"Hilton" wrote in message
ink.net...

Steven, I really enjoy reading your posts. I think you bring a lot of
knowledge to these NGs. It's a real pity that you have to resort to
insults to try make a point.


I don't resort to insults, I use facts and logic to make my points. I truly
do find it hard to believe that someone with your knowledge of ILS could be
a CFI-I.



Try ACV ILS 32 - it starts you at 5200 - I made it easy for you.


That's very interesting. Let me make sure I understand your position.
You're saying that if the GS fails when I'm in IMC at 2700 MSL on the ACV
ILS RWY 32 approach I'm screwed and only luck will save my butt if I haven't
started the timer. Is that correct? Do you really teach your students to
begin timing an ILS at the precision approach FAF? Most pilots start the
clock at the nonprecision approach FAF, that's the one used in the timing
table. But at 2700 MSL on the glideslope the nonprecision approach FAF,
ACATA, is still three miles ahead. I don't have to do any arithmetic at all
to determine my distance from the MAP, I can just start the clock when I
reach ACATA. But I don't even have to do that, I can identify the MAP with
DME or ADF or marker beacon.

By the way, DH on that approach is 418 MSL, not 357.



OK, so you suggest teaching IFR pilots that *while they are doing
important stuff* that I mentioned before (power, gear, cowl flaps etc),
they have to
do this math in their heads:

(2700-357) / 300 * 60 / 80 = 6 minutes.


You still don't get it. This isn't an argument about timing vs. not-timing
an ILS. You claimed you're screwed if you don't time an ILS and the GS
fails, we're just trying to show you that that's not the case. Do you now
understand why your position was incorrect?



And getting back to my original comment, no, I don't think that every IFR
pilot is able to make these calculations correct 100% of the time - hence
the comment about luck. I certainly wouldn't guarantee myself that I
could get these calculations correct 100% of the time during the 'missed'
high-workload portion of the flight. I know and understand my limitations
(there Steven, huge opportunity for another snide remark ), and I'm
willing to do anything that will reduce my workload and that of my
students in IMC during a high-risk part of the flight.


But you think any IFR pilot can determine the distance from the MAP to the
precision approach FAF and correctly compute the time required to cover it
00% of the time. Apparently arithmetic is only a problem when it's used to
prove you wrong.