11th September 2000,

22:50

#2 (permalink)

Cough
Posts: n/a

Briefly.. (As a guide only...)

CAT I - 200ft and 550m Visibility
CAT II - 100ft and 300m
CAT IIIa - 50ft and 200m
CAT IIIb - Below 50ft (e.g. 744 and 75/76 have no decision
height, they decide once on the ground)
Types
CAT I - any basic aircraft in the world with an ILS receiver
and a half competant pilot.
CAT II - 146, some OLD 737-200
CAT IIIa - 737-200ADV, all newer 737, Avro RJ
CAT IIIb - 747, 757, 767, 777, A320 etc etc
Cough

Coug
h

#2 (permalink)

1st May 1999, 14:05

Bubbles
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Glasgow no more!
Posts: 6

PNR
constant fuel flow D = (E * O * H)/(o+H)
d=(endurance (hrs) * g/s out ) g/s home)
___________________________________
G/s out + g/s home
flow = kg per gnm
____
G/S
G/s = gnm per kg
____
flow
[This message has been edited by Bubbles (edited 01 May
1999).]

2nd May 1999, 05:44

Captain Custard
Posts: n/a

#3 (permalink)

Socca, I couldn't resist reading your thread, with a name like

that!! Trig forever!
My experience is that Bubbles technique doesn't work! Now
I'll explain why! Sorry Bubbles! It does work with a consant
fuel flow scenario, but with, say, a normal cruise out, and an
abnormal cruise back, it gets a bit messy.
A method that is easy (after you've done it a coulpe of times),
accurate and will work for any type of PNR (3 eng, 2 eng,
Depress) and at any "out" condition is as follows:
1. At a suitable point after TOPC, ie the START POINT, note
the distance from the departure airfield (assuming that's the
one you'll go back to if you have a problem). Note the fuel on
board.
2. From the fuel on board, subtract the Fixed Reserve (30
minutes Depressurised PNR, 10 minutes Engine Failure
PNR).
3. From the remaining fuel, divide by 110% for an Engine
Failure PNR. To be super technical, we could assume that
there would be little variable reserve needed for the OUT
segment to the PNR, but to err on the conservative side, we
take off 10% for the whole of the remaining fuel.
4. Calculate the SGR OUT by dividing the Fuel Flow OUT by
the Groundspeed OUT.
5. Calculate the SGR BACK by dividing the Fuel Flow
BACK by the Groundspeed BACK. This will be at the BACK
configuration.
6. Calculate the fuel required from the START POINT back to
the ORIGIN (at the SGR BACK).
7. Subtract the fuel required from the START POINT back to
ORIGIN from the fuel available.
8. Divide the fuel remaining by the sum of the SGR OUT and

the SGR BACK. This is the distance from the START POINT
to the PNR. Add the distance from the START POINT to
ORIGIN and that's the PNR from the ORIGIN in miles.

#2 (permalink)

28th August 2000, 18:43

HIGH n MIGHTY
Posts: n/a

At the outer marker, if your altitude is higher than the check

altitude specified on the chart, you add the difference between
the two PLUS the aircrafts pressure error correction .. if not
specified, the PEC is assumed to be 50ft...Therefore the
lowest minima should be at all times 270ft, unless the PEC
shows otherwise..If your altitude shows lower than the
specified altitude at the OM, you simply use 220ft ( standard
or whatever the chart specifies ) and add the aircraft PEC...IF
THE AIRCRAFT IS HIGHER...YOU ADD......IF THE
AIRCRAFT IS LOWER...YOU LEAVE THE MINIMA...!!
But remember the aircraft PEC..!!!

#4 (permalink)

29th August 2000, 08:14

quid
Posts: n/a

Kaptin MI believe it's the other way around. If you are reading 1400
and the crossing altitude is published as 1500 then you're 100
ft. to the good (safe side). Assuming the same 100 foot error
exists at minimums, then when you're reading 200, you are
actually at 300.
The barometric (pressure) altimeter is only calibrated for ISA.
If the temperature is colder, then the altimeter will read higher
than actual. Bad. That is why Jepp publishes an Altimeter
Correction chart. You enter it with two values, the reported
temp. and the altitude above the reporting station (airport). I
don't have the chart handy, but the magnitude of the error is
signifigant. Approximatly 6000' above a -30C airport, the
altimeter may be reading about 1000' lower than actual. The
PEC pales in comparison.

BTW, I think an Outer Marker is much too inaccurate to see a

20-30 (or even 100') error. If you're using the swing of a
Compass Locater, or a DME it will be more accurate.

