A320 doing S-turns at LAS

"Gerald Sylvester" wrote in message S-turns out at 10 miles, yea no
problem. S-turns that close scared the hell out of me.

Why does the size of the plane make any difference?
S-turns are s-turns are s-turns.
No need to over-react.

D.

Capt.Doug wrote:
"Gerald Sylvester" wrote in message S-turns out at 10 miles, yea no
problem. S-turns that close scared the hell out of me.


Why does the size of the plane make any difference?
S-turns are s-turns are s-turns.
No need to over-react.

It isn't necessarily the size of the plane but 1, I didn't
expect to see it especially since the plane was IFR (commercial
jet) and ATC is responsible for spacing (why were they so close
to begin with?), 2, the plane was on very
short final where the 200 foot (?) wingspan was a good percentage
of the entire altitude (AGL), 3, passengers must have freaked a little
when they are looking out the side of the plane *straight down*
(perspective at least since their only reference is houses 800
feet away), 4, the speed of the airplane not allowing a stabilized
approach. Surprised yes. Freaked, no.

BTW, I've put my time in on (not piloting) commericial aircraft.
400+ legs in the past 5 years and I never experienced anything like
that. In fact, the number of total go-arounds was 1 (aircraft in
front of us didn't exit the runway quick enough). So anything
other than a normal landing seems to be quite odd for commercial
traffic.

Gerald

"Gerald Sylvester"wrote in message I didn't
expect to see it especially since the plane was IFR (commercial
jet) and ATC is responsible for spacing (why were they so close
to begin with?),

When a pilot accepts a visual approach and states that he has the traffic to
follow in sight, who is responsible for spacing? This is an every day thing.
Occasionally, the lead plane will slow down much more than expected after
crossing the outer marker (approximately 5 miles out). When this happens,
the following plane will have to adjust as neccessary. For example, If I'm
following a 19 seat commuter turboprop into LGA, I expect that plane to keep
it's speed up until very short final. I can routinely trail it with as
little as 2 miles of seperation. IHowever, if a new-hire first officer is
flying the commuter plane, and I find myself closing on it because it slowed
down sooner than usual, then I have to adjust using the tools that I have.
S-turns are one of those tools.

2, the plane was on very
short final where the 200 foot (?) wingspan was a good percentage
of the entire altitude (AGL),

Closer to 108 feet. Optical illusions perhaps?

3, passengers must have freaked a little
when they are looking out the side of the plane *straight down*

Not really. Have you ever rode the River Visual into Washington National?
How about the Lagoon Visual into San Juan and then switched runways on short
final? These are standard manuevers which involve bank angles near the
ground. In 25 years, not one single person has ever questioned it.

Additionally, the A-320 is a fly-by-wire airplane. The bank angles are
limited by the flight computers.

4, the speed of the airplane not allowing a stabilized
approach. Surprised yes. Freaked, no.

A stabilized approach includes proper airspeed control. S-turns don't
neccessarily change the airspeed.

BTW, I've put my time in on (not piloting) commericial aircraft.
400+ legs in the past 5 years and I never experienced anything like
that. In fact, the number of total go-arounds was 1 (aircraft in
front of us didn't exit the runway quick enough). So anything
other than a normal landing seems to be quite odd for commercial
traffic.

A frequent flyer! I like that.
You are quite right that s-turns are not the norm. However they are an
acceptable tool for pilots, even if the plane is a jet transport. Please
continue to bring your aviation questions to this group. It is important
that we explain the hows and whys so that no one is surprised.

D.