Understanding Approach Charts

[Orlaam 306]

I think most FMS's require you input a complete route, with SID and STAR before departure? I agree it's bad practice but you kinda have to assume at departure and then update it later if things change.

No not really. You enter a flight plan that includes a STAR often and if needed ATC will change it. But the FMC does not require anything, let alone a full flight plan. You can enter a departure and arrival airport and nothing else if desired. Same with the waypoints. You don't need to touch the STAR page if you don't want to. A lot of real world flight plans are devoid of a STAR. They simply give a route with waypoints terminating near the airport despite a STAR(s) being available.

In the real world, we would have a good idea of what to expect for arrival beforehand. Atis for the destination can be pulled up via acars at anytime so that the expected runway and arrival transition can be programmed already. And many stars will have different transitions based on the runway in use, so even if you don't have the atis, the controller working you at the time of beginning the arrival will inform you of which transition you're doing. With the ability to pull up whatever information we need via acars, we would have the arrival briefing completed about 40 minutes prior to arrival. If things change, and they do, we just reprogram and rebrief. Obviously, you don't have all this info in msfs, but you can always check the real world weather ahead if you use real weather and you do have some influence on what runways will be active if made some afcad adjustments. So it does't have to be a complete surprise in msfs.

That's correct; however, as stated you don't have this luxury in sim and nothing in the sim or real world stipulates that one must enter a STAR or arrival. If it's part of your plan then great but changes can occur anytime. So it's still poor practice to assume beforehand just to be stuck at the last minute.

 

In the sim I think it's best to use what is active in the real world and go with that. I use flightaware and use those plans. Then tune ATIS and listen for the active. Usually it won't change but I force winds just to be safe. Too annoying to rely on ridiculous changes last minute without warning. As you said, real wold is so much different but it's not perfect either. So I fly the active STAR based on flightaware and figure out my IAP based on the runway in use. Works best I think.

[Alpha Floor 237]

 

 

To assume that you'll be cleared to a specific STAR and IAP is poor practice

 

This depends on the company SOP I would say.

 

Some companies require all flight plans to be "closed" up to destination airport before departure. If there's a change later on, pilots will update accordingly.

 

I personally prefer leaving the route open, that is, NOT selecting a STAR/APP until "within range" of destination airport.

[Orlaam 306]

This depends on the company SOP I would say.

 

Some companies require all flight plans to be "closed" up to destination airport before departure. If there's a change later on, pilots will update accordingly.

 

I personally prefer leaving the route open, that is, NOT selecting a STAR/APP until "within range" of destination airport.

I'd imagine it has more to do than just SOP per company. Either way, most flight plans are complete when filed and changed accordingly as needed. STARs are essentially a way to filter traffic into a sector and usually required for larger busier airports. They will navigate you through MOAs and other airspace as needed and provide a highway of sorts to the airfield. Typically you can see which STAR will be required based on your direction of travel. Of course some aiports have several that all come from one direction and that changes for whatever reason. One can look at NOTAMs at anyone time and see that a lot of STARs are not to be used.

 

Basically my assertion is that there's nothing wrong with selecting a STAR that works best for your route, rather not to select an arrival before you know what runways are in use.

 

ETA: we're off topic at this point. The OP was asking mainly about arrivals and X,Y, Z designators. That is where I disagree. Selecting an actual arrival prior to know what runway is active. If it's changed halfway through or 25 miles out, it's gonna be annoying trying to fix it in the FMC. Mainly when IFR. The lack of ATC for proper routing makes simulation more of hassle in that regard. I realize at the end of the day navigation and flying is the pilots job but ATC is there for traffic routing. The majority of the time pilots will do as ATC instructs. Only when the instruction is unsafe or unrealistic will pilots buck the system. Pilots have been reprimanded for not following ATC instructions.

[Alpha Floor 237]

 

 

Basically my assertion is that there's nothing wrong with selecting a STAR that works best for your route, rather not to select an arrival before you know what runways are in use.

 

Agreed!

[Jimm 437]

I think most FMS's require you input a complete route, with SID and STAR before departure? I agree it's bad practice but you kinda have to assume at departure and then update it later if things change.

I've only been flying airliners properly for a couple of months now, so for right now, I am just getting used to the process of getting the MCDU programmed and following through with a complete flight.  I have yet to delve into the advanced aspects of approaches as I typically (for now) allow the aircraft to autoland.  My original post was intended to be a simple question as to why approach charts have the X,Y and Z designation, but I am seeing why now.  I DO appreciate the feedback and all of the external resources available, so when I get the time, I'll sit down and read through it all.

 

Right now, I do have a pretty good handle on the basics of programming the MCDU, and for the most part, my flight plan are pretty cut and dry.  Having Navigraph charts is a very big help, for both the programming and for learning.  I use PFPX initially, to get the route and export it to my aircraft and then when I am in the cockpit, I review the plan BUT I also program in the STAR approach and RWY ahead of time.  As I have known though, it isn't general practice as it has been stated above that RWYs and approaches can change, which I will save those scenarios for another day.

