Any chance of a further opinion from the SD Team, in this regard, that might also replace the spam in the SD home page?

Very Newbytheway

DurhamTeaseAirport

My feelings Biggles-EGKB, is that change is inevitable. In this thread regard, it is likely to be for the better. If not sooner, it will be later. It would be nice if it was the former & in our life-time! Having said that with a unique package such as SD, to include all such excellent suggestions as well, we may have to worry in case the big players, eg Garmin ..Bendix King ...etc decide to buy SD & probably shut the whole thing down.

Very Newbytheway

DurhamTeaseAirport

Once again, nice one runways, right on the mark

In the latter parts of this thread we seem to have a number of people throw their penny-worth into the arena -- precisely what the forum is for, but I think we're losing the focus.

"...multiply by this number..........just look out the windows........use WAAS rated GPS........Say goodbye to QFE"

That's great, but I'd like to return to the reason that I started this topic which is that SD can do it all, is partly doing it all graphically and with a RoD digital readout could so easily remove the need for guesstimates allowing the pilot with a simple sweeping glance to determine that the standard cockpit instruments, as the primary means of flying, are "on the numbers" and the current flight position is endorsed by the information displayed by this outstanding piece of software SD.

I really don't want to start doing mathematical gymnastics when the workload is at it's highest, I just want confirmation that SD supports the current cockpit instrumentation readouts. If SD doesn't concur then I'll have an early heads-up that there might be an issue and it will give me more time to deal with and correct the problem.


Let's not go on about whether it's 3 degs or 2.8 degs glideslope when using the rule of thumb of "5 x the unknown ground speed" (but I'll have a guess anyhow). Just give me a RoD output calculation which is dynamically updated -- that's what computers do so well. It's then up to me what I do with the output, afterall that is what piloting a plane is all about and we're doing it all the time.





Biggles -- EGKB

Absolutely, and Near enough, in the ideal world & thanks for the formula.

Just for the sake of reference:

The exact formula for a 3° descent rate is:

GS(kts) x 5.3 = rate of descent (fpm).

If you use the value of 5 instead of 5.3 you will get a 2.8 degree approach angle.

Greetings, -- Chris.

Yes.

Thanks runways. Point well made.

It's all about accurate information rather than "guesstimate" through a rule of thumb. The rule of thumb only works if you're in the right place in a 3D environment.

In my experience life isn't like that, and flying certainly isn't!!!

Also you're asking to multiple 5 (GUESTIMATE 1) by a piece of information that the normal cockpit doesn't have namely GROUNDSPEED. So shall we have another "guesstimate" of that (GUESTIMATE 2).

I've always wondered what "GUESTIMATE 1" x "GUESTIMATE 2" gives you. Neither my Pooleys nor my calculator can work it out. Perhaps its another mown hedge at the upwind end of the runway!!



Biggles -- EGKB

Please note page 1 where the speedx5 rule idiosyncracies were referred to on the 21.8.2012 by Biggles-EGKB. Approximate deductions,lets face it, are not as accurate as a GPS derived constantly updated instantly displayed values.

Very Newbytheway

DurhamTeaseAirport

An easy way to calcul;ate your rate of descent is the 5:1 rule

Say you are at 95 knots on the glideslope your rate of descent should be 95x5 which is 475 ft per min

100 knots=500 ft per min and so on

Simples!

Regards

Paul

Hello Steve. Hope you are well.