Originally Posted by Grease (Post 4031981)

The problem with your argument is that people were trying to blame DEI before we even knew the race and gender of the pilots, just like they did with that runway incursion in DFW, just like the geniuses in this thread are doing right now. That’s why it’s racist and sexist.

Originally Posted by JoeBlo (Post 4032000)

Well when the airline advertises and makes their mission "hiring 50% women and 50% people based on a certain skin color" Its a legit question to ask.....

Is the gender and appearance more important than other metrics? Experience ? PIC time? How do we know without asking? What about in training events? Does the skin color and gender get judged differently? (I already know the answer)

Originally Posted by Milk Man (Post 4031303)

Or just a bad pilot dipping below GS

Originally Posted by HwkrPlt (Post 4032003)

Can you show us that exact quote, and where it came from?

Originally Posted by dmeg13021 (Post 4032025)

That's 2500 into Aviate.

But you knew that.

Originally Posted by Hedley (Post 4031952)

It’s still a RNAV approach with a stable 3 degree glide path all the way to the runway. So on this approach you simply turn the autopilot off over AXELL at 880’ and continue to follow the exact same vertical deviation scale pointer down to the flare just like you do on any other RNAV approach. Same thing with following the glide slope to the runway on a straight in ILS. This is just basic pilot stuff and not that difficult. I can see where crews, especially heavy crews that almost exclusively shoot straight in ILS’s to long runways could not be as proficient in RNAV approaches to shorter runways as NB crews, but that is a fault in our training and not the design of the approach.

Originally Posted by CousinEddie (Post 4032039)

Regarding the VD scale on RNAV approaches, I brief that a centered VD on final will not guarantee 2 red / 2 white on the PAPI as you would normally expect on a centered ILS glide slope. Be prepared to make a slight correction visually using the PAPI despite the nicely centered VD indication. Don’t just lock onto the VD scale all the way down. Crosscheck and correct. A recent example was SAN. Centered VD indication on the RNAV was giving a steady 3 whites on the PAPI (737 fleet). That glide path is 3.5 degrees, so correcting for being high on the PAPI can be more of an issue below 1000 feet.

Originally Posted by Hedley (Post 4032051)

Just did the RNAV 27 into SAN. Flaps 40, fully configured by the FAF per the ops alert, and flew a centered VD indication all the way to the flare. The path is 3.5 degrees for a reason, so adjust your flare to compensate for the steeper angle. Touched down about 1700’, disengaged the autobrakes at 70 knots, and took the taxiway that I had briefed. We have electronic glide to the runway on RNAV and ILS approaches. People need to use that and stop ducking under.

Originally Posted by Hedley (Post 4032051)

Just did the RNAV 27 into SAN in a Max9. Flaps 40, fully configured by the FAF per the ops alert, and flew a centered VD indication all the way to the flare. The path is 3.5 degrees for a reason, so adjust your flare to compensate for the steeper angle. Touched down about 1700’, disengaged the autobrakes at 70 knots, and took the taxiway that I had briefed. We have electronic glide to the runway on RNAV and ILS approaches. People need to use that and stop ducking under.