WN 737-800 first flight
03-26-2012 | 06:07 AM
#41
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
+1 on the forecast winds, makes all the difference. I usually use fl340, fl240 and 120, seems to maintain a good transition. Also if you put in your landing alt on the same page, it will prevent that "bump" when descending through fl180.
03-26-2012 | 08:47 AM
#42
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
SWA made a conscious choice many many years ago to save a ton of money by not embracing the technology many other airlines were using. It was a very smart choice and it did in fact save millions upon millions of dollars. At the time SWA was a relatively small airline serving a fairly small portion of the U.S. Fuel was extremely cheap and SWA did very little long haul flying. The auto-throttle mechanisms were cannibalized from the 300 fleet and sold on the open market. VNAV was disabled. Autobrakes were not used etc. These tools were simply not needed for the up and down Texas two step type of flying that was done at the time. Not only did the parts that were sold make money for the company, they saved a fortune in maintenance costs for not having to maintain equipment that was not necessary in their short haul operation.
Fast forward many years and the cost of fuel and a completely different route structure made these tools valuable for a now expensive commodity, fuel. SWA began using these fuel saving tools as they became necessary to a now very different type of flying being done by the company. Again it was the outside the box thinking that paid huge dividends. The plan did in fact save a lot of money for the type of flying that was done and worked very well for many years.
I have no idea what you are talking about on the safety front. SWA has an industry leading fatigue policy (excused from the flight with pay and no carpet dance guaranteed) and utilizes all other common safety practices standard at other carriers, ASAP-FDAP etc. The SWA safety record is exemplary, feel free to look up the statistical data at your leisure.
Fast forward many years and the cost of fuel and a completely different route structure made these tools valuable for a now expensive commodity, fuel. SWA began using these fuel saving tools as they became necessary to a now very different type of flying being done by the company. Again it was the outside the box thinking that paid huge dividends. The plan did in fact save a lot of money for the type of flying that was done and worked very well for many years.
I have no idea what you are talking about on the safety front. SWA has an industry leading fatigue policy (excused from the flight with pay and no carpet dance guaranteed) and utilizes all other common safety practices standard at other carriers, ASAP-FDAP etc. The SWA safety record is exemplary, feel free to look up the statistical data at your leisure.
Maybe what he is talking about is that the use of VNAV gives you a little more protection from altitude deviations. Using V/S will allow you to fly right out of an altitude to which you are assigned. But real men don't make that kind of mistake I guess...
03-26-2012 | 09:59 AM
#43
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
I'll be the first to admit that our flight ops leadership at times feels they are legends in their own minds. Is yours really any better about that?
Actually, we started using VNAV in 2010 and as any SWA flight attendant will tell you, the rides on the descent (and climb) most certainly did NOT get smoother! V/S and CWS pitch may seem like anachronisms to many, but in reasonably competent hands they absolutely provide a smoother ride than George chasing the airspeed.
The other fact is that many around here just love to engage in tired old stereotypes. Kind of like how uptight all those double-breasted u-boat commanders seem to be.
Actually, we started using VNAV in 2010 and as any SWA flight attendant will tell you, the rides on the descent (and climb) most certainly did NOT get smoother! V/S and CWS pitch may seem like anachronisms to many, but in reasonably competent hands they absolutely provide a smoother ride than George chasing the airspeed.
The other fact is that many around here just love to engage in tired old stereotypes. Kind of like how uptight all those double-breasted u-boat commanders seem to be.
VNAV works great if you know how to use it. I'm very much a V/S or LVL CH guy as need be as I will always do what needs to be done to be smoother and accurate. However, I had very few issues with the 737 using VNAV. The newest software uploads seem work great unless you're flying right up against the barber pole. I had the hamster totally fall off the wheel one time going into BWI- ATC jacked with our speed a couple times and the plane went crosseyed about 30 seconds later.
It was pretty funny seeing the VNAV go "I got it... I got it.... I got it... LOL NOPE."
All in all, throw in the predicted winds and altimeter setting, and it will do a nice smooth job the vast majority of the time.
03-31-2012 | 08:01 PM
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ok, I gotta agree with that one.
Delta guys should not be bragging about the VNAV on our 737s.
When it comes to VNAV descents, the Smiths FMS on Delta 737NGs is a piece of junk.
It does OK in climbs or down low at low speeds (ie -- approaches). But in a descent from cruise it never seems to get it right. It is highly likely to overspeed the airplane, overshoot the crossing restriction or get 20 knots slow. (or all three)
The Honeywell VNAV on our 757s and 767s is far superior.
Delta guys should not be bragging about the VNAV on our 737s.
When it comes to VNAV descents, the Smiths FMS on Delta 737NGs is a piece of junk.
It does OK in climbs or down low at low speeds (ie -- approaches). But in a descent from cruise it never seems to get it right. It is highly likely to overspeed the airplane, overshoot the crossing restriction or get 20 knots slow. (or all three)
The Honeywell VNAV on our 757s and 767s is far superior.
This is so true.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
