Ual 4933
03-07-2019, 10:03 AM
#121
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,671
Originally Posted by sobo
I’d say in probably 5/10 of the aircraft I fly at piedmont have this issue. Some pilots prefer to fly in 195RA to tighten the system up to cat II tolerance (if that’s even a thing).
But if I'm not mistaken, that requires a flap 22 setting as well as an RA less than 200' to trigger all that fancy CAT2 tolerance crap? Because, if you get the CATII annunciator and put in flaps 45, it'll make that go away wont it?
Not that it matters, buuuuuuut in certain cases where flaps 45 is desirable for landing performance, etc it could be self defeating.
Like I said, 2 airplanes and years ago flying it. So if I'm wrong and off base, disregard. I'll take that, because it means I was FINALLY able to purge that 145 crap effectively
03-07-2019, 10:06 AM
#122
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 234
Originally Posted by John Carr
It's been a long lonnnnnnnnng time and 2 airplanes ago, so forgive me;
But if I'm not mistaken, that requires a flap 22 setting as well as an RA less than 200' to trigger all that fancy CAT2 tolerance crap? Because, if you get the CATII annunciator and put in flaps 45, it'll make that go away wont it?
Not that it matters, buuuuuuut in certain cases where flaps 45 is desirable for landing performance, etc it could be self defeating.
Like I said, 2 airplanes and years ago flying it. So if I'm wrong and off base, disregard. I'll take that, because it means I was FINALLY able to purge that 145 crap effectively
But if I'm not mistaken, that requires a flap 22 setting as well as an RA less than 200' to trigger all that fancy CAT2 tolerance crap? Because, if you get the CATII annunciator and put in flaps 45, it'll make that go away wont it?
Not that it matters, buuuuuuut in certain cases where flaps 45 is desirable for landing performance, etc it could be self defeating.
Like I said, 2 airplanes and years ago flying it. So if I'm wrong and off base, disregard. I'll take that, because it means I was FINALLY able to purge that 145 crap effectively
At any rate, I doubt that an erratic ILS could have caused this. I don’t think a trained crew would start the approach if something was acting up so severely that it caused them to land off the runway, amongst other things.
I’m not really willing to speculate too much on this whole thing. I’m gonna give the crew the benefit of the doubt on this, and wait for the NTSB to do their thing.
Glad nobody was seriously hurt.
03-07-2019, 10:30 AM
#123
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,671
Originally Posted by sobo
Not sure. Like I said, I don’t mess with it because it’s not an approved way to do anything at our company.
At any rate, I doubt that an erratic ILS could have caused this. I don’t think a trained crew would start the approach if something was acting up so severely that it caused them to land off the runway, amongst other things.
I’m not really willing to speculate too much on this whole thing. I’m gonna give the crew the benefit of the doubt on this, and wait for the NTSB to do their thing.
Glad nobody was seriously hurt.
At any rate, I doubt that an erratic ILS could have caused this. I don’t think a trained crew would start the approach if something was acting up so severely that it caused them to land off the runway, amongst other things.
I’m not really willing to speculate too much on this whole thing. I’m gonna give the crew the benefit of the doubt on this, and wait for the NTSB to do their thing.
Glad nobody was seriously hurt.
And my time on the plane, it wasnt frequent, but the whole FD/AP set up on it could suck at times. I remember being on an ILS and having the loc flip flop around.
03-08-2019, 08:40 AM
#130
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,503
Originally Posted by Hou757
From the metar it was not hard IFR. 1500 overcast light snow. Should be able to differentiate between runway and field well before touchdown.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
EngineOut
Regional
153
05-10-2017 10:12 AM
