Another exellent video.ı was longing to see you back.Got some questions.1.as far as i know for Rnav approach clearance should be given to a point at least 2 miles before the FDP but here intercepted just at the FDP and about 90 degrees and it didnt overshoot or stayed high interesting?2.see to if the engines add power is it better to look at epr or n1 first? 3.general question-if we are in V/S mode and blue and white arrow meet at the point where we want to descent BUT we also see the broken intercept arrow just before..doest it mean we are high? thanks Captain.
A few points. The 2 nm established requirement is a company SOP, not an Airbus or regulatory requirement, at least not where I fly. No radar vectors or DIR-TO instructions are given on this approach. Instead, the STAR is flown. Just in case, don't mix up FDP and FAF, they are not the same thing. I would recommend re-reading exactly what the requirement of your company is. Some companies require the final approach course to be intercepted 2 nm before the FAF, if radar vectors are given. Is that what you mean? A 90 degeee intercept will not result in an overshoot provided you are flying at the correct speed when in NAV mode. In case of an ILS approach, LOC* will take the speed into account and it also won't overshoot. As far as the profile related to a 90 degree intercept, that is not relevant. If you are on profile or below, you will not get high just because you do a 90 degree intercept. The track miles is all that matters, 90 degree intercept or not. If your aircraft uses EPR, it's better to look at N1 for thrust, as small differences are far more visible on the N1 gauge. Don't look at the arrows for anything related to descent management other than to see if you can make an altitude restriction. The arrows are not accurate. If you want to know if you are high or low, you have to calculate it using altitude, distance, and speed.
I consider that he F/o in this case is not that high at all. He’s flying at FL100 250kt 30 miles. Thats perfecty okay. The only thing why he is a little high is because of the tailwind. But just a little bit.
First you have to slow down when you need to descent but cannot. Once you can descent you need to speed up. So it's not about staying at the slow speed. That is time efficiënt and will get you even higher. Priciples of descent management requires context.
I got see your point. However, focusing on this particular case you cannot decelerate to S speed ( therefore being forced to select flaps 1 )30 miles away from touchdown. You’d ruin the airport sequence, and it is not efficient. To solve the situation ( however I can’t see why he’s high on energy) i would just apply the speedbrake or even reducing the speed to 230 aprox( to keep the margin with VLS) in order to be able to apply speedbrake with no flaps selection
@@tolokingperson2944 I am sorry but I do not agree with you. Unless ATC gave you a speed restriction, slowing down and then speeding up in order to manage your energy is in fact efficient and does not ruin sequencing at all. Not even once in my entire career did ATC complain I'm slowing down because I get high, provided of course they didn't tell me maintain a certain speed. Again, the slow down is only temporary. The average speed along the track is the same and thus will not affect sequencing.
@@a320descentenergymanagemen3 Yes, except there will be significant compression of traffic at the point you choose to go to S speed (even if planning to accelerate after the fact). While you may reach the IAF at the same time, when running a 60 second sequence at a feeder gate for an airport, it would not be acceptable for a pilot to reduce to S Speed 30 miles out. Most flow systems work on the principle of aircraft maintaining a certain performance profile to a certain point. Where you are flying in Vietnam this probably isn't a problem, but using this method at many busier ports around the world would result in ATC not being happy.
Captain, excellent video! A question: once you have the FDP as your TO waypoint, wouldn’t it be better to descend to your pseudo-constraint, pass through that point with Flaps 2, and arm the FINAL APP so the aircraft descends on its own to the minimums at a 3-degree angle?
You van also do that. Whether or not it is better depends on your personal preference. There are multiple ways to fly such an approach, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.
You can get it on iPad by installing the Amazon Kindle app. Then you go to the Amazon website to buy the kindle edition of my book. After that it will show up in your Kindle app.
Very interesting insights. I would like to know why the VNAV was still off after passing the FL100 altitude constraint? Or does it just try to fly a geometric descent from the FL100 waypoint to the next at a steep angle?
Hello! I am applying all the Rules for the descent planning. I’m flying A321neo. With this plane, and I assume because of the Drag of the PW Engines, I end up way too low to intercept the G/S with a level segment
Indeed, the NEO has more drag due to the bigger engines. But that is not the only factor. Wind, weight, thermals, are other factors. That being said, my calculation method leaves a 500 ft margin, so if you want to have idle thrust all the way (max 1000 ft AAL), then you need to fly 500 ft above profile. With the NEO that is ok, but with any other variation, you don't leave much room for error.
They appear to be rules of thumb to account for energy transfer between altitude and speed. I.e 300kts will need 3000ft to slow to approach speeds, 250kt 2000ft, green dot 1000ft and 'S' 500ft. Not sure if that's accurate, just what I inferred from the video.
Correct. Indeed this is just a rule of thumb, not an SOP. But it works really well. It gives a bit of a margin as well. Depending the weight and wind, you can be 500 ft above profile, and still be ok.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for making a video again!
Lovely video, thank you for sharing your insights!
Welcome back
Another exellent video.ı was longing to see you back.Got some questions.1.as far as i know for Rnav approach clearance should be given to a point at least 2 miles before the FDP but here intercepted just at the FDP and about 90 degrees and it didnt overshoot or stayed high interesting?2.see to if the engines add power is it better to look at epr or n1 first? 3.general question-if we are in V/S mode and blue and white arrow meet at the point where we want to descent BUT we also see the broken intercept arrow just before..doest it mean we are high? thanks Captain.
