ERJs/CRJs and landing on DCA Rwy 33
07-31-2013, 10:14 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,533
Interesting turn to the discussion, personal attacks aside.
I looked it up in my airline's manuals, and it mentions that we have to be on the proper TRACK to the runway. Nowhere in either book does it reference bank angle as a criteria for stable approach. Could that TRACK be a banking turn toward the runway of intended landing if all Stabilized Approach criteria are met, ie landing configuration, on power, on speed, on descent path, with a stable vertical speed?
I asked that question to one of our senior check airman on the jet I fly, and he mentioned that yes, we can be considered legally stable per our manual by flying a curving track toward the runway inside 500'. He brought up the RAIM approaches with constant bank and descent rates as an example.
Interesting. Personally, I'd never thought of it that way, but the glaring omission in any of our manuals of any reference to the extended centerline or bank angles speaks volumes. It mentions TRACK many times, but a track can be curved. Interesting.
I looked it up in my airline's manuals, and it mentions that we have to be on the proper TRACK to the runway. Nowhere in either book does it reference bank angle as a criteria for stable approach. Could that TRACK be a banking turn toward the runway of intended landing if all Stabilized Approach criteria are met, ie landing configuration, on power, on speed, on descent path, with a stable vertical speed?
I asked that question to one of our senior check airman on the jet I fly, and he mentioned that yes, we can be considered legally stable per our manual by flying a curving track toward the runway inside 500'. He brought up the RAIM approaches with constant bank and descent rates as an example.
Interesting. Personally, I'd never thought of it that way, but the glaring omission in any of our manuals of any reference to the extended centerline or bank angles speaks volumes. It mentions TRACK many times, but a track can be curved. Interesting.
07-31-2013, 10:39 AM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by mooney
Your FOM wording may be different, but "stabilized" doesn't mean "no banking/turning." it means on speed, glide path, and proper TRACK to the runway. We had guys refusing the visual to 13 i think in LGA because the charted visual had a turn below 1000 ft and they said they couldn't do it because they wouldn't be stabilized!
07-31-2013, 10:47 AM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,750
Originally Posted by OnMyWay
I have seen a UA 757 land on 33 a few times. Yes, a 757.
33/15 is great for us because we just pull off the runway and we're at our parking with no fuss. Same with 35 and 26 in PHL.
The runway isn't really that short.
I did once meet a controller who thought (mistakenly) that so-called RJs have much lower speeds than larger airplanes and was quite surprised when I told him that we have the same or in some cases, higher speeds for approach and landing. I was taken aback by this because I thought they had ground speed readouts.
Anyway, It's not that big a deal. It's not that short and It's pretty rare that you even need to roll to the end of the runway.
07-31-2013, 10:57 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,152
Originally Posted by mooney
Your FOM wording may be different, but "stabilized" doesn't mean "no banking/turning." it means on speed, glide path, and proper TRACK to the runway. We had guys refusing the visual to 13 i think in LGA because the charted visual had a turn below 1000 ft and they said they couldn't do it because they wouldn't be stabilized!
07-31-2013, 11:00 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by Geardownflaps30
I didn't say that
Originally Posted by Geardownflaps30
+1. My point exactly! Physically impossible to stay over the river or river bank and perform a stabilized approach to landing on 33.
07-31-2013, 04:51 PM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,236
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
Yes you did. Now take it back and admit you were wrong like a big boy.
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
And I'm not sure if anyone else said it, but yes, DCA tower often asks RJs to do the MV visual to 1 then land on 33 so they can get departures off 1. I suppose just because most RJs have the performance to do it.
I land CRJ 700s and even 900s on 33 all the time. The numbers always work out.
What's the deal with guys who circle way over Anacostia (particularly Republic)? You know you're supposed to keep it over the river, right?
I land CRJ 700s and even 900s on 33 all the time. The numbers always work out.
What's the deal with guys who circle way over Anacostia (particularly Republic)? You know you're supposed to keep it over the river, right?
You too Tony. Did you reference your -7?
07-31-2013, 05:02 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,152
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
Yes you did. Now take it back and admit you were wrong like a big boy.
Your obsession with "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" is bordering on requiring medical help.
You must be a joy to fly with.
Enjoy your evening!
07-31-2013, 06:02 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,533
No kidding...
So, yea...
I've been on the visual for Rwy 01 and had them ask me to step over and land on 33 in the CRJ700. No biggie. No I was not wings level at 500', but our manuals don't require wings level in order to be considered "stable".
Compared to the (formerly) 4800' Rwy of San Luis Obispo (SBP) on the central CA coast (my favorite airport), landing on 33 at DCA is a breeze. Heck, even SBP is a breeze, now that I think of it. There was more drama landing a SF3 on that runway.
So, yea...
I've been on the visual for Rwy 01 and had them ask me to step over and land on 33 in the CRJ700. No biggie. No I was not wings level at 500', but our manuals don't require wings level in order to be considered "stable".
Compared to the (formerly) 4800' Rwy of San Luis Obispo (SBP) on the central CA coast (my favorite airport), landing on 33 at DCA is a breeze. Heck, even SBP is a breeze, now that I think of it. There was more drama landing a SF3 on that runway.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
