Manual approach

[michal 44]

Ryan,I urge you to perform this experiment and compare with you Cessna experience.Trim the aircraft for a level flight and just add power without touching controls. In Cessna most of the change will be in aircraft climbing - any change in airspeed will be secondary. In 767 it will be just the opposite. You can also do the reverse and retard power and see what happens in either case. The Skyhawk and 767 react amazingly different.But like Pedro correctly underlined - whether it is Cessna or a big fat Boeing - you fly your ILSes pretty much the same way.Michael J.

[Guest]

There is no such thing a just a Cessna Pilot, you are either a pilot or you are not. That's where you develop the skills that will define as a pilot for the rest of your career. I believe that the private pilot checkride is the hardest checkride. Why? that's when you where the worst at your "craft". 42 hours of flying time, WOW!. My easiest? the 737 type rating checkride My favorite? my instrument. I"This method also seems smoother while making small corrections in the glide path rather than over-correcting with pitch."Oh Boy, I love this line...Your pitch is as smooth as you make it. The overcorrection comes from you not from the method. Think about developing a connection with the aircraft. The distinction is that at all times the pitch goes where I want it to go. I have the aircraft on my control. The trim constantly relieves the pressure between my hands and the aircraft. That is very different than saying I move the trim wheel to keep me on the glideslope. Who's flying the aircraft? The trim wheel not you!. Great topic, best regards, ,Pedro

[Guest]

"Cessna Pilot" was meant to be humour. I am a pilot. I hope this will help me later in my career.Point well taken, thanks guys ;-)

[Vulcan 14]

All good posts here but one point not mentioned which surprises me, practice, practice, practice :-)I am not a rw pilot and never will be, and I am not very good at manual landing because I use the auto-land fature quite a lot, very useful for not upsetting TWR when flying on line :-)Some time ago Mike Bevington (sp?) started to organise on line flying for 767PIC pilots, one of which was a visual into Washington (I think). I tried this approach off line many times and could not get it right so asked here for help.With that help and a lot of practice my manual landings got much better. So my advice is to take this valuable advice from rw/virtual pilots and do plenty of manual landings and you will get there.Have fun

[michal 44]

Very true, very true.Michael J.

[Guest]

Hey PedroWhat is up with pitch and power comments?Why would a flight school teach a new student something that is fundamental for smooth pattern management (ie pitch for speed and power for decent), when,... if and when that student advances to CPL and MEIFR, they would begin to teach the old dog a new trick? (power for speed and pitch for decent???) This makes no sense to me being a non-logical old artist #####. Now to add to this. I am PPL CPL student M/IFR? I have never heard this before...this to me sounds like a recipe for disaster in CATIII approaches when you have your hands on the quadrant.The old ##### :0)

[Guest CYOW_pilot]

The pitch/power arguments go on forever and around and around.Just for info, the pitch for airspeed and power for descent or climb is also what is taught in the Canadian Air Force. However, as any pilot with experience will know, it all depends a bit on the situation and in practice the two are used together without thinking about it a whole lot. I have flown everything from C-150s to B707/AWACS and, although there are certainly differences in technique due to swept wings and engine spool-up times etc in jets, they still fly like airplanes, and contrary to what someone said earlier, if I am trimmed in level flight at say 250 knots in my AWACS and add power and don't change the trim, guess what? The aircaft will stabilize at the same speed (250 KIAS) in a steady climb. Now, agreed, on a ILS when you want to make very fine corrections and you are trimmed up at the correct speed, the quickest way to do it is by making a pitch change, but to maintain that new rate of descent, I will adjust my power as well.We could (and probably will) go on and on, but smooth accurate instrument flying requires you to know two things: The correct attitude and the correct power setting to achieve the desired performance. The performance instruments (ASI, VSI, compass, Altimeter)will tell you how well your chosen attitude and power are working, and if they are not, then make a change in one or both of attitude and power. And so the circle continues. For example, for typical landing weights in PIC767 I know that if I set about 2 deg nose-up and about 50% N1 and keep the turn index on the AI centred then I will get the kind of peformance I require for a flap 25 approach (about 140 IAS, steady heading and 700 fpm descent). If the performance is not keeping the bars centred then just make a SMALL change in attitude and/or power and check again. Eventually you will find a combination that works for the given conditions (in the real world there will be many more corrections because of turbulence, speed restrictions etc). I would recommend no more that 10 deg of bank and 5 deg of heading change to maintain the LOC and bracket your rate of descent between 500 fpm (if below) and 1000 fpm (if above) to maintain the glide path. Remember, small changes.I'll shut up now. Cheers,Kevin in CYOW

[fbevard 0]

Do any of the Airliners have an angle of attack instrument?Would sem easier to use and more precise.