both of which would give you a slope. Do you see that [3.24°] notation on the planview chart? Are you familiar with a D-DA? |
Again, you keep referring to "FMS widebody" and I am talking about this approach in general with no particular equipment in mind, clearly there are differences between just LNAV like this one and full LNAV/VNAV, too bad this runway doesn't have it yet. Yeah, I know many FMSs can handle constant angle descents but unfortunately my SR22 can't do it but instead can do LPV which most "widebodies" can't :}. But my G1000 can turn a given LNAV into LNAV+V and give me this desirable glide slope but it ain't guaranteed.
|
Quote: The plane was built in 2003 and had logged about 11,000 hours over 6,800 flights, Airbus said in a statement.
Overnight Cargo - 52 weeks x 5 days x 2 legs a night x 10 years = 5,200 With the short legs these airplanes fly, just about right. Short leg passenger operation - completely different story. So sad for these guys and families of - just another day at work - enjoying (even loving...) what you do and getting a darn good paycheck for doing it - then in an instant - finished. Crap! :ugh: |
This seems surprisingly low. |
Kengineer wrote
Sky news report has a witness saying it was on fire before impact? li battery's again??.... |
Was there any distress call prior to? What kind of approach were they doing?Wx seemed ok. Wait to hear the initial findings before coming up with ANY theory . We were not there!
|
witnesses ALWAYS see a fire before impact...might have been on fire before it hit the hill, as it did impact trees and power lines prior to hitting a hill...LiOn battery fire would have probably generated a Mayday call....who's to know, anyway be sure the FDR and CVR will bear witness to what happened...
|
SMT: . . . which is limited to operating as little as 2 sectors a day. It is ops normal for integrators to have their aircraft standing around all day, and only operate for a handful of hours during the night. Incredible how it can be made to pay. In the early days of Britannia's 737 operation, a Texas Boeing salesman told me they had the highest utilization in the world - some 19.something per 24. I found that incredible in the opposite direction. Low utilization seems to imply there might be a lot of pressure to get those packages accepted and on their way. Why am I getting a bad feeling about this? Not the tragic loss of this one, but for a basic principals. Sitting on the flight-deck watching the night activities in freight hubs is a real eye-opener. |
Staggeringly unhelpful graphic published by FlightAware (who really should know better) purporting to show the final radar plot of the aircraft's position amid the KC-135 tankers on the 106th ARW's ramp, just to the NW of runway 06/24 :ugh:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRn-43rCYAAr1ig.jpg:large |
Originally Posted by Airbubba
Step down fixes are not on the final profile path on many approaches. And even if they are, non-standard temperature can cause them to be above the extended profile. The feds have been harping on this in recent years, here is a discussion for ILS approaches, it is a similar situation for non-precision approaches with vertical path guidance:
I can see no technical reason why a distance/altitude profile could not be published for this and other NPAs, as they are in other parts of the world: http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...ASVO01-135.pdf
Originally Posted by olasek
Yeah, I know many FMSs can handle constant angle descents but unfortunately my SR22 can't do it but instead can do LPV which most "widebodies" can't . But my G1000 can turn a given LNAV into LNAV+V and give me this desirable glide slope but it ain't guaranteed.
|
You are free to do what you like in your bugsmasher |
I would think most airlines are using constant-rate descents on non-precision approaches. Most charts in the US have a ROD table based on ground speed whereby you figure an initial descent rate and modify it if g/s changes or a restriction will not be met, using the VNAV information for advisory. (Don't get me wrong, this can be tricky)
Adding 50' to the MDA, you would miss the approach if you were either not in a position to land stably, or you simply did not see the requisite lights or runway environ. Some airlines call it "CANPA". Constant-Angle NPA. It works rather well in practice. I can't see doing a dive and drive method in this day and age, but I do not know what UPS does or did. |
Originally Posted by Bugg smasher
I beg your pardon? You are starting to sound like my wife...
Originally Posted by FIRESYSOK
Most charts in the US have a ROD table based on ground speed whereby you figure an initial descent rate and modify it if g/s changes or a restriction will not be met, using the VNAV information for advisory. (Don't get me wrong, this can be tricky)
|
Yes sir. In the US dive and drive is all but extinct for 121 carriers. Typical is to add 50' to the MDA and treat that new altitude as a DA. Calculate a vertical speed to use from the FAF and make small adjustments to V/S as necessary for the proper path and step downs if applicable. Much much better. Works great.
|
Dive and Drive
In the US, dive and drive was the preferred method of NPA. That said, I have no idea how UPS operates their NPA and will not try to speculate.
There is no proper VNAV on the A306 and the profile mode is generally not reliable enough to use for more than the initial stepdown in an arrival. Any changes and it goes tango uniform. It is certainly not a FBW modern airbus. Has anyone ever seen an aircraft crash that didn't include Cletus and Maude talking about "backfiring engines", abnormal configurations and "explosions and fire" prior to impact? How many times has a witness actually said "it all looked normal"? And how many people were up before dawn watching UPS land? :ugh: |
Good analysis of UPS 1354 accident
Like their Asiana 214 analysis, Sooeet did a new analysis for UPS 1354, including nice plots of position and airspeed. It's darned good, check it out:
What Happened to UPS Flight 1354 - Analysis by Sooeet.com |
So far there have been no reports of anyone hearing engines spooling up.
If they were doing 190KTS less than 1 nm out, the fact that no go around was attempted (or was successful) suggests that they were dealing with problems other than simply a 'messed up' approach. |
why not wait till the preliminary comes out? the engines could just as likely have been at idle.
pointless speculating either way, the NTSB will get the report out as soon as they can. best we can hope for that the FAA will get a move on in changing their rediculous FTL's in the USA. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:58. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.