angle of approach or landing range question

When the forward acceleration stopped (climbing at a constant airspeed)
the actual deck angle would be indicated, and that was also 30 degrees.
How were you able to tell that the acceleration had stopped?

I was not able to tell that. However, now that I am a pilot, I know
that aircraft tend to climb at constant airspeed, and are generally
limited to 200-250 knots down low. So, the horizontal acceleration
certainly stopped before I stopped measuring.

What I found was that the combined angle reached 30 degrees partway down
the takeoff roll, and stayed that way through initial climb out.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Tim923 wrote:
I always thought the angle was much greater before I heard about it
from a pilot. I think I had 30 degrees in mind. Tell me I'm not the
only one.

Unless you're viewing a slope exactly from the side, it will always
appear steeper than it is. Slope = rise / run. If you're watching the
plane land from an angle, your perception of the "run" length could be
drastically reduced, which would make the apparent angle much steeper
than it is. Sometimes a plane can appear to have a glide slope of 30
degrees.

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
I have to admit; that bird was about the laziest airplane on approach I've
ever been in :-)) About halfway down the slope I managed to get ahead of
it
somewhere in the vicinity of where I had to be to satisfy the FD109. It
was
the flattest touchdown I've ever made. Had the chief pilot of the line in
the right seat. (Just a crew on board for a ferry flight) At least he
didn't
seem all that scared :-))

I got to watch some sim evaluations for job interview candidates once. It
was wonderfully entertaining. The candidates came from regionals flying
glass cockpit CRJs. They were used to sprightly performance with good power.
Their scanning skills were diminished because of the glass and the
autothrottles. The evals took place in the stretch DC-8 sim. One of
candidates actually landed close to the runway. All of them went out of box
with a ghostly shade of gray. Very humbling.

D.

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
news
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
I have to admit; that bird was about the laziest airplane on approach
I've
ever been in :-)) About halfway down the slope I managed to get ahead of
it
somewhere in the vicinity of where I had to be to satisfy the FD109. It
was
the flattest touchdown I've ever made. Had the chief pilot of the line in
the right seat. (Just a crew on board for a ferry flight) At least he
didn't
seem all that scared :-))

I got to watch some sim evaluations for job interview candidates once. It
was wonderfully entertaining. The candidates came from regionals flying
glass cockpit CRJs. They were used to sprightly performance with good
power.
Their scanning skills were diminished because of the glass and the
autothrottles. The evals took place in the stretch DC-8 sim. One of
candidates actually landed close to the runway. All of them went out of
box
with a ghostly shade of gray. Very humbling.

D.

I know it was humbling for me. I did manage to get it there and down in one
piece, but I had the advantage of one hell of a good "coach" riding shotgun
with me.
Coming out of fighters and into something like the stretch 8 cold is a hell
of a shock. Naturally, being at least "somewhat experienced :-)" I expected
the airplane to be sluggish and a handful. It wasn't really. I found it
fairly predictable actually, and after a bit of "learning" I managed a fair
takeoff through a smooth double rotation to clear the tail.
I decided early on that a stabilized approach would be my only chance at
putting it on the runway, and taking it around would have cost the company a
few bucks to say the least, so I was careful and got it stabilized at the
marker. From then on it was just flying the director and trying to grease it
on. It jarred just a bit at touchdown and that was my own fault having
slightly misjudged the distance from the cockpit to the ground :-)
Anyway, I walked away with a new respect for folks who handle these monsters
on a daily basis.
Don't tell anyone, but secretly I was glad to get back in the old P51
again!! :-)
Dudley Henriques

I got to watch some sim evaluations for job interview candidates once. It
was wonderfully entertaining. The candidates came from regionals flying
glass cockpit CRJs. They were used to sprightly performance with good
power.
Their scanning skills were diminished because of the glass and the
autothrottles. The evals took place in the stretch DC-8 sim. One of
candidates actually landed close to the runway. All of them went out of
box
with a ghostly shade of gray. Very humbling.

You can get lazy using flight directors. I did some evaluations for a
start-up airline while working for Flight Safety Boeing (now Alteon).
Because the candidates normally wouldn't be experienced in the MD-80
simulator we used for the evaluation we had them fly without flight
directors, autopilot, or auto-throttles. One of the 2 pilots was flying the
MD-80 for another airline and the other pilot was a lady from a fixed base
operator with no jet time at all. I figured the MD-80 guy would do much
better than the lady. WRONG! He was so used to the MAGIC he couldn't fly
basic instruments worth a crap. The gal who normally only had basic
instruments flew much better. (but to be honest I heard one of our
instructors had let her have sim time on the side to help her prepare).

"Darrell S" wrote in message
You can get lazy using flight directors. I did some evaluations for a
start-up airline while working for Flight Safety Boeing (now Alteon).
Because the candidates normally wouldn't be experienced in the MD-80
simulator we used for the evaluation we had them fly without flight
directors, autopilot, or auto-throttles.

That is the truth. Most of the airline pilots I fly with would have a bad
day if they had to handfly an ILS to mins on raw data. They've been using
flight directors and autothrottles for so long, their scan is gone. I
brought this up to our training department. The director of training's
response was that in his 29 years of A-320 experience, he had never known of
a dual FD failure. I showed him a copy of the discrepency I had written up
that morning, after hand-flying a raw data ILS to mins with a full load of
pax.

D.

Capt.Doug wrote:



/snip/The director of training's
response was that in his 29 years of A-320 experience, he had never known of
a dual FD failure. /snip/

Hmmm, I *seriously * doubt he has 29 years of A-320 experience.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

"Scott Skylane" wrote in message
Hmmm, I *seriously * doubt he has 29 years of A-320 experience.

He is no longer with the company either.

D.