------------------

quid

29th August 2000, 22:22

#5 (permalink)

bookworm
Posts: n/a

The temperature error is proportional to the height above the

measuring station. The rule of thumb I use is that a 20 degC
cooler day than ISA (say -5 degC at sea level) gives a 7%
overread of altitude.
So at 1500 ft on glideslope you'll see 1600 ft on the altimeter
on an ISA-20 day. When you get to 300 ft on the glideslope,
the altimeter will read 330 ft. So add 30 ft to your normal
decision height.
I'd suggest making the correction based on the temperature,
not the altimeter reading at OM crossing. 100 ft is only half a
dot at the OM. If you see 100 ft off at OM, it may be the
glideslope indicator.
It's also worth bearing in mind that the altimeter setting is
rounded to the nearest millibar (30 ft), a typical static
calibration correction (PEC) is 30 to 50 ft at approach speed,
and the barometer itself may be good only to +/- 50 ft anyway.
So don't sweat it! But I suppose on an ISA-20 day that's
unlikely...
[This message has been edited by bookworm (edited 29
August 2000).]

#2 (permalink)

27th March 2008, 01:40

misd-agin

767-200 is 17.9:1 (Boeing manual)

Join Date: Jan 2006

Location: US
Posts: 472

Was told by knowledgeable pilot that the 727 was 17:1.

Based on that I'd assume all modern airliners are very close to
18:1.
That would be at optimum L/D speed, which would be about
clean min. manuever speed.
L/D ratio would decrease as flaps are extended. As BA 038
showed, based on the data given by the AAIB(108 KIAS,
1800 FPM sink), the fully configured glide ratio, right above
stall, is about 6-7:1.

Mike Strutter

a320 cruise clean config

Join Date: Oct 2007

Location: fuk
Posts: 7

max l/d approx 15.2

mathy

what you need is some printouts

Join Date: Mar 2008

Location: London
Posts: 20

Title says it all. I'm a Boeing person, medium and the smaller
heavies.
Drop me a line. These short squat boxes can't do justice to
data.
B777 at M0.84 CL=0.500 L/D = 19.26 @ F330
B767 at M0.80 CL=0.500 L/D = 18.34 @ F330
B737-800 at M0.78 CL=0.500 L/D = 17.26 @ F330
B737-400 at M0.74 CL=0.500 L/D = 15.52 @ F330
But with all the variables that kick in, these spot values on
their own are might I suggest, close to meaningless. What
they burn, what payload they are carrying under certain
conditions and how much you still have to pay in bank loans
means a lot more.

But you're welcome.

Mathy
Last edited by mathy : 6th February 2009 at 18:05. Reason: some data

#5 (permalink)

17th April 2003, 08:10

18-Wheeler
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gold Coast
Age: 44
Posts: 1,183

A mate of mine that flew MU-2's was curious about this, and
since the flight manual didn't say you couldn't do it, he
decided to give it a try one day.
He did it when very high on finals once, and he said that "the
wing stopped working and the plane just dropped out of the
sky!!!!".
So he never did it again.

#8 (permalink)

17th April 2003, 13:11

Southland
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Townsville
Posts: 4

18 W, let me assure you that reverse in an MU-2 in flight etc,

for that matter any Garrett powered turbo prop is not
permitted. The approved FM for the aircraft states this as does
the Garrett manual.
Lucky chappie!

#14 (permalink)

19th April 2003, 14:25

compressor stall

PC6

Join Date: Feb 2000

Location: 500 miles from
Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Posts: 1,816

The PC6 has an increible ability to descend with the engine in

BETA 6000 feet per minute without the airspeed over 90
knots.
I seem to recall talking to one of the PPRuNe Mods about this
a couple of years back - he used to para drop in them. Could
have been Rob?
Re the herc above...would it not be doing as the jets do and
land concurrent with the application of full power in the case

of a missed hook?

#17 (permalink)

4th August 2003, 18:01

Meatbomber
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vienna Austria
Posts: 51

Well we are 8,33 eqipped , but i guess it's pretty

impossible to get a RVSM certification for a Skyvan
Regarding our abort north of EEL the week previously:
It was the first attempt up to FL280 with the wing and a
PC6 Porter equipped with a steady cam as a chase
plane. Now that Porter has significantly less climb
performance than we do and so we basically had to
abort before we ran out of oxygen... thus change of
plan inflight and bad comms with Maastricht RDR
which was really busy at the time too. Another reason
we're been really thankfull for the descrete frequency
we got from London.
Lesson learned..