Well, we are not talking about 5 minutes early, but when congestion disappears (and it has been a lot less congestion lately due to a massive reduction of flights) we are talking about potentially arriving 30-40 minutes on some flights early with the massive block times UA operates with. We still have a 2:40 block time for UA between LGA-ORD and UA is using every second of it while AA has block times of 2:20, 2:30 at the most. (why is that anyways? Is that UAs strategy to have 2:40 block time for 730 miles just to make sure they meet their on time performance?)
To dilly dally at .75/76 to save gas, leave on time, fly 2:40 and land on the dot getting to the gate on time when you could have arrived 30 minutes early is something I as a customer find annoying when you know that cruising at the aircrafts normal speed could have gotten me home early (.76 is not normal speed).
If you think they can change arrival time by 30 minutes on LGA-ORD by flying at a different cruise Mach, you're just misinformed. The difference from max to min cost index is about 15 minutes if you can change altitude also (in which case the fuel difference is substantial -- something like 15%). If you're comparing min and max cost index at constant altitude, it's well under 10 minutes.
If you go to a site that shows actual recorded data for flight times, you'll see that UA's flight (not block) times LGA-ORD over the last week have been consistently 2-5 minutes faster than AA's.
Well, never say never. As we posted, we have to have all systems working for the autolands. If a twin engine cessna collided with the cockpit, sucking out the FO and leaving a gaping hole in the jet, my guess is there would be inoperative systems in the jet, thus not allowing an autoland. You would be stuck with Karen Black the FA flying the jet again.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
If you're comparing min and max cost index at constant altitude, it's well under 10 minutes.
For those who wish to run some numbers... Mach 1.0 is roughly 700mph/610kts at typical cruise altitude temperatures. That makes each 0.01 Mach a change in speed of 7mph. Spend two hours in cruise and each 0.01 Mach is about 72 seconds of flight time. Fly 0.76 instead of 0.80 and you'll spend less than five extra minutes in cruise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aluminumdriver
If a twin engine cessna collided with the cockpit, sucking out the FO and leaving a gaping hole in the jet, my guess is there would be inoperative systems in the jet, thus not allowing an autoland.
In the movie, the autopilot's turn function was inop. It would only hold a heading and altitude. That would make it a bit difficult to get an approach capture, never mind a [Land 3].
Did the 747-100, the aircraft used in the film, ever have autoland?
Last edited by FlyinHawaiian; May 25, 09 at 11:19 pm.
Reason: fix html
Fresh answered this pretty good. There are a lot of things that have to be working for us to do autolands. The airport has to have its ILS system working, and runway lights working correctly. The plane has to have all it's required equipment working and be current in autolands, and then the pilots have to be current and qualified as well.
From what I've heard from other airline pilots, the airplane has to be configured (ie, airspeed, flaps/slats, landing gear, autopilots engaged, ILS's tuned in, etc.) further out than a visual approach. This slows down the rate at which an airport can accept incoming aircraft. As such, you will only get a CAT III approach if it requires it or the airport and ATC are really quiet and the pilots request it for certification purposes. This happens on a regular basis typically on the late arriving flights. Autolandings can also impact outgoing flights. The outbound a/c typically hold short of the runway in ILS Critical Areas and their presence can affect the glide slope (vertical guidance part of the ILS). In visual conditions, not a factor for landing a/c but for autolands, the tower needs to have the holding a/c outside of this critical area. BTW, the Glide slope is typically located by the runway aiming point (the two big solid white markings on the runway) and about 200 feet off the centerline.
Programs: UA M+ 1K/1MM, VX eleVAte, HHonors Diamond, SPG Gold, Hertz 5 Star
Posts: 2,234
Just a comment about autolands. My most vivid memory of one was SFO-BOS in a UA 762 a number of years ago. We were in dense fog and ATC had warned all incoming aircraft of "tall ships" in the harbor for approaches. It was pea soup out there and somewhere close to landing we executed a go around. The captain asked ATC for an alternate approach and one was given. After setting up for it, he radioed he would be performing an autoland. I watched out that window the whole time, our headlamps were on, it was 2300 EST at the time, and you couldn't see a thing until 5 seconds before touch down. Then all we could see were some faint lights immediately under us on the runway. I didn't even see any terminal buildings until we had left the active runway. It was a really impressive landing and from a layman's perspective, it must have been CAT III.
I'll never forget hearing about the "tall ships" warning... ever hear of that before?
Looking at a satellite picture, only runways 27 and 33L have their thresholds right next to the water, and 33L has some kind of structure holding approach lights quite a distance into the water.
In my extremely unprofessional and uninformed opinion, likely not much of a problem!
