# Why are vectors used for sequencing rather than speed control?

Qantas 94 Heavy
• Why are vectors used for sequencing rather than speed control? Qantas 94 Heavy

Why would ATC generally issue vectors instead of simply issuing speed reductions to aircraft? It'd seem more efficient to have aircraft flying less track miles, so is there any reason that speed control is worse than giving vectors to aircraft?

• It is easier for an aircraft to change headings than to change speed, especially in situations that would require the aircraft to slow down and then speed back up repeatedly. ATC is also restricted from slowing aircraft below certain minimum speeds until they get closer to the airport, so a vector may be their only option.

For instance, if ATC is trying to line two airplanes up on final and get them spaced a certain distance apart and going the same speed, a vector is usually the best tool because all they have to do is angle the following airplane correctly to intercept final and don't have to issue any speed adjustments.

• Let's say you have two aircraft that will reach the same point in space at the same time, and your job is to keep them three miles apart. One way to do it is to calculate how many knots the second aircraft should reduce their speed so that at the time the first aircraft reaches the point, the second aircraft will have fallen three miles in trail.

Unfortunately for you, this means that you have to work a time-speed-distance-wind problem for every single aircraft that you, as a controller, handle.

Alternatively, you pick a point three miles away and tell the second aircraft to fly there.

Air traffic controllers are human, and humans are better at angles than we are at numbers. The simplest thing for controllers is usually the best thing - they've got lots on their mind already without making them do math too! This might change in the NEXTGEN air traffic network (where everyone has a GPS position and speed readout right there on the screen) but for now, easy is better than hard.

Tags
• Why would ATC generally issue vectors instead of simply issuing speed reductions to aircraft? It'd seem more efficient to have aircraft flying less track miles, so is there any reason that speed control is worse than giving vectors to aircraft?

• — (1) Category A: Speed less than 91 knots. (2) Category B: Speed 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots. (3) Category C: Speed 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots. (4) Category D: Speed 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots. (5) Category E: Speed 166 knots or more. So an aircraft category never changes because it is always Vref at max landing weight. What if I fly an approach at a speed that falls into a different category? For instance, a jet may land at significantly less than this speed if very light, or more than this speed if landing with less

• In aeroelasticity, there are three main phenomena that one should take care of: divergence, aileron reversal and flutter. Each of them has an associated speed at which the phenomenon might start to occur. During wind-tunnel tests it is possible to increase the flutter speed to have access to the divergence speed first by using some small masses smartly placed on the wing. This is due to the fact that usually flutter speed is smaller than divergence speed. Is it always the case for aircraft (without additional masses on the wing)? If not do you have any example? If yes do you have

• and that's why I don't hear reply, however on approach side much bigger distances are heard in my area) Thank you I did verify that indeed the aircraft that I don't hear read back from receives... out in the question for some reason mostly it is "big" aircraft that gets this preferential treatment, but I am not 100% sure why. ... by the pilots per this question however on more than one occasion I don't hear read back on critical vector info on departure, despite the visual confirmation of instruction (pilot making proper vector

• How do flying wings, like the B-2 Stealth bomber, actually keep themselves from yawing out of control without a vertical stabilizer? For the record, I assume this has to be a simple mechanics... WWII. They didn't have flight control computers back then, and the only control complaints I recall them having is that early versions had a tendency to flip over backwards when approaching stall speeds, well, that and the ground effects were pretty strong. But, no mentions of going into flat spins when going into hard maneuvers (that I recall). So how do they control that Y axis on flying wings

• I want to know how aileron reversal takes place when control reversal velocity is higher than divergence speed and operating speed is in between them (for conventional wing)

• I'm very interested to learn if there are (m)any (major) (commercial) airports that have runways further away from the terminal(s) than Schiphol's Polderbaan. Which airport is "in the lead" in this respect? The northern end of the Polderbaan, the last runway to be constructed, is 7 km (4.3 mi) north of the control tower, causing taxi times of up to 20 minutes to the terminal. [...] Newest runway, opened 2003. Located to reduce the noise impact on the surrounding population; aircraft have a lengthy 15-minute taxi to and from the Terminal. Wikipedia

• Whenever I hear anyone talking about P-Factor, (whether it be single-engine left turning tendencies or multi-engine loss of directional control scenarios), someone always brings up the fact that the descending blade of a propeller generates more thrust than the ascending blade. I'm wondering why that's the case. What is P-Factor and why does it occur?

• Aircraft categories include: Airplane Rotorcraft Glider Lighter than air Powered lift Powered parachute Weight-shift-control I'm familiar with all of these except for weight-shift-control. What are they??

• Provided an aircraft with a fly-by-wire system, there are basically two possible choices when it comes deciding how to let the pilots interface with it: rate control / attitude hold: a deflection of the stick will command a certain rate, releasing it will make the system maintain the current attitude. See the Airbus Normal control law. direct control: a deflection of the yoke will directly translate to a deflection of the surfaces, mimicking the "old" mechanical control setup. It is my understanding that this is the design choice of Boeing in its new aircrafts. I do not wish to discuss

Data information