Stabilized Approaches (cross-post)
01-07-2010, 01:49 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Posts: 239
We use the "industry standard" at my shop...Actually, we use the "industry standard" for everything here (tongue in cheek). I have found in my limited experience in the 121 world that planning ahead is the key to a stabilized approach. Flying into the busier airports in the NE is a really goos way to figure out what your airplane and your own limitations are as well...Happy flying and just remember..."industry standard"!
01-07-2010, 02:41 AM
#12
Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Tiki bar
Posts: 2,634
Like everybody else here, checklists done, 500' VFR, 1,000 IFR, on speed +- a few kts (been a year or so...).
Good vectors are always appreciated, I'd rather not be slam dunked unless we ask for it or it is well expected ahead of time.
Good vectors are always appreciated, I'd rather not be slam dunked unless we ask for it or it is well expected ahead of time.
01-07-2010, 03:11 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: retired
Posts: 565
Although I would rather have the A/P off, if you have to turn it off usually its cause you don't know how to use the eq and you will never learn how to use it...
01-07-2010, 07:23 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: MD80
Posts: 1,111
I know I'm not answering your question directly but I had an AUS approach controller one time leave us very high on an approach. The weather was MVFR and they were using the ILS to the south. We were cleared for the approach well above glideslope in the clouds a few miles outside the marker. Inexperience lead me to arm the approach. Fighting to get down with everything out, the descent rate was high, maybe around 2,500 FPM or higher. The AP locked onto a false glideslope and started pitching up. There was a few moments of confusion before finally clicking off the AP and pushing the nose down. By the time we had captured the real GS, had everything stabilized and configured we were maybe 2-3 miles out and below the clouds. In the confusion we had forgotten to switch to tower and get a landing clearance. We received clearance over the threshold. Our ops specs state a stabilized approach of descent rate less than 1000 feet per minute by 1500 feet AGL I believe. So by definition we were probably stabilized or close to being stabilized. However looking back, going around might have been a better option or even better yet, requested a vector back around to join from below after the confusion of joining the false GS. In the past I can recall numerous times in AUS fighting to get down. It also seems like I've seen a disproportionately high amount of go arounds at AUS when compared to other airports.
01-07-2010, 07:28 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: MD80
Posts: 1,111
01-08-2010, 01:36 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Austin Tower
Posts: 175
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
