Very smooth approach, with a "kiss landing" at flaps 3! Compliments for the flight and for the video! Greetings from a new "gold" subscriber from Verona, Italy!
Thanks a lot for watching and your great feedback! I agree, he did a very nice landing! Also many thanks for supporting the channel as a new subscriber! This helps to keep the channel alive! All my best wishes to Verona!
Loved the way the first officer let the side stick almost glide the plane down by releasing momentarily. Nice technique. Love the videos captain keep up the good work 👍🏻
Fantastische Samstag-Morgen-Unterhaltung! An dieser Stelle ist auch mal ein riesiges Dankeschön an alle Copiloten angebracht, die das hier auch ermöglichen:-)
Vielen Dank fürs Anschauen und die netten Worte! Ja, da stimme ich voll zu! Auch ich Danke allen Copiloten und Copilotinnen für sehr viele schöne Flüge!
Hello Cpt. Beautiful Flaps 3 Landing in Stockholm. 👌 I'm always amazed by the great Videos 🏆you take. Unfortunately I've never been to Sweden, it's certainly a beautiful country. I always find approaches with radar vectors interesting. I'm looking forward to the next video. With that in mind, I wish you and your crew a nice weekend. Kind regards from Styria 🤗 Werner
An awesome approach, and a smooth landing by the flying pilot. The view flying through the clouds was amazing. like always, a wonderful video and beautiful insights.
Thank you very much for watching, for your good feedback and for your financial support of the channel as a member! This really helps! Have a nice day!
14:34 Sehr nett anzusehen, wie der FO den Flieger "fühlt". Kurz mal die Hand vom Stick nehmen und fühlen, wie der Flieger "liegt". Wieder ein tolles Video, danke dafür und allways 3 Greens!
Goodness me Saturdays seem to come around so quickly these days. Once again I enjoyed your video very much, Captain. I noticed the roads around the airport are so quiet, not like Heathrow.
Good day Gentlemen that was a very smooth approach and landing, pity about the low cloud as you said "no views" but that's weather for you. I have landed a few times in the UK when you cloud has been so low the ground only appeared what seemed like seconds before the wheels touched down. I greatly respect the Aircrews that flew before modern technology, it must have been terrifying. Thank you for a lovely video Gentlemen.
Thankyou for another great video and great flying. I wondered, when you are in manual thrust with FD are you just looking at the speed to set throttle and also if throttle went too low would the aircraft A.Floor. Thanks 👍👍
Thanks for the good feedback! All protections, including Alpha Floor, are also available during flight with manual thrust and during flight with no flightdirectors.
Good day! Great video, nice piloting as always! I would appreciate if you could lower the volume of the frequency because I can't hear what you are talking to your colleague while someone is talking on the frequency. Also would appreciate a video of a departure or arrival at LROP. Clear skies!
Thanks for watching and your good feedback! The audio is the same audio which we hear in the cockpit. It is always a little tricky for us pilots to adjust the audio level between the different sources: ATC, cockpit interphone from the other pilot. Sometimes the result is better and sometimes not that good. I cannot adjust this in the postproduction because there are not different audio tracks for the different sources. Just one cockpit audio track. I am sure that there will be a LROP video sometime. As always, it depends on my duty schedule. And this is always a surprise. Please stay tuned. Have a nice day!
Look forward to these videos every week, excellent as always! Captain, I’ve been wondering how much difference you find between flying and aviating the A319/20 and the A320 Neo? I imagine there are a lot of similarities when it comes to the flows but are there any quirks between the different aircraft? Wie immer; vielen Dank!
Good question! Airbus A318 to A321 have a common type rating. This is even true for the NEOs. The flows in the cockpit are the same and the procedures are very similar. There are some differences in regard to the weights and the resulting speeds. But the glass cockpit makes it easy to handle that. The A319 has the lowest approach speeds and the A321 the highest approach speeds. Reason is the different weight. The A319 can land on very short runways and the A320 and A321 need a little more room. Due to the length of the plane, we have to be careful about the initial pitch at the A321 during takeoff and landing. My personal opinion: I like the A321 very much because due to the mass and the high approach speeds it is very stable in the air. Especially during crosswind landings, I prefer the A321. Next in the row would be the A320. I know that I can land an A319 on almost any runway. But due to the low approach speeds it is more prone to changing winds. And if we talk about CEO or NEO, I always would prefer the NEO! Less noise, significantly less fuel consumption and better performance makes the NEO a great plane. Procedures between the NEO and the CEO are very similar.
