Tino From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 750 times:
Does anybody know if many airlines still let their cockpit-crew make fully manual landings(of course in cat1 conditions)
I know, for instance that SAS, Swissair and Sabena still have the procedure to land manually, wether Air Belgium prohibits their pilots to do a manual one for this costs more fuel.
Noel From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 740 times:
Yes, that's correct. The pilot always does the landing unless the conditions fall under Cat II or III. Actually, it would be more stressful for the pilot to let the plane land because of the attention they must give to the autopilot's proficiency. I hope you are mistaken about Air Belgium because if they do what you say, they are VERY dangerous as the pilots become little more than advanced passangers. How would the pilots ever get training? Plus, it's no fun to let the a/p land the plane! :-)
BryanG From United States of America, joined May 1999, 427 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 745 times:
On Southwest Airlines aircraft, pilots do all manual landings in all conditions. That's because their aircraft aren't fitted with autoland systems. Instead, heads-up displays are standard on their planes. I don't know exactly why they choose to do this, but it works for them.
Airbear From Australia, joined May 2001, 642 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 741 times:
I know its entirely dependent on weather conditions. autopilot can only land the plane if visibility is better than a certain distance. otherwise, the pilots need to do it manually. I dont think this answers your question but then again maybe it does
FedEx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 741 times:
Your correct about Southwest pilot's do all the landings except
when it gets to CATIII. Southwest pilots also do there own
navigation in some cockpits and they also do there own braking.
Alaska is the only airline I know that can land and take off in zero
MD-11 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 740 times:
I doubt Alaska is the only airline who can take off and land in zero visibility... There are plenty of airlines who have airplanes capable of taking off and landing in zero visiblity. The MD-11, 777, etc., are all planes that are capable of that aren't they? I was once on an MD-11 and when we landed, the visiblity was so bad that from my window seat, I couldn't see the surroundings or even the surface of the runway until we actually touched down on it.
Noel From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 740 times:
The autopilot can land the plane in 0-0 visibility, and a pilot can't and is not allowed to if the vis is that bad. The autoland function does have a crosswind limit so it can't land the plane in all conditions. Also, if the runway is not equipped with Cat II/III autoland functions, autoland cannot be done, and the plane is diverted to the filed alternate.
Tino From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 740 times:
Sad but true, More and more airlines state that the captain must file a report when landed fully manually ( that is with NO AUTOTHROTTLE),for manual adjustments consumes far more fuel than automatic throttle. It was my intension to cause a new "hot" topic on this site.
I do not invent this,you can trust me, I grew up in the aviation world and I am in the progress of becoming an airline pilot.
Winglet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 741 times:
Automatic landings are done if the visibility is below a certain number, not above. So when it's really bad the autopilot lands the plane. For the autopilot it ofcourse doesn't matter how bad the visibility is since it cannot see anyway. If the visibility is good the autopilot can ofcourse still do an automatic landing but usually the pilots prefer to do it them selves in these conditions. As far as Air Belgium is concerned I think you must have gotten wrong information since they tend to fly to places in southern Europe quite a lot where they haven't got ILS equipped runways. And without an ILS (Instrument Landing System) you simply cannot do an autoland. Many pilots will also occiasionally do visual landings (weather permitting), meaning they will not use any instruments for landing, just visual cues. Hope this answered your question.
Noel From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (15 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 740 times:
Bad weather may not mean that an autoland is needed. To pass through that "assigned altitude" in bad weather, though, some things must be in view. Either the runway, runway end lights, the "rabbit" (sequenced strobes),runway threshold, runway threshold lights, any of these or all of them. To pass below the DH (decision height), there are criteria to be met. If on an ILS, the usual DH is 200 ft AGL, but it may be higher for some circumstances. For ILS autolands, it depends on carrier-specific details. The runway MUST have CAT III and/or CAT II ILS capabilities or the autopilot has NOTHING to land with, trust me! :-)For visual or radar approaches, the DH is much higher, so autolands cannot be done without visual cues when using radar.