There is alternative configuration that stay passive for last min. Plan change Only reason to re-configure from scratch when even alternative configuration is not applicable as well.
Aaand only thing you would have to do is change the approach in mcdu which takes literally 3 seconds and short brief the approach briefing box - done. The rest of the stuff isn't changed
It looks very complicated and puts into perspective how relatively simple it is to drive a car, yet so many people can't properly drive one by using their turn signals correctly, leaving enough distance with the front vehicle, respecting the speed limit, giving way when they're supposed to and not somewhere else, parking between the lines, etc. This is why it's so very important to make license exams as difficult and exhaustive as reasonably possible, so as to filter the bad drivers and pilots as much as possible, and in turn improve safe transportation conditions for everyone as much as possible.
imagine driving the car and continuing to measure the road available its condition and the weight of the vehicle to calculate the braking distance... no one would drive anymore, imagine what a paradise would be empty roads :D
Don't forget the aircraft engineering/maintenance staff. It's like maintaining a car with 3 million parts, making sure every one is working properly, many which are very deep into the airframe...
@@SP6RI'm a pilot and I do that. Obviously I don't have a performance calculator next to me, but I judge based on the road condition, separation between my car and the next one and if I'm carrying A LOT of stuff, or it's just me in the car. All this to maintain a safe distance
hello, I have a question in the mcdu on the GO around page where did you get from the cards the value that you put in the part of ,(THR RED/ACC) you put "1420"
Hi Joe, I have a question. I mean once we have estimated when we should descend based on 3:1 rule, adding wind component distance as well, then how do we deal with the fact that our descent rate will no more be the same as we get lower and closer to FAF for instance. I mean let's say we initiated initial selected descent at 2300 ft/min ( GS 460knots), how can we still assume we'll descend at this rate when we 're lower and that GS will probably be around 350 knots ( 1750 feet/min'). Can the plane still descend at the initial rate we did set in the mcdu?Or does that rule alteady account for the fact that we'll have a lower GS anyway?
Hi R O, let me first answer how an aircraft like the A320 does that calculation and then go on to answer your question. The 3:1 is normally used in General Aviation or to do a quick assessment as a "rule of thumb" in bigger airplanes. The A320, as well as many other aircraft, have FMS' that allow it to execute descents complying with a lot more factors than "just arriving at a specific altitude at a certain point". Taking into example the A320, you would most certainly be following a Standard Terminal Arrival Route (STAR), which has Altitude and Speed Constraints that have to be met, but the airplane is also smart enough to know that the most efficient way to execute the descent would be a decelerated approach, that means, it will try to glide with idle power to arrive at the Vapp speed at the Final Descent Point (FDP) of the arrival, all while complying with the constraints of the approach. So for example, if the STAR has a Waypoint with an altitude constraints of no lower than 16,000' and the next waypoint has an altitude constraint to be at 15,000' at 250kts, the airplane will compute back the Top of Descent (TOD), starting from the FDP somewhere along the route where it can start the descent at idle, maybe passing the first waypoint at let's say 18,000' , decelerating along the first and second waypoint reducing the vertical speed and meeting the second at exactly 15,000' and 250kts. Of course in theory it sounds like magic but sometimes you as a pilot will have to add speedbrakes or the airplane will have to put in a little bit of thrust because of how the approach is built, ATC requirements, etc. Now to your question. There are even some "older" GPS systems, like the Garmin 430 or 530 that let you calculate the TOD to a certain point and will display the required vertical speed. You as a pilot would be descending at the given rate and keeping an eye on the Vertical Profile given by the gps to make the necessary adjustments. The GPS knows your GS and will display the changes needed to be made by you to keep on profile. If for some reason you only have your GS available to you, use it to calculate your new rate of descent every couple of thousand feet and apply it your descent. And in the most rudimentary of cases, without a GPS, or any other source of information of your GS, you will have your starting assumption of GS to calculate your Vertical Speed based on your 3:1 rule. Once you start the descent you have the active duty of monitoring your descent to see if you arrive below, at, or above the waypoints you predicted. Then, you change your vertical speed accordingly. The 3:1 rule does not account for changes in GS, it's a calculation based on a specific gradient of descent. As you know TAS will change with altitude, and most likely so will the winds, so it is very difficult to try and calculate your GS all the way in your descent through the different altitudes and courses. I would recommend you to keep an eye on the remaining distance and *know at what altitude you should be at* every 1, 3, 5 nautical miles you pass. If below it, you reduce the rate of descent, if above it you increase it. The base line of all this is that you make use of the tools available to you. Increasing information will give you the advantage to have additional ways to plan ahead and execute your task with more precision. Hope this answer helps.
