Staying a bit High Behind a Heavy

[pelmet]

Not always possible of course, depending on the conditions but I remember having a similar situation in a turboprop. Visual approach, behind a big jet. There is a pretty high chance that the big jet will be on the glideslope/descent path for their stable approach requirements that most airlines actively enforce. So, in my experience, I just stayed slightly high and targeted further down the runway, perhaps 2500 feet from the threshold(still in the touchdown zone). Still stable but arriving a bit above the glideslope.

Beats getting in a significant roll at low altitude. More difficult if there is a tailwind. Don't know the full story in this case but it was cool weather and light winds that day...allows vortices to last longer.

"C-FOWE, a De Havilland of Canada DHC-8-402, operated by WestJet Encore, was conducting
flight WEN3156 from Vancouver Intl., BC (CYVR), to Edmonton Intl., AB (CYEG) with 4 crew and
73 passengers on board. WEN3156 was cleared for the visual approach for RWY 20 following a
Boeing 747 on final. The 747 traffic exited at the end of the runway and ATC subsequently cleared
WEN3156 to land when it was on final approach at an altitude of approximately 500 feet AGL.
WEN3156 continued the approach and at approximately 300 feet AGL the aircraft experienced an
uncommanded roll. The pilot in command took control of the aircraft, corrected the roll and elected
to continue the approach and landing. An uneventful landing was accomplished."

[AuxBatOn]

Successful landing from a de-stabilized approach

[Cessna 180]

Makes no sense why he landed if the roll was significant enough that he reported it.

[iflyforpie]

Successful landing from a de-stabilized approach

What was destabilized?

Usually there is specific criteria for stabilized approach. Proper configuration. Airspeed no lower than X below or Y above. No more than X lateral or vertical deviation. Less than X vertical speed. Less than X bank angle. GPWS callouts. Etc

If all of those are within parameters no point in going around.

But I have feeling the event was probably exaggerated. It’s like when I hear severe turbulence reported from a Q it usually means light occasional moderate. A hero I heard on Edmonton Centre actually said that the other month when he was passed on a PIREP of moderate turbulence and went on to explain what moderate actually means to all who were listening.

[AuxBatOn]

Successful landing from a de-stabilized approach

What was destabilized?

Usually there is specific criteria for stabilized approach. Proper configuration. Airspeed no lower than X below or Y above. No more than X lateral or vertical deviation. Less than X vertical speed. Less than X bank angle. GPWS callouts. Etc

If all of those are within parameters no point in going around.

But I have feeling the event was probably exaggerated. It’s like when I hear severe turbulence reported from a Q it usually means light occasional moderate. A hero I heard on Edmonton Centre actually said that the other month when he was passed on a PIREP of moderate turbulence and went on to explain what moderate actually means to all who were listening.

Obviously assuming but if it is severe enough to warrant a report, it must have been significant enough to be outside stabilized approach criteria. An aircraft is subject constantly to uncommanded roll (turbulence for example). If we reported every instance... we would overload the CADORS with things that really don’t matter (and there is already a lot of it already)

[rigpiggy]

Probably because it sounds like the captain had to take control, it would generate an automatic SMS report.

[oldtimer]

I wonder if the Captain of the Westjet Encore flight was thinking that some passenger(s) would complain that the sudden bank angle close to the ground so scared them, so traumatized them, that their (so far insignificant) entire life flashed before their eyes as this tiny (old)airplane banked so steeply inches from the ground and the untrained and incompetent pilot almost crashed and I need many dollars in compensation so the Captain explained to flight ops what actually happened and management could then dismiss the complaint with valid reasons.
Just my thought.
Been there and done that.

[Intentional Left Bank]

CADORS # 2014P0058 2014-01-15

An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 400 (ASA703) from Los Angeles, CA (KLAX) to Vancouver, BC (CYVR) reported a turbulence encounter while on final for runway 08L at CYVR. They were operating 6.5nm behind an Air Canada Airbus A330-300 (AcA855) from London/ Heathrow (EGLL) to Vancouver, BC (CYVR). The pilot reported a 60 to 70 degree left bank twice. No operational impact.

[Corsham]

One of the plane spotters at YEG caught photos of it and posted it on the YEG spotters Facebook page, have a peek if you are on it. . Audio is available on LIVEATC as well. Traffic passed, clearance given with cautionary issued from arrival controller. Tower controller I think slowed them down as well as it sounds like they were eating up the 47, so must have been at mins for wake.