From what I've heard from other airline pilots, the airplane has to be configured (ie, airspeed, flaps/slats, landing gear, autopilots engaged, ILS's tuned in, etc.) further out than a visual approach. This slows down the rate at which an airport can accept incoming aircraft. As such, you will only get a CAT III approach if it requires it or the airport and ATC are really quiet and the pilots request it for certification purposes. This happens on a regular basis typically on the late arriving flights. Autolandings can also impact outgoing flights. The outbound a/c typically hold short of the runway in ILS Critical Areas and their presence can affect the glide slope (vertical guidance part of the ILS). In visual conditions, not a factor for landing a/c but for autolands, the tower needs to have the holding a/c outside of this critical area. BTW, the Glide slope is typically located by the runway aiming point (the two big solid white markings on the runway) and about 200 feet off the centerline.
Spacing is further during any instrument approach versus a visual approach. Even if we are flying a basic Cat I ILS, approach will give us the same spacing as a CAT III ILS, standard IFR separation, unless we request to slow down earlier. We run into more problems having to slow down early and configure on a non-precision approach in the weather, than a standard ILS.
As for the ILS Critical area, that has no affect on delays or spacing. Usually the critical area is only a couple hundred feet prior to the normal hold short line, so planes just hold behind that line for takeoff. Adds 30 sec to a taxi out to the runway maybe, so no issue overall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFO 1K
Just a comment about autolands. My most vivid memory of one was SFO-BOS in a UA 762 a number of years ago. We were in dense fog and ATC had warned all incoming aircraft of "tall ships" in the harbor for approaches. It was pea soup out there and somewhere close to landing we executed a go around. The captain asked ATC for an alternate approach and one was given. After setting up for it, he radioed he would be performing an autoland. I watched out that window the whole time, our headlamps were on, it was 2300 EST at the time, and you couldn't see a thing until 5 seconds before touch down. Then all we could see were some faint lights immediately under us on the runway. I didn't even see any terminal buildings until we had left the active runway. It was a really impressive landing and from a layman's perspective, it must have been CAT III.
I'll never forget hearing about the "tall ships" warning... ever hear of that before?
At Boston, you can have tall masted ships intruding upon the normal TERPS obstacle criteria for runways 4 and 27. We are instructed to ask if any tall masted ships are in the area prior to shooting a no kidding instrument approach if we can't clear the area. Most of the time it's no factor, but every now and then we have to change up an approach for a tall masted ship.
Some autolands can be down to less than 1/16 of a mile vis, so you won't even see the runway when you land, you just land. Taxiing in that weather is the hard part, using what's called the Surface Movement Ground Guidance system to taxi around the airport. It is a series of lights and ground checkpoints to tell everyone where you are, or so that Ground can use their radar to follow you to specific points. It can take along time to taxi using SMGS to the gate.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
"200, Land 3" That's 200' above touchdown. Land 3 is the autopilot/autoland status.
"100, Land 3" 100' above touchdown.
"50" 50 feet above touchdown
"30" 30 feet above touchdown
You can hear the touchdown.
very cool and thanks tho a little nerve wracking as one doesn't really see the runway (save a quick glimpse of the lights) until they actually touch down (yeah, i know, for you it's just a walk in the pahk <--boston accent )
__________________
just my humble opinion but i used to try and stop hockey pucks so what do i know . Nighthawks fans are everywhere
Not sure if this is the right place, but it would be related
anyone knows the 26 words that pilots use (or the industry use) to represent the alphabet?
Like C for Charlie (thats the one I can remember)
Programs: UA 1P, BD Gold, AA Plat, SPG Platinum, National Executive
Posts: 1,792
Let's see how I do... (it's called the phonetic alphabet)
Alpha
Bravo
Charlie
Delta (Dixie in ATL for obvious reasons)
Echo
Foxtrot
Golf
Hotel
India
Juliet
Kilo
Lima
Mike
November
Oscar
Papa
Qubec
Romeo
Sierra
Tengo
Uniform
Victor
Whiskey
X-Ray
Red Sox
Zulu
Last edited by UAX_Brasilia; May 25, 09 at 4:53 pm.
Reason: spelled romeo wrong
Let's see how I do... (it's called the phonetic alphabet)
Alpha
Bravo
Charlie
Delta (Dixie in ATL for obvious reasons)
Echo
Foxtrot
Golf
Hotel
India
Juliet
Kilo
Lima
Mike
November
Oscar
Papa
Qubec
Romeo
Sierra
Tengo
Uniform
Victor
Whiskey
X-Ray
Red Sox
Zulu
Thanks!!
but why Red Sox for Y? wouldnt Yankee be more better
tho a little nerve wracking as one doesn't really see the runway (save a quick glimpse of the lights) until they actually touch down 
(yeah, i know, for you it's just a walk in the pahk <--boston accent 
)
