15 degrees nosedive descent to prevent going around, would you call me an idiot or fuel efficient?

[anthony31 63]

You would have saved more fuel by timing your descent properly.

 

The C208 flight load limit for full flaps is 2.4g so when you transition from the 4000fpm descent rate to a normal approach make sure you don't exceed that otherwise your wings may decide to part company with your aircraft.

[vololiberista 205]

You can do two things in a flight simulator.

1. Kill yourself over and over again. (just imagine MS sending you a funeral bill each time!).

2. Learn something of how things should be done.

[Dave Morgan 68]

Hi.

 

I do the same occasionally: usually when the beer runs out just before TOD and I know there's time to weave to the fridge and back before starting down.

 

Doesn't always work out...

 

I imagine that a properly timed descent is more efficient in terms of fuel - you'd be able to descend at flight idle from further away so you'd be bound to use less. Experimentation is the solution but I'm pretty sure of the result. Save your flight at the planned TOD and fly it using both methods a couple of times. Check how much fuel you have left as you leave the runway.

 

Regards,

D

[Domini99 0]

Well,  . . . my question to the original poster is, why are you not planning your descent to approach altitude a bit better? In the real world or the simulator it works the same and it isn't that difficult. As others have said, when you are flying in the simulator do as you wish - nobody has to know. Again as others have said the economics of a proper ascent, cruise and descent are far more efficient that a kamikaze dive at the runway. Unless of course your company real or virtual has a policy of 'save fuel - waste lives' :Big Grin:

 

In the end though, it is your simulator and there is probably nobody watching over your shoulder grading you so have fun in what you do your way. My grandson comes to visit, flies the simulator and crashes every way he can think of and a few he didn't think up. He has a great time even though I can barely stand to watch!

 

Regards to all,

Normally i do, but i'm not a professional, sometimes i under or overestimate the my rate of descent and come in too high or too low.

 

 

 

 

To all:

Hehehehe no worries, i'm not going to use this as a normal descent procedure in real life.

The topic was more of a fun topic than a serious question.

Ofcourse i know it's stupid to do such descent.

 

And i'm not planning on flying more than a Cessna 172 in the future, so you shouldn't have to worry about me suddenly bombing my plane inverted into the Big Ben 

[KevinAu 441]

There's nothing wrong with an idle descent in landing configuration at approach speed as long as you make your stabilized approach criteria, whatever it may be. A pilot has to be comfortable with that kind of descent to be fully rounded. As a flight instructor, what do you think I did to my students everyday? I took the throttle and pulled it back to idle at random and inopportune points in the flight. At some point, they had to transition the plane to landing configuration and speed as they approached the landing field. They needed to be comfortable judging and flying a deadstick approach.

 

To say that you are not going around on a bad approach for fuel economy is idiotic though. There are only two reasons I can think of to not go around. Not having enough gas for it and a thunderstorm or mountain that you can't get around at the departure end of the runway are the only reasons I can think of. How you got into that position raises other questions about you as a pilot but that's neither here nor there.

[mebull 27]

 

 

The topic was more of a fun topic than a serious question.

 

Well of course that is true and we (most of us) understand that, so don't be concerned. It's simply a fact that some of us are nearly obsessed with doing things by the book so to speak. I don't think that means we are devoid of a sense of humor or have an absolute aversion to doing something silly once in awhile. Some of us have our fun by trying to fly the simulator as close to real life as possible, others may resort to breaking the boredom with something not covered in the manuals or done in the real world. I have been known to fly an entire leg of a intercontinental flight  manually and inverted. And then there was PHNL to KLAX at twenty feet! I have also taken my B752 at cruise altitude 150 miles from KSEA - cut the engines - dumped the fuel ( except enough for the APU ) - dumped the cargo - and dumped the passengers ( definitely not real world procedures ) and glided all the way to touch down. So, what you were doing is certainly no worse than that. I'm betting some would do things like these when no one is around, but never admit it.

 

Have fun, . . . . your way, that is what it is all about. Learn as you go and make a point of knowing the right way from the wrong way. And, it reads that you are already doing that anyway.

 

The real world on the other hand is about never ever doing things the 'wrong' way. Proper procedures and proper responses to situations as they arise are all about keeping yourself, your passengers, people on the ground and your aircraft in one piece and unharmed / undamaged. Manageable risks should never be a part of the equation - risk being the keyword. Good pilots never leave anything to chance or luck.

 

Regards to all,

[vololiberista 205]

Well of course that is true and we (most of us) understand that, so don't be concerned. It's simply a fact that some of us are nearly obsessed with doing things by the book so to speak. I don't think that means we are devoid of a sense of humor or have an absolute aversion to doing something silly once in awhile. Some of us have our fun by trying to fly the simulator as close to real life as possible, others may resort to breaking the boredom with something not covered in the manuals or done in the real world. I have been known to fly an entire leg of a intercontinental flight  manually and inverted. And then there was PHNL to KLAX at twenty feet! I have also taken my B752 at cruise altitude 150 miles from KSEA - cut the engines - dumped the fuel ( except enough for the APU ) - dumped the cargo - and dumped the passengers ( definitely not real world procedures ) and glided all the way to touch down. So, what you were doing is certainly no worse than that. I'm betting some would do things like these when no one is around, but never admit it.

 

Regards to all,

 

I've done the Dambusters route in a Lancaster bomber at 50ft all the way there and back. BUT, I was too scared to do it at night!! :(

[flightsimfan912 2]

I remember watching one of my Ultimate Traffic 2 AI planes almost at a 180 angle trying to descend to the runway. Did pretty much the same thing as you. Pretty hilarious to watch actually. I took off From KSEA and watched Alaska's MD-80 plane pitch down to about a 160 degree angle. I'm surprised it still landed. Either ATC gave it a high descent or the pilot was a new guy :-)

[woodreau 0]

Sometimes ATC (landing south in Orlando, all the time in Las Vegas or Shreveport) leaves you high on approach and then clears you for the visual approach.  You're left with two choices, clean with speed brakes at 250kts to descend or dirty up with landing gear and one or two flap notches of flaps at 180-200kts to descend.    It's situation dependent, both work.  If you're farther away from the runway, you do the former, if you're closer in you do the latter, and if you're way too close, then S-turns, 360 and go around.  But it's not for fuel efficiency - that's the last thing on my mind.

 

In Aspen, on a normal approach on the LOC/DME Rwy 15 approach, you're looking at a 1800-2000ft/min descent from 16000ft to 700ft AGL fully configured at 140kts in landing configuration with the TAWS periodically giving you a "Terrain Terrain pull up" as you cross 500-800ft over Triangle Peak at elevation 9239ft, and continuous "Sink Rate" alerts after you go below 2500ft AGL.

 

The sim is all about learning where the edges of the performance envelope for your aircraft are and getting to know what your airplane is capable of doing.  Unfortunately there isn't enough sim time in a training syllabus to see what those limits are.  And of course real life is not where you should be pushing to see what the limits are, but for a lot of new airline pilots who are transitioning from GA to the 121 world, that's the only place they get to see what the plane is capable of doing as one of the harder things to do as a new airline pilot is a visual approach - figuring out how low, how far out to configure, etc.    In the simulator environment, the sim instructor is always giving you vectors to join, you're not flying around at 250kts, you have your profiles where you're told where everything is supposed to happen and everything is controlled.   The real world is different and that where everyone learns what their airplane can do.