I believe you’re right because the approach plate they are using is dated 21 Apr 2017, effective 27 Apr 2017. That would align it with being used in October 2018.
I'm from IT (not from Aviation) and get very intrigated by this question : why so much manual data entry between the iPad and the aircraft panel computer ? This is soooo error prone, mostly on this critical moment ! What about some sort of communication between them , either by BlueTooth or USB ? Other than that I get mesmerized by the AirCraft panel and the quality of the instruments. Everything seems very robust. Being from IT I love numbers, controls and of course I love the Apollo Guidance Computer so the "view" fascinates me a lot. Guess I'd be very fine sitting at the front of it all :-) Who wouldn't ?
Aircraft have nearly no external devices that can be connected to them whether by usb or wireless methods to avoid hackers/viruses penetrating into the system ^^
@Jefuelhead Hi I have a question about the THR RED/ACC. You have entered 1420. Elevation is 620. So why did you chose 800ft above elevation for Thrust reduction? Also how did you calculate 2110 for acceleration altitude? Thanks for answering.
@@AVIATIONSOUNDEXPERT Every Airline has their own approved policies regarding reduction and acceleration altitudes and the airport might also have Noise Reduction and Abatement procedures that have to be followed. In this case you can see that the airport has an elevation of 620' and the the THR RED/ACC given is 1420/2100 (the company policy 800/1500 for that specific case plus the elevation of 620') And yes there are 20 feet missing haha
@@alphalock1 Thank you for your answer. If you have Noise Abatement Procesure, for example in London Heathrow, do you always have to use 800ft for Thrust Reduction Altitude? I red that airlines which have to follow NAP use 800ft, if not then 1500ft. Some airlines, like Ryanair, use instead of 1500ft, 1000ft. But a 737NG pilot told me that it also needs to be considered Terrain and temperature. Also the altitude that has to be used from the ground is from aerodrome altitude, not runway altitude. Especially about Terrain and Temperature, I dont know how you take these parameters into account. Thanks and my apologies for my curiousity.
Before RUNTS waypoint there is a F-PLAN DISCONTINUITY. Don’t you clear that one later so the AP follow the waypoints? Or you force temp direct to that waypoint?
you only delete the discontinuity in sim, in reality it's there because inbetween you have to wait for ATC instructions either a heading or a direct to a waypoint
@@danielvillava I was curious about this. Why does it alert you of the THR Reduction change for the go around when you change the approach? Is it because you manually amend it after inserting each approach - so goes back to default when changing approach type? I've never seen this on our EU A320s (although we use the standard figure of 1000ft AAL). Slightly further aside, what's the reason for 800ft at your company - noise? I'd have thought that the default could be adjusted on the A320 to 800ft AAL as IIRC, the minimum is 400ft for PERF (though that might be on takeoff, not G/A).
@@milesaharrison It seems it’s exactly how you wrote it. When you insert another approach and you had a previously-set THR RED and ACC altitude higher than default, it goes back to the default one and you get the message. The 800ft were to reduce from TOGA to CLB earlier than the normal 1000ft or 1500ft, depending on the default altitudes.
@@danielvillava Does the ipad perf app account for this automatically for each calc? We have to put this kinda thing in manually each time if we need it.
@@milesaharrison it was also manually for takeoff, using NADP1 (THR RED at 800ft AAL and ACC at 3000ft AAL). It really depends what the airline wants to be done.
The discontinuity is left there since the end of the STAR is continued on radar vectors. When getting vectors to RUNTS or to the LOC before RUNTS, you would insert a DIR to with intercept course/radial to sequence the flight plan.
It’s not a particularly long runway for an airliner, calculated distance with the extra margin at F-LD brings it close to the end so medium auto brake and reverse thrust is what I’d pick to be on the safe side.
