A320fumes

Aircraft handling, weight, expected delay, icing conditions, density altitude, sequence, wake-turbulence....must I go on? All are considerations as to when a pilot chooses to fly a particular approach. As a former 121 and military PIC, I really didn't care if it seemed to make sense for the given situation and the SIC had considered why he chose to fly the approach it a particular fashion. As the PIC you are morally obligated to give a few pointers through open discussion about said considerations. The problem comes when guys "prefer" that their SIC flies the approach exactly as he would have. We quite a few of those guys in the military. As squadron scheduler I always made sure those Colonels always flew with a diplomatic "Seeing-Eye Captain" because they were so "Good" that they never took input from anyone but themselves. Thousands of hours of experience....working against them.

EDC757

No, the speedbreaks on the 757 cause pilot induced turbulance. The biggest problem with flaps is that you have to be below 230 kts to extend flaps 1. Going into JFK early morning my F/O flew at 250 kts away from the airport as ATC instructed. I asked why he didn't slow and extend flaps. He said he can get down faster this way. If he knew the 757 wing is the cleanest wing in the industry he would understand that he was just taking us farther over the Atlantic and fast at that. So, yes flaps are not just to increase lift for takeoff.

tomgoodman

If ATC was vectoring you out for a turn behind someone on final, a lot depends on what they were expecting. Would slowing up have reduced the spacing of the guy behind you, complicating matters? Even if not, I'd stay clean (220 - 230) as long as possible for minimum fuel flow, since they won't give a base turn until the spacing is right. For those "over the airport at 10,000 feet and then cleared to descend" approaches, I found that hurrying down sometimes got me a short approach and sometimes got a long one anyway.

FliFast

Just to change the thread a little bit, how many times do you watch a pilot use VNAV when given a 1000 foot climb. How many times do you see that same pilot having to use full boards after relying on VNAV to make a descent and slow to a certain speed. i.e Kayla Arc at 11000 and 250.

AFPirate

Why not just throw out the T/Rs?

A320fumes

As a Captain, I hope you explained that to him. I'll try try your technique. As a new pilot to the 757, I would have done exactly as him, but I will agree that the 757 is the cleanest large aircraft I've ever flown. We'll see how it works. Thanks for the info.

CE750

That is the odd situation.. but generally speaking, I was talking about pilots that will opt to use flaps to slow down, or worse yet.. extend flaps at flap limit speeds, not taking into account aircraft weight and distance from landing... Don't know about the 75, but on the 11, if you go to slats (260kts) and flaps 15, your fuel flow nearly doubles.. so we generally like to wait until "Vmin foot" plus 20 which is to say 1.3xStall+20kts... this is easier on the flaps, and more importantly on the fuel burn and noise.

In Milan Italy, you are actually instructed not to introduce flaps until with in 12 miles of the airport.. on a "Heavy" landing weight day (491,000) that could mean that you either have to go fast (not practical), or go with only slats. So sometimes you're choices are limited.