@@ApproachandDepartureVideos Thank you so much for such a detailed answer! Always interesting to hear from pilots about their equipment :) I wasn’t aware the NEO shared the same type rating but that makes a lot of sense! Thanks again Captain
Beatiful video! After a boring week I always like to watch your channel. I was wondering what distance do you use to crosscheck your altitude as you descend, is it the one on the fpln page? Thank you!
Thanks for your good feedback! If the flightplan reflects the expected arrival routing, we use the flight plan distance. Very often this is not the case because the entered approach is different from the approach which we expect to fly. If we expect to fly more or less straight in, we use the runway as reference. This can be the ILS DME or the field VOR DME or we enter the runway in the progress page of the MCDU. If we come in from another direction, we can enter the 10 mile final fix or so in the progress page and check how far we are away from this fix. Then the brain work starts: We add the 10 miles to the indicated distance on the progress page plus whatever we think is needed as additional distance for the turn or so. We compare the result to the current altitude minus the field elevation and double check if we are good on the profile.
@@ApproachandDepartureVideos Ok thanks! I didn't know that 10 fix tip! Really useful for energy management, I usually just added or subtracted miles from the fpln page. Have a great week!
Nice video as always! Love how you show everything from the sky until parking at the gate! And i want to know how do you decide when to do flaps 3 or 4 landing? Does weather, speeds and landing weight affect with that decision?
Thanks for watching and your question! The pilot flying decides if he or she wants to use flaps 3 or full. Flaps 3 needs a touch less fuel but the landing distance is a little longer due to a about 5 additional knots of approach speed. Also, flaps 3 may need more braking / reverse depending on how long the runway is and where you want or have to leave it. The pitch before landing is about 2.5 degrees higher when landing with flaps 3 compared to the pitch with flaps full.
Very smooth approach and a great video as always. Quick question: how is it that sometimes upon applying "manual braking" I can clearly hear "Autobrake off", and sometimes there's nothing to here? Thanks!
Thanks for your good feedback and your question! The AUTOBRAKE OFF auto callout was introduced during the last time. In between, most of our airplanes have this upgrade installed. So it depends on the airplane and the recording date if you hear the callout in the video or not.
@@ApproachandDepartureVideosThank You so much for the answer, captain! Also, does the airplane (A320 family) trimm itself out constanty when in normal law, from T/O to landing? Sorry for a non-topic related question, but I was always wondering. Thank You in advance! Have a nice day!
My favorite approach is the visual approach. There are lots of videos of visual approaches available on my channel. Examples are Ibiza, Manchester, Samos, Funchal, Corfu, Santorini .... I will think about making a playlist of visual approaches.
Very nice as always May I ask. When you do a direct-to and select the inbound radial to get the nice extended centre line and then pull to stay in selected heading, the des profile gets recalculated as you can see by the green marker jumping, how is this descent profile being calculated? Like, how does it know how many miles you have to fly in order to know how high you should be? Because you could fly so many different miles before reaching what it now the first waypoint on the flight plan? (I think in this case was a direct-to the final approach point). I hope this makes sense!
Good question! My understanding is that when you enter a “direct to with radial in” and continue in heading mode (without an armed NAV mode) that the flight management system takes the distance from the present position to the direct to waypoint into account for the vertical calaculation. Regardless of the entered radial. This means that the vertical guidance may be inaccurate, especially if you have to fly much longer than the direct to distance would be.
@@ApproachandDepartureVideos many thanks for you reply. So I presume this would be the same if there are discontinuities? It would just calculate the vertical guidance as if there was a direct-to the waypoints either side of the discontinuity?
Hallo, tolles Video und Tolle Landung! Ich hätte da mal eine Frage, wieso fliegt man den letzten Part der Landung eigentlich immer Manuell wenn man auch entspannt mit dem Autopiloten eine CAT 3 Landung machen könnte?
