Math is accurate, but good luck calculating that while actually flying at 250 kts, talking with atc in a busy airspace. Rule of thumb for a 3 degrees slope if you want to know how much altitude you need to loose : dist (nm) x 3 + elevation = altitude you should be. Rate of descent = GS/2 X10
You mean Ground speed by GS? and also explain: dist (nm) x 3 + elevation = altitude you should be. Rate of descent = GS/2 X10 "that these are two different calculations or one calculation formula?" Thanks!
@@abifaiq9645 For other degrees you just add or subtract 1/5 of the groundspeed for evey whole number. Starting is basic 3 degree. 100/2= 50+0 =- 500vs. 2 degree = - 300vs, 4 degree = -700vs. Thing is that 3 degree is the most common. Google climb/descent table and compare
why complicate the calculations, then there is a simpler calculation without tangent, or cosine, or sine, for example you are at a height of 8000 feet and you opt for a descent at 4000 feet by rate of descent 500ft / min the calculation is simple 8000-4000 = 4000ft we divide 4000/500 = 8 mn and, suppose your desents and has a speed 120kt, we divide 120kt / 60 = 2 kt / miles, which means, that you are going cover 2 nautical miles per minute after, we multiply 2 * 8 = 16 nautical miles this is the distance from which we start our descent ! translate French English thank you from Algeria ! :D
Is this used every time you have to land a Cessna or Piper? Is it calculated before you go up or in your head on the approach to land? I was on a discovery flight Tuesday of this week and the pilot just seemed to "wing" the whole landing part....? How often is this used besides commercial flying?
Hey, it's great that you had a discovery flight! I hope you enjoyed it and that it might have sparked some interest! Pilots are usually very aware of their approach speeds and the related rates of descent for a given glidepath. An easy way to do it mentally is to look at your groundspeed, divide it by 2 and add a 0 at the end. Example for 140 knots, 140/2 = 70, add a zero -- > 700 fpm. This is a rough approximate, but it will give you a correct descent rate +- 50 fpm. Usually, if flying a smaller airplane which I guess you had on your discovery flight, you will be flying visually so the approach path could often be steeper than 3 degrees. However, the 3 degree is the most usual one. With experience you can also visually judge if you are on a proper path while descending towards the runway. As you said, your pilot seemed to wing it, but I believe it was his experience :).
@@stevenstyles7602 No one has ever measured the radius, that’s for sure. Everything else in the heliocentric model - absolutely everything else - depends on the measurement of the radius, which again, has never been done. The maximum distance in miles to the horizon on a sphere with a radius of 3959 miles, can be no further than 1.22 X the square root of the observer’s height in feet. Here is a 3 minute clip debunking the radius value we are told exists. th-cam.com/video/wHFKuqO4UMM/w-d-xo.html
@@Mike-pf1ru I’ve read every flat earthers arguments for the earth being flat, I still can’t believe there are people still claiming this. Everything else is spherical.
@@stevenstyles7602 Earth is navigatably, measurably and observably flat, even though it's a sphere. The celestial luminaries we see through telescopes are only assumed to be spherical. The *images* we see of spherical objects are only admitted computer generated renderings. No one has measured, nor can they ever measure, a radius for any one of them, unless the unmeasured and unobserved radius of earth is used to giive scale to them into the heliocentric model. I understand your objection. I honestly do. Did you have a look at that 3 minute clip? What did you think?
Currently working on my instrument rating and for some reason I just cannot understand this formula, I understand how to get my FPM but how do I use my glide slope to get my decent rate? The formula says multiple your tangent of 3 degrees by your distance so I’m multiplying .03 by 10134 yet I get a incorrect answer (304.02) if anybody who’s smarter then me would care to explain this for me that’d be great lol
Tangent of 3 in degrees should equal 0.05240778, not 0.03. Make sure your calculator is set to degrees instead of radians or grads to make sure your future calculations are also correct! Were you able to figure it out by now?
Now the reality. NOBODY does this when flying. All you have to remember is that 3 degree is groundspeed/2 +0. 100kts/2 = 50+0= -500vs for 3 degree. For every degree you add or subtract 1/5 of the groundpseed number. ex. 2 degree for 100kts is -300 and 4 degree is -700vs. All other numbers on you VSI are not existant/non practical meaning that nobody will ever hold -345ft/m comparing to -300ft/m
Too many planes crossing for dropping and crossing unless a mandatory drop spot and planes or vehicles to get employees and people on the runway when shifting and you know how to even get people on there unless it’s a truck stop on the water with autonomy’s until finding better ways like jet skis water transpo and bring like umm. How many days you work this week
Or easier. Groundspeed x 5 = fpm for 3 degree descent. Altitude to descend x 3 /1000 = distance from TOD to BOD
What should be the Indicated Air Speed, When I'm descending?
And when I'm descending, Ground speed will reduce, so how can I get ground speed?
@@ibnaas7447 if u get 30 nm to decent try to maintain 500 fpm
Math is accurate, but good luck calculating that while actually flying at 250 kts, talking with atc in a busy airspace. Rule of thumb for a 3 degrees slope if you want to know how much altitude you need to loose : dist (nm) x 3 + elevation = altitude you should be. Rate of descent = GS/2 X10
You mean Ground speed by GS? and also explain:
dist (nm) x 3 + elevation = altitude you should be. Rate of descent = GS/2 X10
"that these are two different calculations or one calculation formula?"
Thanks!
