Do you fly constant MACH on the NAT Tracks? - Page 3

#21

Scoop , 04-14-2014 09:58 AM

Super Moderator

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Merger 101: Everything you don't like operationally MUST have come from the other side who were (pick up to three):

a. Nazi's
b. Morons
c. Cowboys
e. Didn't know how to fly the xxx
f. Idiots
g. Too regimented
h. Not regimented enough
i. From the South
j. From the West
k. From the North
l. From the East
m. Only flew regional aircraft
n. Only flew the sim
o. Backwards

anyone got a few to add?

Yes,

p. Cheap - didn't print enough flight plans for the crew.
q. Wasteful - printed too many flight plans for the crew.
r. Too strict - Use SOPA.
s. Malodorous - Didn't use enough soap (Bad BO).

Scoop

#22

CRM114 , 04-14-2014 10:32 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Why not fly what ever the Capt. wants and write FSAPS to cover yourself? The Capt. can choose to write one or not, and if called on it can explain why he neglected the ICAO procedure. As the FO, you're advocating using CRM skills, you can lead a horse to water.......

#23

tsquare , 04-14-2014 03:57 PM

No longer cares

Mostly what maddogmax said is correct. Our procedure is to code it in the FMS and let the magic do it's job. Yours sounds more like a procedure to keep you awake adjusting the autothrottles all night...

#24

forgot to bid , 04-14-2014 04:37 PM

veut gagner à la loterie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Maddox max is obviously right. Some play with the CI, most just over write it.

On an MD88, my guess is you would have to turn off the autothrottles and autopilot to fly a constant anything.

We have an approved tolerance for airspeed variation thank you very much. The tolerance is the Mach number set and it can range from Vs-15 to Vmo+10.

Anything greater and we take the window shades down and turn off Netflix and get to work.

#25

Sunvox , 04-14-2014 06:01 PM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:
ATTENTION ALL INTERNATIONAL PILOTS

It has come to our attention that United Flight Operations Management continues to advocate the use of ECON while operating in the North Atlantic Track System (NATS).

We have attached three documents from ICAO. In each of these documents it is specifically stated that ECON and LRC are NOT to be used while on an assigned Mach speed.

We have provided this information to you in the past and we cannot emphasize enough that UAL Management’s decisions and policies are wrapped in their fiscal cloak of penny-pinching regardless of the impact on your professionalism, ICAO law, safety advocacy, or your certificate.

If you are violated the only people at the table with you will be ALPA representatives and legal staff. UAL Management will be far removed from that meeting.

The following are 3 quotes from the 3 documents herein attached:

“NOTE: Crews must ensure they fly the assigned Mach and not ECON mode or Long Range Cruise.”

“2. Crews must adhere to the assigned (True) Mach. Operators flying Long Range Cruise or ECON to conserve fuel are having a negative impact on the strict tolerance required for ATCs longitudinal separation.”

“Pilots must recognise that adherence to the assigned Mach Number is essential. No tolerance is provided for. Pilots must not utilise Long Range Cruise or ECON FMC modes when transiting NAT MNPS airspace.”

It is most prudent to follow the law as detailed by ICAO and not something written by the same person that writes a column in Hemispheres titled “Ask the Captain”.

Protect your certificate. You are the only one that can do that!

So it appears change is in the air . . . Yee Haa!

#26

Timbo , 04-14-2014 07:42 PM

Runs with scissors

So...nobody has actually done any real testing to see if flying "ECON" with a constantly changing CI saves any fuel, over flying a set Mach number, for the three hours you are in the tracks?

But some tool is spouting changing your cost index constantly to get the correct Mach number?

You've got to be shatting me.

#27

jonnyjetprop , 04-15-2014 02:13 AM

Gets Weekends Off

At World, we'd fly CI to the coast out fix, then constant Mach overwater and then go back to CI after the coast in fix.

#28

GogglesPisano , 04-15-2014 05:00 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonnyjetprop

At World, we'd fly CI to the coast out fix, then constant Mach overwater and then go back to CI after the coast in fix.

As do 99.9% of the operators out there. But somehow some cubicle-dweller has figured out a "better way."

BTW, how did you make out re: World? I sincerely hope everyone lands on their feet. Best of luck.

#29

tsquare , 04-15-2014 05:04 AM

No longer cares

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunvox

So it appears change is in the air . . . Yee Haa!

Source on that? I highly doubt a gubbamint bureaucrat will use the term "penny pinching".

I read it again, and it seems that it was from the MEC? Interesting that you have to make a choice of violating the law or violating company policy. They make a great point though, you will be the one at the long green table, not the company.

#30

scambo1 , 04-15-2014 08:00 AM

The Brown Dot +1

Quote:

Originally Posted by GogglesPisano

Management by cost index somehow is viewed as a penny pinching tool, but it isn't. If the goal was penny pinching, we would set a constant long range cruise at the top of climb. Cost index just manages Econ despite any spin to the contrary, that isn't the minimum cost per leg.

Anyone who thinks constant Mach over the tracks is efficiently managed by varying the cost index, and is somehow debatable as the intent of the Feds is mistaken on both counts.