Danke fürs Anschauen, das gute Feedback und die Frage. Zunächst einmal wollen wir als Piloten fliegen und uns nicht nur vom Automaten fliegen lassen. Darüber hinaus sind automatische Landungen nur möglich, wenn die Landebahn dafür zugelassen und ausgestattet ist. Ausserdem muss der Flughafen mit entsprechenden Schutzmaßnahmen dafür sorgen, dass das Signal des Instrumentenlandesystems nicht gestört wird. Das passiert nur, wenn es neblig ist und automatische Landungen unbedingt sein müssen. Wir müssen deshalb - wenn es nicht neblig ist - immer von Hand landen.
Hallo und vielen Dank für den wiedermal tollen Upload :) Eine Frage: Was ist eigentlich das Procedure, wenn man mit ohne Triebwerke (alle ausgefallen ) landet und die Bremsen auch nicht funktionieren? Touch and go macht da ja nicht wirklich Sinn ,weil man immer weiter Energie verliert...
@@msa_rha Vielen Dank für die schnelle Antwort :) Ich habe mich nur gefragt ob ein Bremsausfall unmöglich ist und wenn nicht was man dann am besten macht, aber so wie es jetzt für mich aussieht ist es tatsächlich unmöglich.
Das ist ja sehr theoretisch. Beide Triebwerke fallen eigentlich nicht zusammen aus. Es sei denn, der Sprit wäre weg, Bei Air Transat ist das vor vielen Jahren mal passiert. Die Bremsen haben trotzdem sehr gut funktioniert und das Flugzeug ist nach seinem Anflug ohne Triebwerke auf der Landebahn gut zum Stehen gekommen. Der Brems-Akku ist so ausgelegt, dass man damit das Flugzeug zum Stillstand bringen kann, wenn die normalen Hydrauliksysteme nicht mehr zur Verfügung stehen.
@@ApproachandDepartureVideos Vielen Dank hier für diese sehr ausführliche sehr interessante Ergänzung. Ich habe schon an den Aufbau eines Akkumulators gedacht und auch daran ob hier Materialbrüche etc. möglich sind, die eine Ausfall zur Folge haben könnten. Das Problem ist ja wie man dann reagieren würde als Pilot .Da man ja nicht mehr abheben kann und vermutlich über die Runway hinausfahren würde müsste man wahrscheinlich versuchen ausserhalb der Runway einen Bogen zufahren um dann durch den Widerstand des Bodens das Flugzeug irgendwann zum Stehen zu bringen in der Hoffnung das es nicht ein Flughafen wie Paro ist oder einer mit Meer hinter der Runway...
@@MrTieflader Der Akkumulator wird überwacht. Wie alle anderen Systeme im Airbus auch. Mit einem teilweise defekten Bremssystem wird man sicher eher zu einer möglichst langen Landebahn ausweichen. Im übrigen ist jeder Airbus Pilot im Rahmen seiner Ausbildung darin trainiert worden, das Flugzeug mithilfe des Akkumulator-Bremsens zum Stillstand auf der Landebahn zu bringen.
Good question. We check the VLS from the MCDU which is calculated from the entered loadsheet weight and the remaining fuel against the VLS which is displayed on the PFD. The PFD VLS is calculated on the basis of aerodynamic data (angle of attack) and the entered CG location. If the PFD VLS is higher we add the difference to the approach speed in the MCDU.
When the FDs are on, we get guidance to steer to the right or left and up or down to stay on the center of the localizer and glideslope signal. When the flightdirectors are off, the pilot has to do that on his or her own. If we do an ILS approach without flightdirector, we call it a raw data approach.
Wir vergleichen die VLS aus der MCDU mit der VLS auf dem PFD. Die PFD-VLS wird auf Basis von aerodynamischen Daten (Angle of Attack) und dem eingegebenen CG ermittelt. Die MCD-VLS wird auf Basis des eingegebenen Loadsheet Zero Fuel Weights plus dem aktuellen Sprit ermittelt Falls die PFD-VLS höher ist, addieren wir die Differenz zur Approach Speed in der MCDU.
