FAA broadcast about TEB..

wrote:

Part of the problem, I suspect, is modern FMS/LNAV aircraft trying to fly a
ancient round-dial aircraft departure procedure, especially one that
includes an NDB crossing and an NDB bearing crossing.

I would think the FMS has the DP in its database. It sounded like the
problem was blowing altitude, not route.

Doug Carter wrote:

wrote:

Part of the problem, I suspect, is modern FMS/LNAV aircraft trying to fly a
ancient round-dial aircraft departure procedure, especially one that
includes an NDB crossing and an NDB bearing crossing.

I would think the FMS has the DP in its database. It sounded like the
problem was blowing altitude, not route.

True. But, each FMS vendor has their own idea of how to code a non-RNAV DP,
which has resulted in some pretty serious problems from time to time. It almost
caused CFIT with a "round dial" DP at Reno being misapplied by crews using
FMS/LNAV.

With RNAV DPs the vendors are pretty well forced to code it correctly. Even
then, some boxes will lead a fly-by WP differently than others.

As to TEB, some crews perhaps busted an altitude because it appears they have
passed the restricting fix when, in fact, they have not. Based on similar
situations at other locations, it is certainly one possibility for an apparent
pattern.

If this were just one or two flights, we wouldn't be hearing about it.

wrote:

As to TEB, some crews perhaps busted an altitude because it appears they
have passed the restricting fix when, in fact, they have not.Â*Â*Â*BasedÂ*on
similar situations at other locations, it is certainly one possibility for
an apparent pattern.

It's rather a shame that the message didn't describe what mistake(s) were
commonly made. Like the concept of hotspots, I think that this would help
direct our attention where most needed.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:
/snip//
It's rather a shame that the message didn't describe what mistake(s) were
commonly made. Like the concept of hotspots, I think that this would help
direct our attention where most needed.


You see, with the FAA it's not about safety, it's about busting you. If
they pointed out the specific problem to avoid, their odds of busting
you drop considerably.

Scott Skylane wrote:
Andrew Gideon wrote:
/snip//

It's rather a shame that the message didn't describe what mistake(s) were
commonly made. Like the concept of hotspots, I think that this would
help
direct our attention where most needed.



You see, with the FAA it's not about safety, it's about busting you. If
they pointed out the specific problem to avoid, their odds of busting
you drop considerably.

I was under the impression that the link in the broadcast went to a PDF
page that HAD the hotspots highlighted on it.

Dave

No, in the new FAA it's about hiring unqualified women and minorities to
operate the National Airspace System and getting rid of white males
under the veil of "Diversity"

It is one reason Lockheed Martin and others will be running the NAS soon
and not the FAA



You see, with the FAA it's not about safety, it's about busting you.
If they pointed out the specific problem to avoid, their odds of
busting you drop considerably.


I was under the impression that the link in the broadcast went to a PDF
page that HAD the hotspots highlighted on it.

Dave

"Peterpan" wrote in message
.. .
No, in the new FAA it's about hiring unqualified women and minorities to
operate the National Airspace System and getting rid of white males under
the veil of "Diversity"

Yep, clearly the reason you're disliked and unwanted is that you're a
qualified white male. No other explanation for it.

Dave S wrote:

I was under the impression that the link in the broadcast went to a PDF
page that HAD the hotspots highlighted on it.

Perhaps I'm missing it, but I don't quite see how that descibes the errors
we're making.

- Andrew