Guest kevenv Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 Had a 319 yesterday that wanted to do the straight in NDB vs the BC. Didn't matter to me but I was curious and asked why (after clearing for the NDB). Something to do with they could "push a button" and the bus would fly the whole approach, but Transport Canada regs prohibited the same thing for a BC (explained that they would have to fly part of the approach). Why this rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest qb Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 A 319 can fly an NDB approach with both lateral and vertical modes fully managed by the FMS. With a BC there is no backcourse 'button' per se, so the pilots have to manage their own tracking in reference to raw data and because of that, cannot engaged a managed vertical mode. Since the 319 has GPS primary fine tuning the FMS there is no sacrifice at all in the accuracy of an NDB approach so really, no need to up the workload and shoot a BC if they didn't have to. The FMS lets the pilots fly a stablized descent all the way down final on a NDB or a VOR approach with the push of one button, just like an ILS, but to non-precision limits. All this, of course, assumes they are at the right airport. qb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nobias Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 That last comment was just a cheap shot. Give it a rest. I'll start making comments like that the day I stop making mistakes myself. Maybe you should consider doing the same... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ecamaction Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 qb It is people like you that give our profession a bad name. Your smart ass comment at the end of what was an informative post negated anything you said. When is this profession going to smarten up and start treating its fellow pilots with some respect. The investigation has barely started and you have hung your fellow pilots out to dry. Nice work. Do you expect support when you have an incident, or are you another one of those invincible pilots who "never" make mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Max Continuous Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 >> All this, of course, assumes they are at the right airport. << Your credibility flew right out the window, with this statement. Rather than pass judgement on others, wouldn't it be more professional to just appreciate that there weren't any fatalities associated with this incident, and have a little compassion for the feelings of others? I would respectfully suggest posting a retraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jay at AC Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 QB: Thank you for your answer to the question. It was very clear, logical, and technically accurate, objectives which are often difficult to achieve. Well done! I appreciated the levity at the end of what could have been a very dry posting. The forum members may be a bit sensitive to the issue at the moment and may not recognize you were poking fun with a blunt instrument rather than the sharp objects that are being lobbed about at the moment. In light of the fact there were no serious repercussions from what appears to be a simple orientation slip-up, the reality is that this event will be the object of some poignant remarks for years to come (Wrong Way Corrigan comes to mind). Your credibility is intact along with your sense of humour. That is supposing, of course, that the posters replying to your thread HAVE a sense of humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kevenv Posted September 5, 2003 Share Posted September 5, 2003 Thanks for the info, clears up a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest qb Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 Jay, Thanks for 'getting it'. qb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nobias Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 It's got nothing to do with "getting it". Oh gee, that humour was so subtle that many of its nuances were completely lost on me. And it's got nothing to do with being sensitive to that particular incident, since I have no affiliation with the pilots or the company. It's got to do with not taking a cheap shot at every opportunity, knowing that it could happen to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted September 6, 2003 Share Posted September 6, 2003 I got it about the same as you did Nobias, cause really, what was the funny part of the post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted September 7, 2003 Share Posted September 7, 2003 I think the term is: self-deprecating. If you can't see past the literal it probably seems to to be insulting but if you can imagine the same phrase delivered with a wry smile or a bit of body language the whole meaning changes. Cut the guy some slack and 'choose' to see it as funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted September 7, 2003 Share Posted September 7, 2003 I think the term is: self-deprecating. If you can't see past the literal it probably seems to be insulting but if you can imagine the same phrase delivered with a wry smile or a bit of body language the whole meaning changes. Cut the guy some slack and 'choose' to see it as funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nobias Posted September 7, 2003 Share Posted September 7, 2003 Self-deprecating: Tending to undervalue oneself and one's abilities. Hmmm, I don't see the self-deprecational aspect of the joke, since it seems to undervalue someone else's abilities... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.