Radio altimeter fault triggered Turkish Airlines crash

In article 7,
says...
Dave Doe wrote
It was suggested (stated I spose) by another poster here that "most"
landings are autolands. I categorically disagreed with that statement.

Air New Zealand do about 1 in 7 autolands.

What ratio did you do?


Probably about 1 in 20. The company would have liked more, but that
took all of the fun out of flying.

Agreed, ANZ *want* the pilots to do 1 in 7, the actual ratio is
probably far less. A mate flys a 777, I'll ask him what they do
(actually)

--
Duncan

writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

The shuttle does an autoland approach and touches down manually.

There's no such thing as an "autoland approach." You can automate the
approach, but if the automation doesn't take you to touchdown, it's not an
autoland.

Funny, the FAA seems to think otherwise:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...pubs/PCG/A.HTM

From the ink:

"AUTOLAND APPROACH- An autoland approach is a precision instrument
approach to touchdown and, -IN SOME CASES-, through the landing rollout."

Emphasis mine.

Wrong again.

The FAA agrees with me.

I didn't say anything about autoland including rollout. But it always
includes touchdown, just like the FAA says, otherwise it's just an approach.
And, inevitably, any autoland that includes rollout also includes touchdown,
since touchdown comes first. An autoland that does not include rollout still
includes touchdown.

What is your point, exactly?

writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Yeah, right.

I know, thanks.

It is routine to turn on autoland during approach and turn it off just
before touchdown.

If you turn it off, it's not autoland.

Nope, it is an autoland approach as defined by the FAA in:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...pubs/PCG/A.HTM

"An autoland approach is a precision instrument approach to touchdown ..."

So if you turn it off before touchdown, it's not an autoland.

You are probably confusing autoland with a coupled approach, which is
something you would have encountered if you had continued to the letter "C"
before rushing to write your post. All autolands require a coupled approach,
but a coupled approach need not include an autoland.

Since tiny tin-can aircraft don't do autolands, it's understandable that
pilots thereof might become confused.

If you try MSFS sometime (with payware add-ons), it can help clarify the
difference.

Dave Doe writes:

Like most landings eh?

Yup.

On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 07:13:12 -0500, Just go look it up! wrote:

On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:27:00 -0600, DannyDot
wrote:

a wrote:
On Mar 4, 2:21 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Musicrab writes:

snip

I don't think (and could be wrong) that a coupled/automated approach
does in fact need a conventional altimeter.

In my F-4 it did not. But that was back in the mid 80s with an analog
autopilot.

Also, can some explain what retard is?

They must have been doing an autoland if the radio altimeter was
involved. It feeds the autopilots AGL for calculating when to reduce
thrust and begin the flare. Otherwise it would have just been
following the NAV inputs for GS and LOC down to whenever the airline
SOP dictated disconnection of AP/AT for a hand-flown landing.


We could have autolanded the F-4 without an radio altimeter because it was
carrier qualified. I was in the Air Force, but our F-4s could land without
a flare and without a throttle adjustment. Put in on airspeed and
glideslope and fly in into the ground :-)

Danny Deger

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

The shuttle does an autoland approach and touches down manually.

There's no such thing as an "autoland approach." You can automate the
approach, but if the automation doesn't take you to touchdown, it's not
an
autoland.

Funny, the FAA seems to think otherwise:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...pubs/PCG/A.HTM

From the ink:

"AUTOLAND APPROACH- An autoland approach is a precision instrument
approach to touchdown and, -IN SOME CASES-, through the landing
rollout."

Emphasis mine.

Wrong again.

The FAA agrees with me.

I didn't say anything about autoland including rollout. But it always
includes touchdown, just like the FAA says, otherwise it's just an
approach.
And, inevitably, any autoland that includes rollout also includes
touchdown,
since touchdown comes first. An autoland that does not include rollout
still
includes touchdown.

What is your point, exactly?

The fact you are too stupid to realize just how infrequently it is actually
used, for openers.

Then the fact that you are just too stupid.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

If you try MSFS sometime (with payware add-ons), it can help clarify the
difference.

Yeah, dumb ass, just like playing Monopoly can teach you the real estate
business.

Your head gets thicker every day. Is your illness progressive?

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

The shuttle does an autoland approach and touches down manually.

There's no such thing as an "autoland approach." You can automate the
approach, but if the automation doesn't take you to touchdown, it's not an
autoland.

Funny, the FAA seems to think otherwise:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...pubs/PCG/A.HTM

From the ink:

"AUTOLAND APPROACH- An autoland approach is a precision instrument
approach to touchdown and, -IN SOME CASES-, through the landing rollout."

Emphasis mine.

Wrong again.

The FAA agrees with me.

I didn't say anything about autoland including rollout. But it always
includes touchdown, just like the FAA says, otherwise it's just an approach.
And, inevitably, any autoland that includes rollout also includes touchdown,
since touchdown comes first. An autoland that does not include rollout still
includes touchdown.

What is your point, exactly?

That you are an idiot?

From your above:

"There's no such thing as an "autoland approach.""

Funny that the FAA defines something you say doesn't exist.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Yeah, right.

I know, thanks.

It is routine to turn on autoland during approach and turn it off just
before touchdown.

If you turn it off, it's not autoland.

Nope, it is an autoland approach as defined by the FAA in:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...pubs/PCG/A.HTM

"An autoland approach is a precision instrument approach to touchdown ..."

So if you turn it off before touchdown, it's not an autoland.

Right, it is an "autoland approach" as defined by the FAA and a term
you claim doesn't exist.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Out of curiosity, and notwithstanding some contributions whose vehemence is
equaled only by their lack of information on the subject, is there an
underlying assumption here that the discussion of autoland proceedures is in
some way related to the THY accident in Amsterdam?

Can anyone point me to verifiable information indicating they were executing
a CAT-IIIc proceedure, and not, as I presently assume, a standard CAT-I ILS
with automatic pilot and autothrottles (as is standard)?