This depends on the company SOP I would say.

 

Some companies require all flight plans to be "closed" up to destination airport before departure. If there's a change later on, pilots will update accordingly.

 

I personally prefer leaving the route open, that is, NOT selecting a STAR/APP until "within range" of destination airport.

I hear what you are saying but as a noob question to be asked:  wouldn't waiting until the last minute, say just before TOD, change the TOD and all calculated ALTs and speeds?  I heard not long ago, that with respect to the precious passengers, when you initiate descent, you don't want the aircraft to slow down too much or change the vertical path where it feels like a roller coaster. lol

 

I fly the Airbus and it does a pretty good job at TOD, to hold a shallower rate of descent and speed, to make the transition less rough.  I will typically leave the PERF page up on the MCDU and watch the distance to TOD, and when it hits about 1 mile, I'll initiate descent.  

[Alpha Floor 237]

 

 

wouldn't waiting until the last minute, say just before TOD, change the TOD and all calculated ALTs and speeds?

 

Sure, but you don't wait "to the last minute"

 

When you're within 200nm (or so) from destination, you should start receiving the ATIS. At this point you can prepare and brief for the approach.

 

In practice, what I do in the Sim, is leave the arrival open, take-off and climb to cruice, go have some coffee, and then I come back to the "cockpit" and I study the arrival well, install it into the FMC etc. This way I don't "lose time" on the ground and do the arrival programming while flying and covering miles...

 

I also usually draw a green 200nm ring around destination airport (using FIX page, on Boeing), in case I "forgot" to program the arrival

[Jimm 437]

Sure, but you don't wait "to the last minute"

 

When you're within 200nm (or so) from destination, you should start receiving the ATIS. At this point you can prepare and brief for the approach.

 

In practice, what I do in the Sim, is leave the arrival open, take-off and climb to cruice, go have some coffee, and then I come back to the "cockpit" and I study the arrival well, install it into the FMC etc. This way I don't "lose time" on the ground and do the arrival programming while flying and covering miles...

 

I also usually draw a green 200nm ring around destination airport (using FIX page, on Boeing), in case I "forgot" to program the arrival

That is an excellent point, although some of my short haul flights don't have the luxury of a 200nm distance between TOC and TOD. lol

 

I do understand what you are saying though.  You mentioned fixes and while I have seen them drawn in the Boeing FMCs, I have to figure out how to do them in the Airbus.  I know they can come in handy, and this tip you gave is a great one to use, thanks.

[Orlaam 306]

The whole assertion that vertical path on descent must be shallow is false. Typical initial descents are around 2000 to 3000 feet per minute and speed is high. The engines will idle and descent is initiated with the descent path usually holding speed. Sometimes spoilers are needed too. That whole "1000 feet or less for passenger comfort" is silly. ;-)

[Alpha Floor 237]

That is an excellent point, although some of my short haul flights don't have the luxury of a 200nm distance between TOC and TOD. lol

 

For very short flights, without a "relaxed" cruising phase then yes, you'll have to install the arrival before taking-off as well

 

 

That whole "1000 feet or less for passenger comfort" is silly. ;-)

 

Also, passengers don't feel vertical speed.

 

That being said, vertical speed and path are different things. A 3º glide path at 500GS results in 2500fpm. At 140GS it's 800fpm. It's three times less, yet the glide angle is the same!

 

What passengers feel is CABIN rate of climb/descend, and deck angle. (Passengers have the annoying and stupid tendency of fearing a deck angle of 30º, but what do they know! hahaha)

[Jimm 437]

The whole assertion that vertical path on descent must be shallow is false. Typical initial descents are around 2000 to 3000 feet per minute and speed is high. The engines will idle and descent is initiated with the descent path usually holding speed. Sometimes spoilers are needed too. That whole "1000 feet or less for passenger comfort" is silly. ;-)

I never said it was a "must".  After I initiate a descent, I watch the magenta dot, and I watch the altitude and speed.  After initiating the descent, the descent rate does fall at around 2000, but the speed is managed to a point when the aircraft's altitude intersects with the descent path and then the engines spool down to idle.  From there, it's pretty much idle as the aircraft tries to maintain the path.  I have also had instances where drag was required, and I'll deploy spoiler...not as hard as I thought it to be.

 

Actually, this brings me back to my first question again about choosing the correct approach with accompanying STAR.  Last flight I performed from OMDB to LGAV, I had picked an approach out of the 3 three available for RWY03R, but for some reason, my aircraft failed to capture the glideslope, so my quick actions came into play and I wound up landing the aircraft manually.  I think this had something to do with the approach and the mountainous terrain.