Or in other words, divide your G/S by 2 and you have your descent rate in fpm :)
divide g/s by 2 and multiply by 10
That is true if the gradient is 3 degrees or 5 percent
@@abifaiq9645 For other degrees you just add or subtract 1/5 of the groundspeed for evey whole number. Starting is basic 3 degree. 100/2= 50+0 =- 500vs. 2 degree = - 300vs, 4 degree = -700vs. Thing is that 3 degree is the most common. Google climb/descent table and compare
why complicate the calculations, then there is a simpler calculation without tangent, or cosine, or sine, for example you are at a height of 8000 feet and you opt for a descent at 4000 feet by rate of descent 500ft / min the calculation is simple 8000-4000 = 4000ft we divide 4000/500 = 8 mn and, suppose your desents and has a speed 120kt, we divide 120kt / 60 = 2 kt / miles, which means, that you are going cover 2 nautical miles per minute after, we multiply 2 * 8 = 16 nautical miles this is the distance from which we start our descent ! translate French English thank you from Algeria ! :D
Wow that's really more clear..great job . Other calculation shown on the clip really that's complex as like his accent ..
@@rajohn84 :D
Here is the formula I developed: dist = Speed× Altitude/Rate× 60
At 70k , 3 nm out and desending 500 fpm at what distance over the ground we traveled when we touch down
great video: just had an afterthought - How much height change in an aeroplane's descent while on the turn assuming no engine power?
Im from the US. Your English is great. Fuck those other comments.
super impractical
GRND speed/2 and add a 0 (ie 100/2 = 50 > add 0 = 500fpm close enough)
That only applies if the glideslope is 3°/5%
Is this used every time you have to land a Cessna or Piper? Is it calculated before you go up or in your head on the approach to land? I was on a discovery flight Tuesday of this week and the pilot just seemed to "wing" the whole landing part....? How often is this used besides commercial flying?
Hey, it's great that you had a discovery flight! I hope you enjoyed it and that it might have sparked some interest! Pilots are usually very aware of their approach speeds and the related rates of descent for a given glidepath. An easy way to do it mentally is to look at your groundspeed, divide it by 2 and add a 0 at the end. Example for 140 knots, 140/2 = 70, add a zero -- > 700 fpm. This is a rough approximate, but it will give you a correct descent rate +- 50 fpm. Usually, if flying a smaller airplane which I guess you had on your discovery flight, you will be flying visually so the approach path could often be steeper than 3 degrees. However, the 3 degree is the most usual one. With experience you can also visually judge if you are on a proper path while descending towards the runway. As you said, your pilot seemed to wing it, but I believe it was his experience :).
depends on what rules are flying for? VFR or IFR and also depends what is your flight level
I have just made a Beautiful Mushroom Omelette for Lunch 🍽.
why do they used the approximate 6080 instead of the precise 6076.11549 for creating the tables on the approach charts?
I assume that’s irony?
Great video ! Thanks
The baseline of the right angle trianagle, the adjacent, is straight. None of these calculations account for the additional drop due to curvature.
But the earth is flat?
@@stevenstyles7602 No one has ever measured the radius, that’s for sure. Everything else in the heliocentric model - absolutely everything else - depends on the measurement of the radius, which again, has never been done.
The maximum distance in miles to the horizon on a sphere with a radius of 3959 miles, can be no further than 1.22 X the square root of the observer’s height in feet.
Here is a 3 minute clip debunking the radius value we are told exists.
th-cam.com/video/wHFKuqO4UMM/w-d-xo.html
@@Mike-pf1ru
I’ve read every flat earthers arguments for the earth being flat, I still can’t believe there are people still claiming this. Everything else is spherical.
@@stevenstyles7602 Earth is navigatably, measurably and observably flat, even though it's a sphere.
The celestial luminaries we see through telescopes are only assumed to be spherical. The *images* we see of spherical objects are only admitted computer generated renderings.
No one has measured, nor can they ever measure, a radius for any one of them, unless the unmeasured and unobserved radius of earth is used to giive scale to them into the heliocentric model.
I understand your objection. I honestly do.
Did you have a look at that 3 minute clip? What did you think?
I need an answer
Currently working on my instrument rating and for some reason I just cannot understand this formula, I understand how to get my FPM but how do I use my glide slope to get my decent rate? The formula says multiple your tangent of 3 degrees by your distance so I’m multiplying .03 by 10134 yet I get a incorrect answer (304.02) if anybody who’s smarter then me would care to explain this for me that’d be great lol
Tangent of 3 in degrees should equal 0.05240778, not 0.03. Make sure your calculator is set to degrees instead of radians or grads to make sure your future calculations are also correct! Were you able to figure it out by now?
Now the reality. NOBODY does this when flying. All you have to remember is that 3 degree is groundspeed/2 +0. 100kts/2 = 50+0= -500vs for 3 degree. For every degree you add or subtract 1/5 of the groundpseed number. ex. 2 degree for 100kts is -300 and 4 degree is -700vs. All other numbers on you VSI are not existant/non practical meaning that nobody will ever hold -345ft/m comparing to -300ft/m
At 500fpm it takes 2 mins to land. Ok. The distance traveled in2 min with ave approach speed of 70 knots is 70× 2/60 nautical miles
This gives 2.33 nautical miles
Just multiply your airspeed with sine of glide angle.
10134sin3°= 531 fpm
Ground speed what matters here. Not airspeed.
Too many planes crossing for dropping and crossing unless a mandatory drop spot and planes or vehicles to get employees and people on the runway when shifting and you know how to even get people on there unless it’s a truck stop on the water with autonomy’s until finding better ways like jet skis water transpo and bring like umm. How many days you work this week
Boring 😅
All this is bullshit math
Ur accent is too strong can't catch .b clear and loud to the next clip pls
I understood him pretty clearly