Wieder einfach genial! Danke. Ich hab nur eine Frage bezüglich der Landung, was sind denn gute und was schlechte Touchdown-Raten? Ich bin heute mit meinem Simulator nach Bergen als EWG9253 mit -475ft "eingeschlagen". Ist das schon ein überschrittenes Limit? Wünsche ein schönes Wochenende 🙂
Vielen lieben Dank fürs Anschauen, die Unterstützung des Kanals und das gute Feedback! 475 Fuss Sinkrate beim Aufsetzen ist schon ziemlich unschön. Was das Limit betrifft, geht auch die genaue Gload beim Aufsetzen mit in die Betrachtung ein. Der Flieger druckt einen Bericht aus, falls bei der Landung Limits überschritten worden sind. Bei einer Overweight-Landung wird ab 360 Fuss pro Minute eine Inspektion erforderlich. Einen schönen Tag noch!
At Heathrow when I was a kid the runways were 28 and 10, and then they became 27 and 09. Same runways. I asked a pilot why this was, and he told me it was because the magnetic pole heading changes over time. But I'm sure Stefan can give you a better, more comprehensive and definitive explanation.
The runway designator is taken from the magnetic compass. If you are sitting in a plane and watch the compass and round it to the next full value (like 250 degrees or 260 degrees), this should be the designator. The compass indication changes over the years because the local variation (difference between true north and magnetic north) changes a little bit every year. Over the time, it may happen that the change requires the runway designator to be changed.
@@ApproachandDepartureVideos - Of course, I imagine it's not cheap for an airport to change the designation of a runway, or two. If you have a runway designated 25 and the magnetic heading changes from 254 to 256, I'm sure changing all that has to be changed can wait a while. Unless there are any safety issues involved? I can't think of any.
I would like to borrow a compliment made as a flirt by someone I told you about before to the person I also mentioned but in your case watching the videos I mean it wholeheartedly. "I have not read this in a book: but the safest airline in the world is the one where you are the pilot". There you go! What is used in a bad context now is used for something good LOLLZZZ
Whats the point of wasting 610 meters (2000 feet) of runway before touching down? Even if the parking position is located near the end of the runway, way not touch down earlier and use less breaking? With 2500 meter in total, this runway offers more than enough for the tiny A319, but in case of an unplanned event, wouldn't it be safer to have more room ahead than leaving the first 25 % of the runway unused behind? From the technical point of view, the TDZ starts at the threshold, not at the aiming point markers, as your TDZ lights are telling you at night.
What if the "unplanned event" was a loss of power on the approach, for whatever reason. If you were set up to land on the numbers, then you ain't gonna make the airfield. Have you watched his Fuerteventura landing? It seemed like *half* the runway was flown over before touching down. Very long piece of displaced threshold. Always unused for landings.
@@renejean2523 yes, displaced threshold is another thing. But having this displaced threshold in that crazy length will leave even less argumentation for wasting any space behind hit. Whatever event may strike, you will hit the tarmac in front of the threshold (cause it is displaced)...
I completely disagree! Touchdown was at 450 meters from the threshold. This was exactly as pre calculated. As a long time instructor pilot, I would say it was perfect! When flying a commercial airliner, you usually arrive on a 3 degree descent path, cross the threshold at 50 feet and would "crash" into the runway with no flare at 300 meters from the runway threshold. With a good flare, you will touchdown smooth at about 450 meters. If you flare a little long, you may touchdown later. The area in which you should land an airliner is - as the name says! - the touchdown zone. So the latest point you should touch down is at the end of the touchdown zone. It this does not work, a go around may be the safest way of action. Short runways have a short touchdown zone. Long runways have a longer one. I do not want to be your passenger if you land without a flare. This would be a really bad experience. I do not know about your unplanned event, but Airbus A320 series airplanes are equipped with 2 redundant braking systems. If they would not work, there is still the parking brake in case of a loss of braking. And the reverse thrust also helps in decelerating the plane. If it would be dangerous to land behind a certain point in the touchdown zone, the aviation authorities around the world would already have shortened them.
If an Airbus loses an engine during the approach, the approach can be continued with the remaining engine. The landing distance would be the same as with 2 engines when using idle reverse because the brakes are not affected during such an event. A single engine Cessna 172, Cirrus, Piper or Mooney may be landed on the numbers on a very short runway. But even the manuals of those airplanes usually show the landing distance over a 50 feet obstacle. This is for flying over the threshold at 50 feet and not at 0 feet. Here we are seeing how airlines operate. This is a little different.
