WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

[Bill Marsh]

U gotta be kidding......... IS THIS A JOKE????

Fly boy scuttle.... on the local So Cal radio news

Landing "heavies" a very low power settings to...
a. it saves gas
b. makes less noise
c. damage to penguins in the arctic


Talking to some airplane guyes at the san diego air museum and several people told me of this "new deal" coming down the pike ....... from FAA or enviromental people or city fathers groups or ??

WHAT GIVES

Bmarsh

[LoveOldPlanes]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

U gotta be kidding......... IS THIS A JOKE????

Fly boy scuttle.... on the local So Cal radio news....

WHAT GIVES

Bmarsh

Hey, maybe that's what Boeing was working on at Heathrow a few weeks back.....!

Randolph

[wyhdah]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

Maybe they could get Bear Driver to give them some pointers.

[King]

U gotta be kidding......... IS THIS A JOKE????

Fly boy scuttle.... on the local So Cal radio news

Landing "heavies" a very low power settings to...
a. it saves gas
b. makes less noise
c. damage to penguins in the arctic
d. bag of walnuts


Talking to some airplane guyes at the san diego air museum and several people told me of this "new deal" coming down the pike ....... from FAA or enviromental people or city fathers groups or ??

WHAT GIVES

Bmarsh

Well, not to be a turd or anything, but ya really can't land an airplane at high power settings!?!

[Apteryx]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

Well, not to be a turd or anything, but ya really can't land an airplane at high power settings!?!

Unless you're in the Navy...

[FlyKidChris]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

Well, not to be a turd or anything, but ya really can't land an airplane at high power settings!?!

True, not much power in the flare (at or near idle in the flare to touchdown), but over 50% N1 on final (gear down and landing flaps) to 67% N1 in a 737-900 (gear down, flaps 40 and a headwind). That much power is surprising to some folks.

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

True, not much power in the flare (at or near idle in the flare to touchdown), but over 50% N1 on final (gear down and landing flaps) to 67% N1 in a 737-900 (gear down, flaps 40 and a headwind). That much power is surprising to some folks.

For quite a while, my GF lived under the West approach/departure for PDX... There were times when I had a tough time telling (from sound only) if it was an approach or take off...

[First time Juke]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

This procedure wouldn't be entirely new since during biplane era also Caudron C.60 pilots used to cut off the ignition to slow the engine down in order to be able to land. Max rpm was 1400 and lowest in the revolving radial engine was 1100 rpm...which did not allow the plane to land.

http://www.sasgroup.pl/index_sas.php?lang=1&co=view&id=664

[Leo]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

The rotary's ran at a fairly constant rpm to facilitate cooling. Using the ignition as a "blip" switch on approach was really the only way to control landing speed.
Seems to me just another non-aviation group foisting their "needs" on an industry. Don't any of these people think that possibly, the aircraft builder and the operators have decided on power settings and procedures based on safety, not on noise and fuel conservation? I guess keeping the arctic .001 degree colder is worth a sacrificing a few airliners a year.
Get a clue! You want cleaner flights? Build cleaner running engines or develop synthetic fuels. You want less noise? Design em to run quieter. I think they've done great work on both over the past couple of decades.
Kinda like my co-worker that rails about pollution and global warming and man's destruction of the earth, but works in land development, drives to work each day and does'nt hesitate to use the company plane to visit projects...

[Bill Marsh]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

Hey Fly Kid C

Thanks for an intelligent answer....

I do remember back in the day (SFO) with the throttle pull back mandates (on takeoff) to keep the home owners (100,000's .... of them) from stop complaining of the serious noise problems. And other airports as well.

It was met with a HUGE OUTCRY of complaints from the pilots, etc and safety concious people

Well.... today its the norm and i dont personally remember any related accidents relating with this noise pollution (throttle reduction)

Any comments?

BMarsh

[Bob]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

The rotary's ran at a fairly constant rpm to facilitate cooling. Using the ignition as a "blip" switch on approach was really the only way to control landing speed.
Seems to me just another non-aviation group foisting their "needs" on an industry. Don't any of these people think that possibly, the aircraft builder and the operators have decided on power settings and procedures based on safety, not on noise and fuel conservation? I guess keeping the arctic .001 degree colder is worth a sacrificing a few airliners a year.
Get a clue! You want cleaner flights? Build cleaner running engines or develop synthetic fuels. You want less noise? Design em to run quieter. I think they've done great work on both over the past couple of decades.
Kinda like my co-worker that rails about pollution and global warming and man's destruction of the earth, but works in land development, drives to work each day and does'nt hesitate to use the company plane to visit projects...

