Jump to content

Daveng3

Members
  • Content Count

    46
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Daveng3


  1. The 512 is the MDA, whereas the 200 is the DH. Is there any reg preventing me from using 200 on the radio?

     

    When on the gideslope you only descend through MDA once, how many times could you descend through DH 200 and when do you call decision the 1st, 2nd or 3rd occasion.

     

    I realise you are requesting for a set of regulations for hard difinitive answers and for all I know there may well be but the previous postings are pointing out an Internationally accepted convention since the conception of Autoland for DH being used.


  2. From FCTM for those who not seen it.

     

    A Decision Altitude or Height is a specified altitude or height in an ILS, GLS, PAR, or some approaches using a VNAV path or IAN where a missed approach must be initiated if the required visual reference to continue the approach has not been established.

     

    The "Altitude" value is typically measured by a barometric altimeter and is the determining factor for minima for Category I approaches, (e.g., ILS, GLS, or RNAV with VNAV). The "Height" value specified in parenthesis, typically a RA height above the touchdown zone (HAT), is advisory. The RA may not reflect actual height above terrain.

     

    For most Category II and Category III fail passive approaches, the Decision Height is the controlling minima and the altitude value specified is advisory. A Decision Height is usually based on a specified radio altitude above the terrain on the final approach or touchdown zone.

     

    Pretty straight forward to me and in line with my experience, only to be adjusted by the airport approach plate as the example from rsvit.


  3. Looking at it, I agree that it looks like it's stating that the ISA temperature is -15C at sea level, but what it's attempting to say is that in order to find ISA, you subtract 15 at sea level. I wish it had been written another way (e.g.: ISA = Temp - 15C, at sea level), and I think it would be more effective for the simmer population if it had been written another way, but it's not outright incorrect.

     

    Playing devils advocate II, he is not trying to find ISA he is trying to find the ISA Deviation.

     

     

    Regards, :acute:


  4. I read NTSB accident reports for aircraft that I fly (I pretty much only fly smaller planes) and I try to stay current on trends. Doing so, I have learned some things about how to augment checklists with flows and that has given me habits that have greatly reduced some mistakes I made in the past. For example, I read on a RW forum on the Lancair Legacy that you should visually sweep back to front on the center console forward and then right to left in front of the pilot from the flaps to the left side. It also works well on the J41, C182 and others. Flows like that are fast so you can do them just before taking the runway and again at line up.

     

    Pretty close to the flows procedures that should be accomplished on the NG, if I am understanding you correctly.

     

    Regards.


  5. Icing conditions involve liquid water that turns solid on contact, and the danger here is from the fact it accumulates. The rule of thumb of -10 to +10 below 10k is useful because above 10,000 feet, and below -10C there is very little liquid water that can freeze on contact with the airframe, and above +10C it is very unlikely to freeze.

     

    Air France 447 disproves this theory and again where are you getting this information? other than OAPA.

     

    Regards.


  6. Thats no where near flyover, using the example of a 3NM lead on the FMS turn your fix will create a turn at 2.9 from overhead the fix.

     

    Also as you shall know flyovers are incorporated on some SIDS and or STARS and done for a reason. A 2.9 NM error would not be acceptable and expect a violation.

     

    Just a heads-up.

     

    Regards.


  7. Sebihepp,

     

    As far as I recall this FMS function and some others can only be accomplished on the ground during your preflight.

     

    But having said that, there is a way to get same results while airborne. As you know the FMS smooths out the turn from the next waypoint to the following WP so starts turning the aircraft prior to the next WP. If you are finding the aircraft turns say 3NM before the WP just create new WP 3NM after and same course and insert between initial 2 WP.

     

    E.G. Inbound course 090 to WP ABC to WP DEF (Press ABC to scratchpad and add 090/3 to get ABC090/3, now insert this new WP after ABC. New WP called ABC01.)

    New routing now should be ABC, ABC01, DEF and will create a corrected turn very close to the original ABC and not 3NM before.

     

    With a bit of time and experience at different speeds and course change you can anticipate how much NM correction.

     

    Good luck.

     

    Edit I/B course to ABC.


  8. Hi again Nick,

     

    The brochure from Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association does not or even imply to be relavant to all aircraft types. I am glad to see A/I is put on even though on the brochure those figures I suggested are not even mentioned. I see also you have introduced which I happen to agree with, a new " most likely limit (<+10 Celsius and visible moisture) " is this also from AOPA as I cannot it see it within the quote net alone the " Below 10K with visible moisture".


  9. Sorry Jordan I do not understand the logic, how are you tricking the system when you are only inputting a possible ATC requirement as quoted on a valid star plate to give you an adjusted TOD with now updated information. Absolutly no difference at all as the headwind/tailwind adjustment within the arrival forecast, maybe you do not utilise either.


  10. Many thanks for your leads and suggestions gents,

     

    Glad to say all sorted now albeit with egg on my face. I checked PMDG data against Level-D in all text files as best I could and nothing apparently wrong boring and long task. Re-installed NGX to get starting base navdata, Airac 1205 and ran Austscene for VHHX with same problem with TH error.

     

    Now the fix, went to Austscene site and Merv has retired handing it over to Jock McIntyre http://www.vapap.com/ . His VHHX updater was a later version 1.10 and specifically mentioning NGX, the rest is history and great to have it all fixed. Having said that a bit perplexed AIRAC 1203, 1204 with older version 1.0 was completed and no problems but 1205 was the problem hence the initial headsup being a new update and all but what the hey.

     

    I am aware Navigraph navdata is not a PMDG concern but FlyTampa VHHX and NGX is the common factor and the new 1.10 is the answer for those guys with these great scenery and aircraft.

     

    Removing egg and happy, kick the tyres and light the fires :Peace:


  11. Hi Folks,

     

    Any of you getting the same, since installing the latest Airac 1205 departing or arriving VHHX FMC coming up with VHHX ERR: TH FIX N/A. FlyTampa scenery, each VHHX Airac updated after each update with Auscene updater. FSX map TH(VOR) appears all normal as well as Level D FMS.

     

    Thanks in advance, Cheers.


  12. The fuel supply from tanks to APU is inside the pressure hull so it is encased in an outer pipeline called the shroud. The shrould drain mast is letting you know if the APU main fuel pipeline is leaking but protected from getting into the pressure hull. Hence very important walkround pre-flight item.

     

    Regards.

×
×
  • Create New...