 

I don't get too worked up about it though.  It is, after all, a simulator.

For very short flights, without a "relaxed" cruising phase then yes, you'll have to install the arrival before taking-off as well

 

 

 

Also, passengers don't feel vertical speed.

 

What passengers feel is CABIN rate of climb/descend, and deck angle. (Passengers have the annoying and stupid tendency of fearing a deck angle of 30º, but what do they know! hahaha)

I think it's more courtesy than anything to descend at a rate that doesn't take people by surprise.  I have flown a few redeye flights and I think pilots don't want to scare anyone if their still asleep.

 

As a passenger of various aircraft, I can tell when an aircraft is going a little deep and steep on the vertical angle and I think this is what the person I heard from was talking about. My wife hates flying, and when the descent phase is initiated, she gets that terrified look on her face.

[ckyliu 1,749]

To assume that you'll be cleared to a specific STAR and IAP is poor practice. In the real world those plans are altered frequently for traffic and other routing.

 

You enter a [FMS ]flight plan that includes a STAR often and if needed ATC will change it. But the FMC does not require anything, let alone a full flight plan. You can enter a departure and arrival airport and nothing else if desired... A lot of real world flight plans are devoid of a STAR... simply give a route with waypoints terminating near the airport despite a STAR(s) being available.

I know not all airports have SIDs/STARs (btw European flightplans typically don't mention SID/STAR as they are ATC assigned, but you can take a best guess). I think my point was more along these lines (phrased better here):

Some companies require all flight plans to be "closed" up to destination airport before departure. If there's a change later on, pilots will update accordingly.

Without a complete plan in the FMS it can throw some predictions out, I think that's why some airlines insist. I should also explain I predominately fly sectors under 90 minutes in high workload cockpits, so I work out and programme everything and double-check before TOD if there's time.

 

Anyway, I don't think terrible to presume and programme a SID/STAR on short haul, provided you are ready to accommodate changes from ATC and weather.

[Alpha Floor 237]

 

 

Without a complete plan in the FMS it can throw some predictions out, I think that's why some airlines insist. I should also explain I predominately fly sectors under 90 minutes in high workload cockpits, so I work out and programme everything and double-check before TOD if there's time.

 

Good points.

 

There might be differences between short haul, in which the FMC flight plan should be closed before departure (due to workload, having better estimates etc.), and long haul routes in which it doesn't make much sense putting in an arrival into the system if you're getting there in 12 hours...

[KevinAu 441]

No not really. You enter a flight plan that includes a STAR often and if needed ATC will change it. But the FMC does not require anything, let alone a full flight plan. You can enter a departure and arrival airport and nothing else if desired. Same with the waypoints. You don't need to touch the STAR page if you don't want to. A lot of real world flight plans are devoid of a STAR. They simply give a route with waypoints terminating near the airport despite a STAR(s) being available.

 

That's correct; however, as stated you don't have this luxury in sim and nothing in the sim or real world stipulates that one must enter a STAR or arrival. If it's part of your plan then great but changes can occur anytime. So it's still poor practice to assume beforehand just to be stuck at the last minute.

In the sim I think it's best to use what is active in the real world and go with that. I use flightaware and use those plans. Then tune ATIS and listen for the active. Usually it won't change but I force winds just to be safe. Too annoying to rely on ridiculous changes last minute without warning. As you said, real wold is so much different but it's not perfect either. So I fly the active STAR based on flightaware and figure out my IAP based on the runway in use. Works best I think.

Stop saying it is poor practice to enter a star or arrival. It will be part of your atc clearance. Poor practice is if you don't ensure that your programmed route matches your clearance. You can play the sim however you want, but in real life, we enter it and it is not poor practice.

[Orlaam 306]

You clearly misunderstood my posts. Again, we are talking the sim for one. Two, where did I say you don't enter the STAR? If it's part of your route then you go with it. My assertion is with the approach. How positive are you that runway 12 is active before you get there from 700 miles away? What if it's runway 22? Everyone does things different, even real world so I think things are getting ridiculously serious here for a sim forum. Then again, the sim community seems to overanalyze every aspect of flying thus making it harder in the long run.

[KevinAu 441]

You clearly misunderstood my posts. Again, we are talking the sim for one. Two, where did I say you don't enter the STAR? If it's part of your route then you go with it. My assertion is with the approach. How positive are you that runway 12 is active before you get there from 700 miles away? What if it's runway 22? Everyone does things different, even real world so I think things are getting ridiculously serious here for a sim forum. Then again, the sim community seems to overanalyze every aspect of flying thus making it harder in the long run.

Well, I completely agree that people here over analyze things, especially these things called sid/stars. They're nothing but airways, that's all. If the atis is showing 12, it's good enough for me to throw it in the box. When they change it to 22, then I will change it in the box. That's the extent of my analysis.