Sell him some carbon credits

[Ron101502]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

I think they are referring to a continuous descent approach profile like they have done in London for years, where the pilot (aided by distance to touchdown callout from the approach controller) attempts to fly a continuous descent below 10,000 feet to toucdown rather than the "dive and drive" method used in most airports. Ideally this would be done at idle thrust a we allways try to descend from cruise altitude to 1000 feet at idle power but the only airport I go into where that is possible is Honolulu if you are landing on 8L and coming in from the west. This is the most fuel efficient way to fly and also reduces noise. 25 years ago we did this type of thing as a matter of routine into less congested airports, it was even possible to do it in Memphis most of the time but today US controllers descend you way too soon in order to slow you down earlier and also in some cases to get under departure traffic. The flight management computers on B-757 and newer Boeings and A-320 or newer Airbusses are all programmed to do this automatically but is usually only used from cruise down to the initial level off altitude which like I said in the US is always way too early, going into LGA from the west you fly over 100 nm at 10,000 and 250 knots, and it costs the same amount of fuel to do that as it does to cruise at 460 KTAS at FL 370 in an A-320.

[Bill Marsh]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

Hey Ron101

Thanks 4 an intelligent answer

One othe thing......... safety incase of a "it aint flying syndrum"

remember... back in the day....

the Reno or Las Vegas condition of the lockheed 4 engined turboprop pilots who put "other issues.... small panel door noise" before the real deal of keeping the plane flying

how do you justify the delay in spooling up and aircraft speed recovery on approach if you have controlabiliy or mechanical issues at low altitudes.

thanks, Bmarsh

[Leo]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

Reno, Galaxy Airlines in 1985. Crashed about a mile from where I work now.

[FlyKidChris]

Re: WHAT? power off landings of commercal A/Cs

Bill, sorry for the delay in this answer.

I do remember back in the day (SFO) with the throttle pull back mandates (on takeoff) to keep the home owners (100,000's .... of them) from stop complaining of the serious noise problems. And other airports as well.

It was met with a HUGE OUTCRY of complaints from the pilots, etc and safety concious people

Well.... today its the norm and i dont personally remember any related accidents relating with this noise pollution (throttle reduction)

Any comments?
BMarsh

The typical thrust reduction from Take Off power to Climb power isn't generally an issue at most airports. Orange County/Santa Ana/John Wayne (SNA) has a "thrust cutback" procedure for noise abatement that exceeds the normal power reduction, however.

One, I'm not a fan of this procedure. I don't have much sympathy for someone that buys a property near an airport - at a reduced price because it's near an airport - and then complains about the noise.
Furthermore, the noise complaints never seem to end, even though the current Stage III aircraft are much quieter than their predecessors.

Like you, I'm not aware of any accidents related to this procedure.

The procedure at SNA is manageable, though. It's important to not "over-reduce" the power (this is done manually in our 737s) beyond the thrust cutback power setting. Thus, I recommend a target just above the actual "goal" power setting. In other words, if the computed thrust cutback setting is 84% N1, I recommend shooting for 85-86% and then fine-tuning to the (goal or intended setting) computed power.

It's also very important for the "Pilot-flying" to maintain airspeed and not allow the aircraft to decelerate - this requires a reduction in pitch attitude.

Part of my briefing for arrivals (in the event of a go-around) or a departure is that if we have any systems abnormal or emergency, that we'll disregard the noise abatement procedures and fly the airplane normally. The emergency takes priority and we don't need the distraction that the noise abatement procedures could create.

As far as being spooled up in the event of a go-around or missed approach, our requirement is to be fully configured (gear down, flaps at the desired landing flap position) and with not less than 40% N1 power at 1000 feet AGL. From 40+% N1, the CFM-56s on the 737s accelerate quickly.

One other related note, it is possible, during a missed approach from a Cat III approach, to touch down on the runway (while in the transition from the approach/descent to the climb out).