Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 15, 5:54*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Nope, it's how reasonable it might be to expect to see he runway and
munuever the airplane to a landing *form the MAP or DH.
You're nto going to be able to do that safely with 1/8 from 200' or
thereabouts.
1/8 mile is pretty ****ing small! That's Cat 3a minima.
I can't
think of any reason why this would not be. A typical GA plane may be
stopped on the runway before a 747 touches down. I think vis
requirements, in general, for GA planes are a bit bogus, at least with
regard to precision approaches.
Hand flown, you would have a lot of airplanes crashed into the approach
lights.
An excepetional pilot would be able to do it most of the time, though.
most of the time.
And I've done a LOT of instruments in singles and light twins. 1/4 is
reasonablem but 1/8. no.
Maybe this is different to me because I live in a fog valley. Today I
shoot 6 approaches. Weather was reported as 001OVC and 1/8SM. This is
pretty common weather here. I easily could have landed from any of the
approaches. Flying over the rabbit I clearly could see far enough of
the runway to land. Now, if a car pulled in front of me that would be
a different story but I don't think the FAA can protect against that
anyway.
So, to me landing 1/8SM 001OVC is not unreasonably hard but I could
see it could be a handful going 150 knots in a 747.
-Robert
|