Sign in to follow this  
opherben

Monitored Approach

Recommended Posts

Hello, an opinion on monitored approach, regarding the one depicted in the program and manual, quote: "Unlike many other airlines, at the airline whose procedures FS2Crew modeled for the 747, the Captaindoes not become the PM and the FO the PF. In FS2Crew theCaptain is the PF, and during a Monitored Approach he willremain as the PF. The FO will remain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hello Opher,I'll leave it to Cowpatz to defend his company's SOPs.I don't write the SOPs, I just model them :-)Cheers,Bryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Opher, I have read your comments and can understand that the ideology of PF v's PM is a little different to some other airlines. Most companies are still flying approaches as they did when analogue instrumentation was the main and autopilots/nav systems required a greater degree of monitoring. Many are still making unecessary calls or not taking full advantage of the new technology. For example some still make calls such as "Flap selected, flap running, flap set" Why? The EICAS system will tell you if they dont run or dont reach position. Just more chance of missing that all important ATC call.Your first 2 comments are not strictly correct. A cat 111 landing can be CAT 111a b or c. A CAT 111a landing is fail passive and as such has a DH of 50 ft. In this case it is a requirement that the runway environment be clearly visible. A CAT 111 b and c on the otherhand, being fail operational, do not. Normal operations should not require pilot intervention. However, there may be pilot intervention required in the event of inadequate aircraft performance or if an automatic landing cannot be accomplished in the touchdown zone.Obviously minmas and operating conditions this low require very quick decison making. In fact some may require the AP to be disconnected and hand flown. The procedure we have is that the Capt is 'flying the aircraft' and the FO is monitoring the instruments. He will call whenever there is an anomaly or an exceedance. The Capt initially will scan in and out of the cockpit with an increasing focus to outside approaching minimas. The FO will call NO FLARE or NO ROLL OUT at the appropriate times if need be. The captain is really following thru on the controls....the whole approach is predicated on the use of the Autopilot. This avoids a low level hand over of control (especially if a reversion to manual control is required) and helps keep the capt in the groove, so to speak. He is the one with the most experience and is in the best position to make a decision.With reference then to point 3 that you made the capt is in an excellent position should there be complications near the TDZ. The FO is still monitoring all parameters and will call any problems....I dont call that nearly useless. For low weather ops I call that essential. There is no last minute hand over of control either.All I can suggest is that you give it a fair go. Just because it is different to the norm does not make it automatically worse. CheersSteve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Steve,thanks for your detailed answer and informative comments. Your comments about CAT IIIa equipment design being fail passive and its implications are correct, I deliberately avoided getting too technical on the forum. BTW are there airports and aircraft already certified for CAT IIIc in US and Europe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Opher,Not that I am aware of. We only have certification to CAT111B. I guess the problem with CAT111C is taxiing around to the gate after landing. It is bad enough at CAT111B!CheersSteve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Steve,I fully agree. Some airports require follow-me vehicles for certain taxi operations, and close when that operation can no longer be safely used, typically below 100M visibility (eg LLBG). There is remarkable difference between the view out of B737/ MD8X's and B747 cockpits in such conditions due to cockpit height. An A380 had better not plan to land in morning fog :-) In LFPO they use old RR engines to disperse it around the TDZ.>Hi Opher,>Not that I am aware of. We only have certification to CAT111B.>I guess the problem with CAT111C is taxiing around to the gate>after landing. It is bad enough at CAT111B!>Cheers>Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this