Your reading things I didn't say, I haven't dismissed any procedures on here or claimed they are not right in any way. You should know however that they are recommendations, no matter how they got there. If you were bound by these procedures than what would a pilot do when they encountered a situation where the procedure given couldn't satisfy the situation? This is why computers aren't flying without pilots, these recommendations, to date, cannot be all inclusive.

In your manual there is only one section you are bound to at all costs, that is the limitations section.

Again I am not saying you should go out and avoid following procedures just because they are recommendations and in fact I believe they should be stuck to 99.9% of the time. But one should know that those procedures are not binding and here is what my aerodynamics professor Thomas Teller told us to think about each time we read any manual section other than the limitations:

1) Do you trust the person giving the information.
2) Are you capable of attaining that performance or completing that procedure.
3) Is your aircraft capable of attaining that performance or completing that procedure.



My answer to the interview question: I realize these procedures are there for my safety and will abide by them whenever able. However, I also realize these procedures cannot cover every situation, particularly emergencies, I may encounter and thus are recommendations. That being said, I continue to do diligent research on aircraft flight dynamics, aircraft systems, and try to stay open minded to any and all information, both past and present, that I encounter. This way, one day, if I don't have a procedure to follow that satisfies the situation, I will be able to get myself and my passengers down safely.

 

I'm not an English major, but it seems like nortonious is reading what you're saying. This is civil flying, the name of the game is safety - especially when the lives of very many people are involved.

 

"Driving an aircraft in at stall speed is not in any aircrafts procedure book for short field landing that I have read, however it will give one unquestionably the shortest landing distance."-shdw



Perfect, but this may get you beaten about the head if you fly with a jet crew. Works well with a Cub. There really are large differences and the idea that your CFI and you have worked out the answers to all aircraft is amusing, but not actually useful.

Again, show us some valid test data or manufacturer's procedures and we are more inclined to listen. Claiming you have an answer without real world data or recommendations ends up looking weak.

 

I agree. I believe that the airlines should just let the crews fly their aircraft the way that they want and use whatever procedures the crew thinks will work. Your recommendation for landing and achieving the shortest landing distance I'm certain will work well in a B-757/767. Besides, that saves a lot of financial resources for crew training.

G'Luck Mate

 

An excellent suggestion! In return, pilots would have to agree that the contractual pay scale is only a recommended rate, and that the actual compensation will be whatever the company deems proper.

Seriously, shdw may be thinking about a very rare situation for which there is no procedure or guidance. That's different.

 

But that's not what shdw wrote.

shdw very clearly stated "Procedures are nothing more than recommendations that work for the majority of situations, they are by no means limitations or a 'be all end all' source of information for aircraft operation"

Frankly, I'm done with the whole x-wind landing technique debate.

shdw, you wrote what you wrote. Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks you're a little off the mark with those comments. Good luck.

 

We have degenerated into a game of "how far can we take quotes from each other out of context?".

You know I'm not entirely happy with the way shdw presents his material or his somewhat smartass attitude either, but he does brings with him some valid and interesting points of discussion, which I DO appreciate.

Can we have a mature, worthwhile technical discussion without the put downs, sarcasms, and personal attacks?

 

More than 3k in the left seat of a metro and more than 8k in an MD11, 4k in the left seat, never had to use diff thrust in crosswinds 40+ kts.

 

Flying chicken:

I could not agree more. This entire thread has disintegrated into...well, I don't know what.

The original question addressed jet aircraft and I have never in my 30+ years of flying aircraft ever used, heard of anyone using or even advocating the use of asymmetrical thrust in a take-off OR landing scenario in a jet aircraft. PERIOD ! In propeller driven aircraft it is a different story and there are valid techniques for using asymmetrical thrust in those situations. Different issue completely folks. Somehow we can't seem to separate piloting techniques in two completely different situations.

Just my two cents worth...and I'm off this thread forever.

G'Day Mates

 

YouTube - Lufthansa Airbus wingstrike at Hamburg

run time 1:06



You can touchdown anyway you like, but lack of rollout control will put your cookies in a spinny tin.