Marenostrum

Members
  • Content count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Marenostrum

    OVERWINGS DOORS

    What to say.... I have more than understood! Thank you Alan for your complete answer.
  2. Marenostrum

    OVERWINGS DOORS

    I am at the gate. Sometimes I see the OVERWING DOORS light up (but they are closed). It is an alert for a non perfectly not closed door....I try to reopen and close...but the lights are still on. The QRH says: if pressurization is normal--> continue if press is not not normal --> plan to land Obviously it refers to an inflight situation. But what to do when I am at the gate?...in rw I suppose you have to call maintenance to check it (btw I took off monitoring the light and it switched off after about a couple of minutes) What to do in these cases (as I imagine that taking off it is not the correct procedure !) Thank you!
  3. Marenostrum

    VNAV computing during vectoring LNAV

    I tested it (same aircraft, same fuel, same payload, same climb setting CLB-01, same derate TO-1, same flaps, same wind conditions) I did a first climb path following the FMC route to go from rwy 05 @EGCC to the first wpt KOXUM. VNAV and LNAV engaged. I did a second climb path following the vectors by ATC, that is proceeding straight ahead without turning immediately and, after about 3 miles, doing a first turn 90° left and after about 2 min another turn left inbound to KOXUM. So a longer course.. HDG SEL and VNAV engaged Both path ending at 9800 ft The table above (for each position there is a picture if you like to see it) shows that I reached 9800 ft after about the same time but at a very different position.In few words (as stated by Dan and Matt) VNAV does not seem to control directy ROC. It simply follows the chosen CLB program and climbs up to the MCP altitude.
  4. Marenostrum

    VNAV computing during vectoring LNAV

    I was replying to downscc and, as soon as I have posted I have seen your answer. I think that your post answers my question. If the course is within 20 NM from the magenta line, the VNAV function does calculate the adjusted ROC. Now it is interesting to know (and I can test it) what does it happen if I do an off-course turn left (following the example) that makes the distance between the two waypoints in the FMC shorter. the VNAV should ask for a steeper ROC...because it will read the sequence of points in the route, faster than the planned route... and the adjusted ROC will steeper than the planned one. Is there a limit after that the VNAV gives an alert and eventually disengages because a too steep ROC?
  5. Marenostrum

    VNAV computing during vectoring LNAV

    mmhhh. if it so...I wonder why the B738 flew in the way I described: when I was off-course compared to FMC route (following the ATC instructions) with the VNAV engaged, the aircraft continued to climb (I had no alert messages in the FMC) but simply I was climbing at a very small rate of climb. As soon as I narrowed my off-course route approaching the planned FMC route the rate of climb increased. For this reason I have supposed that the VNAV (I repeat, engaged) was trying to follow its vertical planned path, but because it was off-course (for a wider turn than the planned one), it was reading the approaching of the subsequent interpolated points of the route (between the two waypoints I was flying), at a lower speed...and consequently it calculated a smaller rate of climb. As soon as I narrowed the real course respect the FMC course, the computer was reading the sequence of points from the first to the second waypoint coming fastly...and the ROC increased. But this is only my "dislexis" reading of the computer calculation.
  6. Marenostrum

    VNAV computing during vectoring LNAV

    Thank you! But what if my real route is shorter...does VNAV compute a steeper climb?...is there a limit and a consequent error that I could receive in my FMC? (the LNAV at the end of my post was a mistake..I was intended to write VNAV as you say)
  7. Marenostrum

