P-56 Busted Airspace

[dojetdriver]

And coming To EVERY AQP event next year.

My company (soon to be ASA) has been using DCA on conventional training PC's for years after we had similar issues with P56, BOTH parts.

Don't get it all the time, but when you do, the instructor will base a lot of the PC out of DCA. If you can't figure out how to track the radial by the time you come out, well...........

 

[LazyLightnin']

Wonderful. Do I get credit for doing this correctly in the past? Or not having a redneck accent or spikey hair?

Shouldn't you be working out of San Francisco?

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

I never understood not building the DCA to DCA328/10 or whatever waypoint in the FMC and using that as primary nav... it's a much more stable and accurate display. Raw data can be monitored on the RMI and/or full displayed and monitored by the PM.

It's incredibly simple- the guys that 9E had bust it mostly let the autopilot fly it right at 600 feet, which on the CRJ with the lag of the nav engaging and then the autopilot engaging, thinking, and then realizing where it needed to be going it was already too late. NOTHING to do with being in green needles, which for some reason all the regional training departments think is the root of the problem...

Be a pilot and have some fun and do some hand flying... even at 20+ degrees nose up its perfectly easy to look down and sniff your way along the river.

 

[1.3XVso]

ar

I never understood not building the DCA to DCA328/10 or whatever waypoint in the FMC and using that as primary nav... it's a much more stable and accurate display. Raw data can be monitored on the RMI and/or full displayed and monitored by the PM. For some reason the all the regionals do this, but no one else does...

It's incredibly simple- the guys that 9E had bust it mostly let the autopilot fly it right at 600 feet, which on the CRJ with the lag of the nav engaging and then the autopilot engaging, thinking, and then realizing where it needed to be going it was already too late. NOTHING to do with being in green needles.

Be a pilot and have some fun and do some flying...

How did AR busted p56? You know he speaks very highly of himself on how great and powerful he is.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

How did AR busted p56? You know he speaks very highly of himself on how great and powerful he is.

Him specifically, I never heard how it happened nor did I ask... I do know it was on a day where the schoolhouse types were doing the carpet dance in DC in regards to a rash of P-56 busts. Irony!

The reason for the majority of busts I heard was the "gear up, speed mode, nav mode, autopilot on" idiocy. The canadian royal mounted autopilot just doesnt capture quick enough in strong wind conditions.

To this day I have never heard a justification for why white needles is not appropriate per the north mississippi flying club standards department.

 

[dojetdriver]

I never understood not building the DCA to DCA328/10 or whatever waypoint in the FMC and using that as primary nav... it's a much more stable and accurate display. Raw data can be monitored on the RMI and/or full displayed and monitored by the PM.

Because then you're technically "building your own" RNAV departure.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Because then you're technically "building your own" RNAV departure.

If you could please explain to me where building your own RNAV overlay departure is wrong, I would appreciate it. Editing an RNAV1 departure in the database is another thing...

You're building an overlay to raw data that is more stable than the raw data while still able to be verified. There is nothing in the FARs that prevents building an FMC overlay to a raw procedure. You are incorrect that building your own RNAV departure is somehow wrong, since the user built RNAV departure is verified on raw and/or certified GPS data.

You can track a radial in flight without going to green needles, right? Along with many other examples including other airports where you track radials off the deck... DCA being the only "green needles" example that some yahoo justified their desk with that I can think of. Some guy on the CRJ decided on this and all the other operators just fell in line.

Again, demonstrate to me why this is wrong or somehow at fault in this situation, because you're going to be scratching at bare walls....

 

[dojetdriver]

You're building an overlay to raw data that is more stable than the raw data while still able to be verified to the raw data. There is nothing in the FARs that prevents building an FMC overlay to a raw procedure. You are incorrect that building your own RNAV departure is somehow wrong, since the RNAV departure is based on raw and/or certified GPS data.

Dude, why are you turning this into a you're wrong/I'm right pissing contest? I NEVER said it was wrong, did I? The point I was getting at was that there's no published RNAV procedure to follow a specific track, such the ATL, DFW, LAX, BOS (at least used to)etc. Would it be nice if they built a procedure? Sure. If I'm not mistaken, doesn't hitting the TOGA on the CRJ when taking the runway give the FMS it's runway update, or something along those lines? If I'm wrong, sorry. Thought I remember hearing that and/or reading that when I was studying for transition training on the CRJ. Since you've flown so many planes in your short career, you should know that not ALL set ups have that capability. If no runway is loaded into the Honeywell product on the WSCOD, the ref data is hardly accurate at first. Again, like I said, RNAV departures are runway specific, the FMS may not be tracking if it NEVER got a good ref point to start with.

Again, demonstrate to me why this is wrong or somehow at fault in this situation.

because you're going to be scratching at bare walls....

Since your putting additional text and inserting ****************************** bag like quips...

Get over yourself and off your high horse.

 

[dojetdriver]

it. Editing an RNAV1 departure in the database is another thing...

You're putting to much additional content/edit jobs in to try to justify your point.

So, when you load an RNAV1 with the specific runway, you're getting terminal area sensitivity, right?

Reference my above point, are you SURE that ALL FMS setups ensure terminal area sensitivity when an RNAV departure isn't loaded? The point I'm getting at is the "accuracy" that's being "guaranteed" by the FMS.

Does DAL allow a manual build? As well as the ability to fly it off that using it as primary nav data?

 

[sweptback]

If you have GPS available on the CRJ, then you don't even need to runway update. The GPS automatically keeps the position updated in the FMS.

Personally I'd fly it in green needles, but build the fix on the FMS for situational awareness.