Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
suchw

When to disconnect auto throttle before landing

Recommended Posts

Since moving away from the NGX and using prosim flight model along with the 737 hardware that i have acquired, i can say its alot harder than the 737 NGX, purely just looking at a monitor vs the actual MIP and looking up etc.

 

Another thing that i have noticed with myself and maybe real world pilots can back me up on this?

 

At first i had difficulty in landing because i always tend to focus too much of my attention inside the flightdeck. This lead me to chase the Glide Slope or the Flight Director at low level which is damaging to a stable approach. In addition, changing the focus from the electronic display of the PFD/ND and adjusting to the dynamic external visual cues of the runway, aiming point, centre-line tracking, PAPIs and peripheral vision was very difficult at first, it took me about a month to get my confidence up and not always stare at the PFD etc like mentioned above.

 

It is imperative that you look out of the aircraft at the touchdown point on the runway more frequently the nearer you get to the runway. Once the runway is in sight a good rule of thumb that i use is;

 

1,000 look out 25% of the time

 

500 look out 50% of the time

 

250 look out 75% of the time

 

100 look out 100% of the time


Vernon Howells

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Starting to wander from topic here. The instrument to visual transition is usually a shared task in the two person cockpit, PF is on instruments and PNF has visual and may in some cases take aircraft for the landing.  Most ILS or RNAV/GPS approaches have final course aligned with runway, which makes the transition much easier than a VOR or NDB approach where the runway could be 30 deg plus the wind correction... it was a challenge just to find the runway.


Dan Downs KCRP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most ILS or RNAV/GPS approaches have final course aligned with runway, which makes the transition much easier than a VOR or NDB approach where the runway could be 30 deg plus the wind correction... it was a challenge just to find the runway.

 

I could expand on that dan and consider an airport Without an existing Procedural Approach for that runway

 

And;

 

With an offset existing Procedural Approach for that runway.

 

Pilots in the RW or even sim pilots like us should carefully consider the prudence of accepting a visual approach to either of the above types of runway. If no Procedural Approach exists, the question must be asked: “Why does it not have a published approach?” The answer could be that there is a terrain issue which precludes the use of normal PANS OPS criteria for constructing an approach. This could also make that runway unsuitable for a visual approach.

 

Also, a published approach with a significant offset to the front course will almost always be as a result of a significant terrain issue that affects the straight in track. Again, such a runway is unsuitable for a visual approach.


Vernon Howells

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


a published approach with a significant offset to the front course will almost always be as a result of a significant terrain issue that affects the straight in track

....or, the VOR is not on an extended centerline.  I'm not sure about terminology in your part of the world, but in the US the "visual approach" is part of an IFR clearance and it's not going to be provided if there's no IAP.  The clearance will be to a fix with a safe altitude from which point the pilot either cancels IFR and continues under VFR rules if VMC or holds IMC and request IFR clearance to an alternate.


Dan Downs KCRP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well over here in EASA land

 

Definition:

A visual approach is defined as an approach where the crew manoeuvre the aircraft from at or before base leg on to final approach without the aid of radar vectors or a procedural arrival. The runway must be in sight before a Commander accepts a Visual Approach.

 

Concept:

A visual approach for a specific operator is normally carried out because there is no approach procedure for that runway or a time saving can be achieved by carrying out a visual approach as opposed to a long protracted arrival and approach procedure.


Vernon Howells

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured as much from your first post..., significant difference in meaning of VISUAL APPROACH in FAA vs Europe. Getting further from topic here.


Dan Downs KCRP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2011 at 7:41 AM, davidz said:

Remember that power affects your pitch. If the auto-throttle is on, you will tend to overpitch: as you raise the nose, the A/T will increase power to compensate for loss of speed. This extra power will raise your noise further. The opposite applies for lowering the nose. For this reason, many pilots tend to disconnect the auto-throttle when they disconnect the autopilot. If you don't do this, the autothrottle will reduce to idle at 27 feet radio altimeter and then disconnect two seconds after touchdown.

Exactly.

Simple rule.... either Autoland and let it do its thing, or switch it all off at DH, and manually land..... but remember to align throttles before disconnecting AT, or you may spool up or down.

Some aircraft will flare, set throttle to idle, deploy spoilers, reverse thrust, and autobrake !

My Avro RJ100, only does "idle" and "spoilers". There is no reverse thrust, or auto brakes, so once landing, manually disconnect the AP and AT.... and manually brake. But.... still ensure your controllers have reduced throttle to idle before disconnecting, or you will spool up and make a mess of the airport !

Edited by Gabe777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google Tarom Flight 371,that is a prime example of not being tactile connected to the aircraft when the automation is engaged. I saw Warren 'Van' Vandenberg discussing this reasoning in his first Children of the Magenta videos.

 


Jim Driscoll


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My outfit used to regularly do dual channel approaches and call for "speed off" when disconnecting AP. Since the number of -800s overtook the -300 fleet, the practice is (thank goodness) dying out with the Dinosaurs.

I firmly believe de-selecting MCP SPEED is an unintended consequence of the MCP and not a design feature. Thus it's foolish to use it in my humble opinion. 

I tend to deselect AP and A/T at the same time, and as early as I can. I encourage the kids to hand fly and you learn so much more doing it while slowing and leveling and re-configuring than you do just waiting till configured for landing and stable at 500ft....

Workload? Real pilots can be such lazy folk sometimes!


Mark Jason Harris.

Aged 50. 

FSX, P3D, X-Plane  & DCS. 

Scan 3XS Laptop 8700K 3.7ghz,32GB DDR4, GTX1080 and 4K 17.3 screen. Should allow more easy Oculus Demos out and about too! I've gone MOBILE!!!

B737NG Pilot. Ex Q400, BAe146, ATP and Flying Instructor in the dim and distant past! Now renewed my SEP to fly a friend's  C182RG 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...