    VNAV computing during vectoring LNAV

    To ask the question I write what I did then I ask the question (be patience with me I cannot find a shorter clear way to explain it!). 1. I am cleared to Take off from EGCC rwy 05L. 2. My first wpt is on the other direction (230° toward KUXEM). 3. No SID here, ATC will give me vectors: after the take off I am expecting a left turn 90° and a little later another turn 90° left direct to KOXUM. (so not a 180° continuous left turn). 4. my NAV display shows the same but with a small difference: the left turn is quite immediately, continuous for 180° directing to KOXUM. 5. I plan to take off with only the HDG SEL armed on the autopilot. 6. After the take off I climb straight ahead heading 053. Once at 800 ft I engage the autopilot with the HDG SEL active, proceeding 053 and I engage the VNAV too (so HDG + VNAV but LNAV is off). 7. I see on my NAV display that I am flying 053 whilst the FMC planned route was telling me that the 180° left turn was before my actual position: Now my real course and the planned FMC course are diverging because I am following the ATC instructions. 8. when I am about 3 miles after the planned turning point in the NAV display, ATC gives me the first 90° left turn heading 330°. I do it. Now I am about 3 miles out of my planned course. 9. Now I am heading 330° whilst the FMC planned course wanted me to direct to KUXEM heading 230° so I am still diverging some miles out of the FMC route. 10. Now ATC tells me to turn left 230° to resume my planned navigation (to KUXEM). 11. At this stage I turn a little more left than 230 directing to KUXEM and, mile after mile, I am narrowing my real route with the FMC route on the NAV display. The divergence of some miles becomes less and less until KUXEM where it becomes zero and I engage LNAV on the autopilot. Now the question. As soon as my real course and the FMC course were diverging, I noticed that my climbing angle was less and less.....once I turned in the direction to KOXUM narrowing the difference between my real course and the FMC course the climbing angle increased (at least so it seemed ). Is this happening because the FMC is calculating that the vertical navigation points (real and planned) are diverging so it slows down the climb (because my real course was longer that the FMC course) and once I was narrowing the planned course the FMC understood my increasing gradient of narrowing and then increased my rate of climb? in other words: how the LNAV computes my vertical navigation path if I force my aircraft not to follow the planned course? And what if it was the contrary: real route shorter than planned FMC route...have I to expect a steeper climb ordered by the VNAV function? Is it allowed? Thank you for your patience before than your answer!
  8. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    .... people running real risks...I have read an interesting report by NTSB about an almost crash during the a survey mission inside a hurricane!!
  9. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    Nulla di cui dispiacersi.....l'rgomento è molto interessante, forse molto noto a molti piloti ma certamente non inutile da rinfrescare. Avevo letto e visto anche alcuni documentari sui fulmini "verso l'alto" visibili dallo spazio. Molto interessante, spaventoso e affascite Neanche io vorrei essere su un U2 o un SR71 per verificare la loro pericolosità!
  10. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    Interesting... In any case from the pilot point of view, the key point is if these types of cells can be flown over their top or if they are the kind of monster that climb up to over FL350 ... so you can just stay away and fly around.
  11. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    The pictures attached are very scary!!!! I For sure it is not necessary to browse the SOP to stay away from them more than 50nm. Some of them in the pictures are also very wide, tall and, if it is not enough, twisted ...to fly around such a large beast it could be a long way. I suppose that inside them you find a mix of all the scary situations: high speed wind variation with rapid variation in direction, ascending and descending currents, hail, heavy rain... I have read that they can build inside also vertical windshear at high altitude rotating updraft!! (I knew about the descending windshear at low altitude dangerous in the approach phase, not vertical windshear dangerous at a cruising FL). If I were a pilot facing a beast like that...I would like to be in a sim!
  12. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    Sure 🙂
  13. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    I see you are used to fly in a zone that is also hit by twisters..is it? How are those cells seen by the cruising altitude? What SigWx says and what to do?
  14. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    Very interesting topic here, thank you for your explanations: this is an area where the simulation is unable to be like the reals world. Only few days ago I was flying on a real 737 NGX of Ryanair from the north of Italy to Sicily....the sky was an amazing picture...with a lot of CB. They where far from us and similar to what the simulator with AS16 and REX soft clouds depicts ...but what the simulator cannot simulate is how they are dangerous. I did some calculation...in the situation that I described it meant do deviate the course toward the upwind side of the right cell, then to fly around it staying at least 20NM away then to reconnect the original flight path.....in other words to extend the flight path of about 100 NM or more !!!!
  15. Marenostrum

    airspeed managing

    Clear!