Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Trimeresurus wrote:From what I understand, HUDs can allow pilots to hand fly CATIIIb approaches down to 50 feet radio minimums, and situations that'd warrant an autoland in a HUDless plane can be flown with the yoke, minus the wind requirements for autolands. This had made them quite popular with American Airlines for example, but not Ryanair. Why is that? After all, Europe is generally a gloomier and foggier place than the sunny American plains, and Ryanair flies quite often into airports without CATIII/CATII systems, so I thought intuitively opposite may have made more sense.
Also it seems like the 737NG was the only airliner with a HUD until the introduction of the 787. What necessitated it?
GalaxyFlyer wrote:CAT III isn’t cheap to maintain, either. But for most operators it’s one or the other, not both. Fly with a HUD and you won’t go back, but that’s not part of airline financial considerations. A HUD is a great piece of kit for lots of things beyond CAT III, too.
saab2000 wrote:GalaxyFlyer wrote:CAT III isn’t cheap to maintain, either. But for most operators it’s one or the other, not both. Fly with a HUD and you won’t go back, but that’s not part of airline financial considerations. A HUD is a great piece of kit for lots of things beyond CAT III, too.
I’ve flown with many pilots at my carrier, which is HGS only - no autoland, who want to use autoland instead of the HGS. There’s much more that can go wrong with the HGS. Pilots aren’t looking at quite the same thing, FO must be ready to execute a hand-flown missed from 50’, etc.
Having flown autoland and HGS, I’ll take the autoland every day. Greater crew situational awareness in my personal opinion and the go-around is automatic with a button push.
Everyone has a different perspective, but personally I like autoland for low visibility approaches over the HGS.
johns624 wrote:Not worth its own thread but I flew on a DL A321neo and the seatback flight data had a CGI HUD display. It was as if you were looking out the cockpit windows. I've never seen that before.
johns624 wrote:Not worth its own thread but I flew on a DL A321neo and the seatback flight data had a CGI HUD display. It was as if you were looking out the cockpit windows. I've never seen that before.
Trimeresurus wrote:johns624 wrote:Not worth its own thread but I flew on a DL A321neo and the seatback flight data had a CGI HUD display. It was as if you were looking out the cockpit windows. I've never seen that before.
Is there a photo of this?
GalaxyFlyer wrote:Trimeresurus wrote:johns624 wrote:Not worth its own thread but I flew on a DL A321neo and the seatback flight data had a CGI HUD display. It was as if you were looking out the cockpit windows. I've never seen that before.
Is there a photo of this?
Yeah, I think I took but don’t know how to post it. For a pilot, it’s hokey; but is better than the useless maps.
Max Q wrote:Trimeresurus wrote:From what I understand, HUDs can allow pilots to hand fly CATIIIb approaches down to 50 feet radio minimums, and situations that'd warrant an autoland in a HUDless plane can be flown with the yoke, minus the wind requirements for autolands. This had made them quite popular with American Airlines for example, but not Ryanair. Why is that? After all, Europe is generally a gloomier and foggier place than the sunny American plains, and Ryanair flies quite often into airports without CATIII/CATII systems, so I thought intuitively opposite may have made more sense.
Also it seems like the 737NG was the only airliner with a HUD until the introduction of the 787. What necessitated it?
Alaska had HUDs in their 727s and Air Inter in their Mercure aircraft years before the 737NG
Starlionblue wrote:https://imgur.com/a/tF00fDHGalaxyFlyer wrote:Trimeresurus wrote:
Is there a photo of this?
Yeah, I think I took but don’t know how to post it. For a pilot, it’s hokey; but is better than the useless maps.
Make a free account on Imgur or another similar service. https://imgur.com/
Upload the pic to there.
Embed the image link here.
johns624 wrote:Starlionblue wrote:https://imgur.com/a/tF00fDHGalaxyFlyer wrote:
Yeah, I think I took but don’t know how to post it. For a pilot, it’s hokey; but is better than the useless maps.
Make a free account on Imgur or another similar service. https://imgur.com/
Upload the pic to there.
Embed the image link here.
Thanks! Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks!
Trimeresurus wrote:johns624 wrote:Starlionblue wrote:https://imgur.com/a/tF00fDH
Make a free account on Imgur or another similar service. https://imgur.com/
Upload the pic to there.
Embed the image link here.
Thanks! Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks!
Oh so it's like the synthetic vision in the G1000? I didn't know airliners had/needed it
SEAorPWM wrote:Max Q wrote:Trimeresurus wrote:From what I understand, HUDs can allow pilots to hand fly CATIIIb approaches down to 50 feet radio minimums, and situations that'd warrant an autoland in a HUDless plane can be flown with the yoke, minus the wind requirements for autolands. This had made them quite popular with American Airlines for example, but not Ryanair. Why is that? After all, Europe is generally a gloomier and foggier place than the sunny American plains, and Ryanair flies quite often into airports without CATIII/CATII systems, so I thought intuitively opposite may have made more sense.
Also it seems like the 737NG was the only airliner with a HUD until the introduction of the 787. What necessitated it?
Alaska had HUDs in their 727s and Air Inter in their Mercure aircraft years before the 737NG
Didn't the MD-80 have HUD as an option?
Max Q wrote:SEAorPWM wrote:Max Q wrote:
Alaska had HUDs in their 727s and Air Inter in their Mercure aircraft years before the 737NG
Didn't the MD-80 have HUD as an option?
Not sure, sure didn’t on the ones I flew, we had VOR / ILS / DME and an NDB receiver, that was it !
N1120A wrote:Max Q wrote:SEAorPWM wrote:
Didn't the MD-80 have HUD as an option?
Not sure, sure didn’t on the ones I flew, we had VOR / ILS / DME and an NDB receiver, that was it !
No GPS later on, or did you move on before CO upgraded the avionics?
johns624 wrote:Starlionblue wrote:https://imgur.com/a/tF00fDHGalaxyFlyer wrote:
Yeah, I think I took but don’t know how to post it. For a pilot, it’s hokey; but is better than the useless maps.
Make a free account on Imgur or another similar service. https://imgur.com/
Upload the pic to there.
Embed the image link here.
Thanks! Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks!
Trimeresurus wrote:johns624 wrote:Starlionblue wrote:https://imgur.com/a/tF00fDH
Make a free account on Imgur or another similar service. https://imgur.com/
Upload the pic to there.
Embed the image link here.
Thanks! Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks!
Oh so it's like the synthetic vision in the G1000? I didn't know airliners had/needed it
Delaxio wrote:I think it's a feature of the (Panasonic?) IFE system. MH A350s and AC 737 MAXs (at least, from experience) have the HUD view.