Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
BravoOne wrote:As usuall, we need more info like weather, and aircraft type?
AirKevin wrote:The pilots responded by telling the controller they wouldn't be stable at 210 or greater and needed to slow to 170 knots.
KingOrGod wrote:AirKevin wrote:The pilots responded by telling the controller they wouldn't be stable at 210 or greater and needed to slow to 170 knots.
Depends on the crew sometimes, I once had a B763 cross a 10nm final still with 350IAS. When they want to they can.
tb727 wrote:
Depends on the crew sometimes, I once had a B763 cross a 10nm final still with 350IAS. When they want to they can.
FlyHossD wrote:The controller could conceivably cancel the approach clearance, though (thus, necessitating a go-around or missed approach).
tb727 wrote:Sounds like the guy behind me will have a problem then because I won't do 210 to the marker. Just have to say unable or put me (or him) somewhere to get your spacing. Where I am at they have been hammering the 1000' stable with lots of FOQA calls so I've been very mindful of it as of late since they changed some verbiage on it.
DiamondFlyer wrote:tb727 wrote:Sounds like the guy behind me will have a problem then because I won't do 210 to the marker. Just have to say unable or put me (or him) somewhere to get your spacing. Where I am at they have been hammering the 1000' stable with lots of FOQA calls so I've been very mindful of it as of late since they changed some verbiage on it.
Depends, is it go home leg or no? In any case, you eventually have to learn what the airplane is fully capable of. My current airplane, you can do 250 KIAS to the marker (provided its at least say 1500AGL), but it's not a comfortable approach for those in the back.
AirKevin wrote:Whilst I was at work yesterday, I was listening to LiveATC, and shortly after FedEx 1483 landed at JFK, they asked the tower for the phone number to approach control since the approach controller had them flying at 210 knots all the way to the outer marker. Eventually, when I was able to go back through the archives, I noticed that when the flight was on final, the pilots were telling the controller they needed to slow down, but the controller insisted that they fly at 210 or greater. The pilots responded by telling the controller they wouldn't be stable at 210 or greater and needed to slow to 170 knots. The controller eventually told them to slow to 160 and contact the tower, but gave them an attitude in the process. When the pilots contacted the tower, the tower controller instructed them to slow to final approach speed, to which they told him they were trying. I was just wondering if it was normal for them to be flying that fast that close to the runway. Prior to this particular flight stating the reason why they were asking for the phone number, I had noticed that just about every flight that checked in with the tower was being told that they had a 70-knot overtake on the traffic ahead.
zeke wrote:The phone number would be to talk to the supervisor, I have done that a few times over the years. They don’t have the big aeroplane operating picture, and I don’t have the big traffic control picture. Sometimes we need to educate each other.
IAHFLYR wrote:That is an insane speed to assign to any jet arrival, maybe a turbo-prop, but even then it is not the norm. Had I ever assigned a speed above about 180 KIAS when working the finals I would have expected an "UNABLE" in about every instance. Sounds like the controller needs a few jumpseat trips in jets.
tb727 wrote:I wish they still did that. I also wish I could go to an enroute facility and sit and watch for a while. I've done few towers and tracons and I love seeing the other side of everything. I think that it helps everyone do a better job because you understand it more.
tb727 wrote:I wish they still did that. I also wish I could go to an enroute facility and sit and watch for a while. I've done few towers and tracons and I love seeing the other side of everything. I think that it helps everyone do a better job because you understand it more.
IAHFLYR wrote:Anyway, you should be able to get into an enroute facility if you are a pilot of any level. Just find the facility and talk to the Training Department folks to find out how to make it happen.
trnswrld wrote:tb727 wrote:I wish they still did that. I also wish I could go to an enroute facility and sit and watch for a while. I've done few towers and tracons and I love seeing the other side of everything. I think that it helps everyone do a better job because you understand it more.
They do still do it. I have famed a couple times within the last few years.
You can also take a tour of an enroute facility. Just call them and set it up.
tb727 wrote:IAHFLYR wrote:Anyway, you should be able to get into an enroute facility if you are a pilot of any level. Just find the facility and talk to the Training Department folks to find out how to make it happen.trnswrld wrote:tb727 wrote:I wish they still did that. I also wish I could go to an enroute facility and sit and watch for a while. I've done few towers and tracons and I love seeing the other side of everything. I think that it helps everyone do a better job because you understand it more.
They do still do it. I have famed a couple times within the last few years.
You can also take a tour of an enroute facility. Just call them and set it up.
I do have a standing invite to ZOB with my aunts neighbor who retired from there a few years back. I need to take him up on it.
And if I had one of you up front I would love it, I would bend your ear the whole time probably!
trnswrld wrote:Yeah when I did my fam trips that’s exactly what happened. We both had all sorts of questions. It was a good time and I really enjoyed it.
