Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also, according to Nextgen the airplanes "glide" silently to the airport, with the engine on idle.
However, according to this boeing doc, Loss of Thrust on Both Engines, an airplane without power needs to be at 4000ft high when it's 10miles from the airport.
They're currently at 1700ft or lower. This means that they ARE using power, producing noise.
"For the straight-in total loss of power approach the aircraft must be positioned on the extended centerline of an ILS equipped runway at a minimum height (in 100's of feet) equal to 4 x the distance out, e.g. at 15nm, aim to be at 6000ft."
BREAKING: FAA Flight Path Update:
Via Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport
Nov. 30, 2017: The City of Phoenix and Historic Neighborhoods have negotiated an agreement with the FAA and filed a joint petition to engage in outreach with affected communities while temporarily returning flight paths to their original routes before developing new flight path procedures. Read the Aviation Department press release and the FAA press release on the agreement. (linked below) https://www.skyharbor.com/FlightPaths
Also, according to Nextgen the airplanes "glide" silently to the airport, with the engine on idle.
However, according to this boeing doc, Loss of Thrust on Both Engines, an airplane without power needs to be at 4000ft high when it's 10miles from the airport.
They're currently at 1700ft or lower. This means that they ARE using power, producing noise.
"For the straight-in total loss of power approach the aircraft must be positioned on the extended centerline of an ILS equipped runway at a minimum height (in 100's of feet) equal to 4 x the distance out, e.g. at 15nm, aim to be at 6000ft."
Aircraft do optimum profile decents also known as OPDs. These are near idle power decents to lower altitudes typically in the 6k-8k range to get set up for the approach. They take you from the enroute environemnt and transition you to the approach/local area.
Your google skills are impressive but you lack in common sense. No aircraft is landing with their engines shut off. Company procedures require spool up by at minimum 1000-1500 ft and when on an actual approach you can't do that.
Airspace design especially in the NYC area is incredibly complex. It's incredible what is accomplished on a daily basis in that area.
Aircraft do optimum profile decents also known as OPDs. These are near idle power decents to lower altitudes typically in the 6k-8k range to get set up for the approach. They take you from the enroute environemnt and transition you to the approach/local area. No aircraft is landing with their engines shut off.
That's strange, because on the FAA website, on a doc titled "Fact Sheet – NextGen", it says the following:
"OPDs enable aircraft to descend from cruising altitude to the runway in a smooth, continuous glide, with engines set at idle"
So...Is it at idle or near idle? Suddenly the FAA story is somehow flexible apparently, but when they told the story to the senate, they forgot to say that it's actually no at idle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup
Company procedures require spool up by at minimum 1000-1500 ft and when on an actual approach you can't do that.
I'll tell you why I believe they "can't" do that. It's because they want to have as many airplanes landing as possible. But in order to do that the airplanes need to reduce the speed considerably. The problem is that they cannot reduce the speed if they fly high, because the density of the air is too low. So they need to fly low, close to each other, and slow.
This gives you a near idle sound going slow, every 30 seconds, and really low. Believe me, it's horrible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup
Airspace design especially in the NYC area is incredibly complex. It's incredible what is accomplished on a daily basis in that area.
I heard this 100s of times. We all do really hard work.
That's strange, because on the FAA website, on a doc titled "Fact Sheet – NextGen", it says the following:
"OPDs enable aircraft to descend from cruising altitude to the runway in a smooth, continuous glide, with engines set at idle"
So...Is it at idle or near idle? Suddenly the FAA story is somehow flexible apparently, but when they told the story to the senate, they forgot to say that it's actually no at idle.
Keep in mind spooled up is different than takeoff power. It's fairly quiet with today's engines. They are over simplifying the story in the ease of explaining how the system is designed to work.
Quote:
I'll tell you why I believe they "can't" do that. It's because they want to have as many airplanes landing as possible. But in order to do that the airplanes need to reduce the speed considerably. The problem is that they cannot reduce the speed if they fly high, because the density of the air is too low. So they need to fly low, close to each other, and slow.
This gives you a near idle sound going slow, every 30 seconds, and really low. Believe me, it's horrible.
Well your lack of physics, aircraft, airspace, and the ATC system is severely lacking so I won't engage there. But you are wrong in your 'theory'.
As far as it being annoying I'm sure it is. That is why I no longer live near an airport . If the noise bothers people I suggest they don't move near one. It's that easy.
Yes the goal is efficient use of airspace and fuel. Instead of flying low and slow and being wasteful, you can make shorter approaches and use less gas in doing so. Airplanes don't want to be low, performance is much better at altitude in terms of economy.
Quote:
I heard this 100s of times. We all do really hard work.
I'm sure you do. I said it was complex which is quite different. Digging a hole is hard.
Keep in mind spooled up is different than takeoff power. It's fairly quiet with today's engines. They are over simplifying the story in the ease of explaining how the system is designed to work.
Well your lack of physics, aircraft, airspace, and the ATC system is severely lacking so I won't engage there. But you are wrong in your 'theory'.
As far as it being annoying I'm sure it is. That is why I no longer live near an airport . If the noise bothers people I suggest they don't move near one. It's that easy.
Yes the goal is efficient use of airspace and fuel. Instead of flying low and slow and being wasteful, you can make shorter approaches and use less gas in doing so. Airplanes don't want to be low, performance is much better at altitude in terms of economy.
I'm sure you do. I said it was complex which is quite different. Digging a hole is hard.
gee, let me guess, you work or are in the airline industry, and your only purpose here is to badger and tear us down, thank you. but we all get you, and we know what your about.
face it, the FAA sneakily changed the flightpaths and didnt tell the public. and michael heurta should rot in hell.
Instead of flying low and slow and being wasteful, you can make shorter approaches and use less gas in doing so.
Is it just me or this doesn't make any sense?
Low and slow doesn't mean wasteful...
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup
Airplanes don't want to be low, performance is much better at altitude in terms of economy.
This is wrong. We're talking about the approach, not cruise altitude.
The lower they go, the higher the pressure, the more density and oxygen, the less fuel they need.
Also the more density the higher the lift - they can go slower.
i know what nexgen is [...]so do you want modern, and safer air traffic control able to handle large volumes?
no! We want the peace we came for, this far from the city!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.