Checklists/Flaps 3
 

On the A319/A320 flaps 3 increases the pitch attitude vs a flaps full landing, but tail strike is not a large concern on those versions. You do have better crosswind control and go around capability as well as a quieter approach with less airframe buffet. Bean counters say you save maybe 50 lbs of fuel. You pay for that with higher pitch attitude on touchdown, longer float, longer landings, increased tire/brake wear etc. On the other hand, flaps 3 ( a different flap design) on the A321 decreases the pitch attitude vs flaps full (approx .9 degrees) and does give you some additional tail strike protection on an airframe that does have a tail strike concern. We are told in training that the next crew that hits the tail landing flaps full in a 321 when they should have landed flaps 3 will be hung out to dry in the investigation. Of course if you run off the end of the runway you won't get any sympathy either.

Guess delta shuda ordered it with a HUD installed

Oh well, those were the days you were lucky if the flight recorder worked and for sure nobody wore headsets or shoulder boards. There was one sim and it was bolted to the deck. Snow, uphill both ways..

Our checklist is designed to keep the FO heads down until the first runway signage comes into view, at that point the FO can reference the sign, FMS and WDR in a most efficient manner.

As a captain I do not move till its all done, we are paid by the hour whats the rush? they talk about dwell times on check rides and line checks but you can't fail for being slow, you will fail if you violate some taxi route or hit something.

Speaking of LCA's.... back in 1992, I got my very first Delta line check as a 6mo. MD88 Captain, the leg was ATL-PNS. My F/O was brand new, second line trip, neither one of us were former Navy and we had never been into PNS. This was about 6 months after a Delta MD88 had run off the end of the runway at PNS.

It was a typical July day, hot and hazy, maybe 3 miles vis in haze, we are cleared directly to the airport and the approach controller is asking us if we have the airport in sight, we are still 20 miles out descending.

I say to the F/O, "Tell him we want a vector for a 10 mile straight in.". F/O does, we get our turn on vector, turn 30 degrees left and intercept the LOC about 10 out, get configured and land normally, taxi to the gate, shutdown, another on time arrival.

The LCA then precedes to debrief me. "Well, that wasn't the most fuel efficient approach but I guess it was ok.".

There was a big push on the pilots to 'save fuel' back then too, just like all this Flaps 25 in the 757 today.

So I look at the LCA and say, "Neither one of us have ever been here before, there was no way I could accept a 'visual' approach with no landmarks, 20 miles out, and how much fuel does it take to pull a Mad Dog out of the grass and tow it to the gate?". :rolleyes:

I gotta say, I would enjoy flying with you! :)

Basic question to ask the LCA.... Did the crew act in a safe and professional manner? What was his suggestion to save. fuel? Typical LCA who's part of the problem rather than part of the solution who vocabulary lacks "Good judgment, good job".

I was giving a 6 month CA line check going into CDG on the 330. The minimums for the approach were 720 ft. MSL. The CA went missed approach at 720 Ft. off the RA. He also thought the weather as 2000 ovc when it was actually 200 ovc. He did one of the best missed approach I have ever seen. I briefly explained what happened on downwind and landed safely on the next approach. Bottom line, he was SAFE. No problem