AirKevin wrote:which makes me wonder what the approach controller was even doing
RetiredNWA wrote:210kts 'til the marker isn't unheard of; neither are jack*ss controllers at JFK.
Many variables here are missing in order to formulate an exact answer for you.
N766UA wrote:Some controllers simply don’t know what is or isn’t reasonable. I once asked a controller pal of mine “hey, what’s that?” pointing to a 737. “I dunno, a jet?” He and many, many other controllers don’t even care to know what the things look like, let alone their full capabilities.
Controllers get used to what airplanes *can’t* do pretty quickly (like a CRJ2 isn’t going to do 3000FPM in the flight levels,) but they’re sometimes a little ignorant to what they *can* do. Gotta just say “unable” and put the ball back in his court. Attitude is just SOP for anything in New York.
KingOrGod wrote:N766UA wrote:Some controllers simply don’t know what is or isn’t reasonable. I once asked a controller pal of mine “hey, what’s that?” pointing to a 737. “I dunno, a jet?” He and many, many other controllers don’t even care to know what the things look like, let alone their full capabilities.
Controllers get used to what airplanes *can’t* do pretty quickly (like a CRJ2 isn’t going to do 3000FPM in the flight levels,) but they’re sometimes a little ignorant to what they *can* do. Gotta just say “unable” and put the ball back in his court. Attitude is just SOP for anything in New York.
Sadly what you write is true, and to be fair, we don't get recurrency training and/or much in the way of accurate information as to what an aircraft is capable of. Even minimum clean on the same frame can be different depending on actual weight. A lot of the time it's broad spectrum "junk" info saying the aircraft is capable of anywhere between 125 and 340 IAS and can fly up to F390. Not very helpful really. It helps when you say "unable" instead of just not flying 170 to 5, for instance. I know where I work that a lot of crews just read back 180/5 (which is too fast IMO) and fly around 160/5 instead.
What makes matters worse is the folk that "are not that into" aviation. It is "just a jet" to them and I think it hinders their on-screen performance.
In a similar vein, it's the same as pilots that think they can control. Also, hinders our performance.
Fortunately, I have held both licenses, and although I only flew light types, I have been on many many an airline LOFT session and/or FAM flights and like to think it has broadened my horizons (especially in the energy management and capabilities areas) as a result.
PS in my experience a CRJ2 will hardly ever achieve in excess of 3k fpm unless under 10k LOL. Was the 2nd slowest dog I ever had to F410. Even a B721 outclimbed it to F330 but at least the B721 was fast at the same time hehehe
N766UA wrote:I promise we’re trying.
KingOrGod wrote:N766UA wrote:Some controllers simply don’t know what is or isn’t reasonable. I once asked a controller pal of mine “hey, what’s that?” pointing to a 737. “I dunno, a jet?” He and many, many other controllers don’t even care to know what the things look like, let alone their full capabilities.
Controllers get used to what airplanes *can’t* do pretty quickly (like a CRJ2 isn’t going to do 3000FPM in the flight levels,) but they’re sometimes a little ignorant to what they *can* do. Gotta just say “unable” and put the ball back in his court. Attitude is just SOP for anything in New York.
Sadly what you write is true, and to be fair, we don't get recurrency training and/or much in the way of accurate information as to what an aircraft is capable of. Even minimum clean on the same frame can be different depending on actual weight. A lot of the time it's broad spectrum "junk" info saying the aircraft is capable of anywhere between 125 and 340 IAS and can fly up to F390. Not very helpful really. It helps when you say "unable" instead of just not flying 170 to 5, for instance. I know where I work that a lot of crews just read back 180/5 (which is too fast IMO) and fly around 160/5 instead.
What makes matters worse is the folk that "are not that into" aviation. It is "just a jet" to them and I think it hinders their on-screen performance.
In a similar vein, it's the same as pilots that think they can control. Also, hinders our performance.
Fortunately, I have held both licenses, and although I only flew light types, I have been on many many an airline LOFT session and/or FAM flights and like to think it has broadened my horizons (especially in the energy management and capabilities areas) as a result.
PS in my experience a CRJ2 will hardly ever achieve in excess of 3k fpm unless under 10k LOL. Was the 2nd slowest dog I ever had to F410. Even a B721 outclimbed it to F330 but at least the B721 was fast at the same time hehehe
IAHFLYR wrote:Speaking of slow climbers...a Houston Center controller asked an E145 one day....."if you had a rate of climb what would it be?". LOL
FlyHossD wrote:IAHFLYR wrote:Speaking of slow climbers...a Houston Center controller asked an E145 one day....."if you had a rate of climb what would it be?". LOL
That reminds me of a former first officer who had flown CR2s (IIRC) and he referred to them as "cholesterol of the airways."