Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another Fun Youtube

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    I'm 100% sure that the whining noise (weep) that is heard immediately before the "speedbrakes up" call is the speedbrakes lever moving automatically from auto to full.

    Perhaps the speedbrakes deployed when the right gear touched down, and that's why we can still see some roll after that.
    Solved.

    Maybe the right main hit first and the left main and nose gear hit at almost the same time. Sort of a roll-derotation...

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Evan View Post
      Maybe the right main hit first and the left main and nose gear hit at almost the same time.
      Well, that's sort of similar to what I've said: "right main first, and then left and nose together".

      Sort of a roll-derotation...
      Also called "derollation"

      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by 3WE View Post
        By some definitions being grossly not aligned with the runway and making big turns to align below 500 or 1000 ft is not a stabilized approach...(...)

        Still, some approaches can only be performed like that... Funchal, Juneau, runway 19 at Washington-National, runway 13R at JFK... and obviously Samos, Greece...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
          Still, some approaches can only be performed like that... Funchal, Juneau, runway 19 at Washington-National, runway 13R at JFK... and obviously Samos, Greece...
          I think we are in agreement- there are approaches that are other than 5 mile 3 degree and straight in. They require good piloting but are executed with a high level of precision and safety.

          This contrasts with the situation of a straight in approach being declared unstabilized because you are making a 20 degree bank to line up below 500 feet.
          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by 3WE View Post
            I think we are in agreement- there are approaches that are other than 5 mile 3 degree and straight in. They require good piloting but are executed with a high level of precision and safety.

            This contrasts with the situation of a straight in approach being declared unstabilized because you are making a 20 degree bank to line up below 500 feet.
            I think that the key is not the straight in part, but that the pilot is able to keep the plane on the desired 4D track (2D top view, descent profile and speed) with only reasonably small corrections.

            If the approach needs to be of 6.5 deg slope like London City, or if it needs to be a curved approach, then let it be.

            Now, if the pilot needs to do an "unscheduled" 2000fpm descent because he was too high, or needs to make a 30 deg course correction because he was unexpectedly out of track, or suddenly finds that the speed is quite lower than it was supposed to be, then it is unstabilized, no matter if it was a 5 NM long straight in with a 3° glideslope or Paro (Bhutan).

            The thing is... the standard approach that is the one that is most taught, practiced in the sim, and flown for real, is the 5NM 3° slope straight in. So we want you to fly one of those whenever possible. And if you find in one of those needing to do -1500fpm to recapture the glideslope, then you already screwed up, you are unstabilized (not because of the 1500 fpm per se but because you were not supposed to go 1500 fpm), go around and try again. Other approaches will require one or more of the following:
            - A special briefing.
            - A special company procedure.
            - A special training.
            - A special airplane certification.
            - A special pilot certification.

            Obviously, the approach in your video is of the type "other approaches" (not 5NM 3° straight in), and obviously it has a special procedure and special training (note the ground references for aiming, crossing altitudes, and turn points, that's not something that you know and can do relying on your airmanship the first time you fly there if you were not taught it before). And I guess that it had a special briefing too.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #21
              I'm pretty sure that all pilots operating into Samos, Bhutan etc. need a specific certification to operate at those airfields.
              Yes, by definition the approaches they fly are "unstabilised" in that they are not a straight 5 mile final, 3 degree glideslope but they are considered a "normal" approach in that the manoeuvres made are necessary to operate in and out these fields.
              "Unstabilised" approach is really the wrong word to use here because it hints at something going wrong. Maybe "Special Procedure" approach would be more appropriate ?
              If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
                ...Yes, by definition the approaches they fly are "unstabilised" in that they are not a straight 5 mile final, 3 degree glideslope...
                Thank you.

                And, I concur with the parts of your post that I deleted.

                These little gray areas and slight inconsistencies are interesting.

                No other significant message or big inference is intended.
                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gabriel (Paraphrased) View Post
                  On-Target is On-Target

                  (Regardless of what "on target" is.)
                  And, a well-executed, on-speed, on-altitude, 90 degree turn, 15 degree bank onto final at 300 ft AGL is a well-executed, on-speed, on-altitude, 90 degree turn, 15 degree bank onto final at 300 ft AGL.

                  (Regardless if the it's a no-terrain, normally-straight in approach or a curvey, mountain dodging special).

                  Black and white absolute?

                  ...Or is there a gray area?
                  Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                    And, a well executed, on-speed, on-altitude, 90 degree turn, 15 degree bank onto final at 300 ft AGL is a well executed, on-speed, on-altitude, 90 degree turn, 15 degree bank onto final at 300 ft AGL.

                    (Regardless if the it's a no-terrain, normally-straight in approach or a curvey, mountain dodging special).
                    Exactly, but only if you planned it that way (and have the required qualifications and certifications if required).

                    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X