A few points. The 2 nm established requirement is a company SOP, not an Airbus or regulatory requirement, at least not where I fly.
No radar vectors or DIR-TO instructions are given on this approach. Instead, the STAR is flown.
Just in case, don't mix up FDP and FAF, they are not the same thing.
I would recommend re-reading exactly what the requirement of your company is. Some companies require the final approach course to be intercepted 2 nm before the FAF, if radar vectors are given. Is that what you mean?
A 90 degeee intercept will not result in an overshoot provided you are flying at the correct speed when in NAV mode. In case of an ILS approach, LOC* will take the speed into account and it also won't overshoot.
As far as the profile related to a 90 degree intercept, that is not relevant. If you are on profile or below, you will not get high just because you do a 90 degree intercept. The track miles is all that matters, 90 degree intercept or not.
If your aircraft uses EPR, it's better to look at N1 for thrust, as small differences are far more visible on the N1 gauge.
Don't look at the arrows for anything related to descent management other than to see if you can make an altitude restriction. The arrows are not accurate. If you want to know if you are high or low, you have to calculate it using altitude, distance, and speed.
I consider that he F/o in this case is not that high at all. He’s flying at FL100 250kt 30 miles. Thats perfecty okay. The only thing why he is a little high is because of the tailwind. But just a little bit.
I agree. Suggesting to be at S speed with 30 miles to run is ludicrous. Would cause carnage into any airport with any sort of sequence behind them.
First you have to slow down when you need to descent but cannot. Once you can descent you need to speed up. So it's not about staying at the slow speed. That is time efficiënt and will get you even higher.
Priciples of descent management requires context.
I got see your point. However, focusing on this particular case you cannot decelerate to S speed ( therefore being forced to select flaps 1 )30 miles away from touchdown. You’d ruin the airport sequence, and it is not efficient.
To solve the situation ( however I can’t see why he’s high on energy) i would just apply the speedbrake or even reducing the speed to 230 aprox( to keep the margin with VLS) in order to be able to apply speedbrake with no flaps selection
@@tolokingperson2944 I am sorry but I do not agree with you. Unless ATC gave you a speed restriction, slowing down and then speeding up in order to manage your energy is in fact efficient and does not ruin sequencing at all. Not even once in my entire career did ATC complain I'm slowing down because I get high, provided of course they didn't tell me maintain a certain speed. Again, the slow down is only temporary. The average speed along the track is the same and thus will not affect sequencing.
@@a320descentenergymanagemen3 Yes, except there will be significant compression of traffic at the point you choose to go to S speed (even if planning to accelerate after the fact). While you may reach the IAF at the same time, when running a 60 second sequence at a feeder gate for an airport, it would not be acceptable for a pilot to reduce to S Speed 30 miles out. Most flow systems work on the principle of aircraft maintaining a certain performance profile to a certain point. Where you are flying in Vietnam this probably isn't a problem, but using this method at many busier ports around the world would result in ATC not being happy.
Captain, excellent video! A question: once you have the FDP as your TO waypoint, wouldn’t it be better to descend to your pseudo-constraint, pass through that point with Flaps 2, and arm the FINAL APP so the aircraft descends on its own to the minimums at a 3-degree angle?
You van also do that. Whether or not it is better depends on your personal preference. There are multiple ways to fly such an approach, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.
Thanks, great video
Thank you so much
Hello Captain. Is it available the book for iPads on bookstore? If not, Where can I find a PDF paid version?
You can get it on iPad by installing the Amazon Kindle app. Then you go to the Amazon website to buy the kindle edition of my book. After that it will show up in your Kindle app.
Very interesting insights. I would like to know why the VNAV was still off after passing the FL100 altitude constraint? Or does it just try to fly a geometric descent from the FL100 waypoint to the next at a steep angle?
I think it's because the vertical path is calculated for a much higher speed.
Hello! I am applying all the Rules for the descent planning. I’m flying A321neo. With this plane, and I assume because of the Drag of the PW Engines, I end up way too low to intercept the G/S with a level segment
Indeed, the NEO has more drag due to the bigger engines. But that is not the only factor. Wind, weight, thermals, are other factors. That being said, my calculation method leaves a 500 ft margin, so if you want to have idle thrust all the way (max 1000 ft AAL), then you need to fly 500 ft above profile. With the NEO that is ok, but with any other variation, you don't leave much room for error.
What is the software you were showing in the beginning of the video?
I made that software myself. It is work in progress and not yet available. It will take probably about a year before it's ready.
Why at the beginning you calculated 3*60 = FL180 and substracted 3000ft? You said you are flying 300kt
They appear to be rules of thumb to account for energy transfer between altitude and speed. I.e 300kts will need 3000ft to slow to approach speeds, 250kt 2000ft, green dot 1000ft and 'S' 500ft. Not sure if that's accurate, just what I inferred from the video.
Correct. Indeed this is just a rule of thumb, not an SOP. But it works really well. It gives a bit of a margin as well. Depending the weight and wind, you can be 500 ft above profile, and still be ok.
The details about these calculations are available in my book. Only 10 usd on Kindle.
Hi bro, can i ask what is the software you use at the beginning of the video ? Thanks a lot
I made that software myself. It is work in progress and not yet available. It will take probably about a year before it's ready.
@ it looks amazing for practice at home to calcute descent profile bro, love to see it when it’s ready, let me know ! Ty bro