![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 21, 10:57 am, "Barry" wrote:
Nitpicking here, 91.175(c)(3) does not mention the "rabbit" aka RAIL or Sequenced Flashers as an acceptable visual reference. You can descend to 100' using the *approach lights* as a reference... 91.175(c) was changed to make "the runway environment" explicit. RAILs or SFs are not on the list. I disagree, 91.175 (c)(3)(i) says "the approach light system" which certainly includes the sequenced flashers - see the AIM 2-1-1 which states "Some systems include sequenced flashing lights". So you don't have the "system" in sight if you only have the RAIL/ SF, but not the approach lights themselves, and the next clause refers to descending with the approach lights in sight. If "approach light system" is to be parsed as lights plus RAIL, you need both. If you parse it as the lights, you need the lights. It doesn't say "any part of the approach light system". From a practical point of view, in my experience, having *only* the RAIL as a visual reference is more of a distraction than a help. One important point that people often miss is that in addition to seeing the lights, the pilot must have the required flight visibility in order to continue the descent below DH. Since 100 feet above TDZE on glideslope is only about 1000 feet from the threshold, if you can't see the runway well before then, you probably don't have landing minimums, and are not authorized to go below DH. When you get to a 200' DH, you are 4000' from the fixed distance marker, 3500' from the beginning of the TDZ and 3000' feet from the threshold. So with a minimum 2400/1800 foot visibility, you won't be able to see the threshold yet. That's why you are allowed to descend to 100AGL with only the approach lights as a reference - you should be able to see *them* if you have the required visibility. (Parenthetically, if you can't, and can only see the RAIL, I find it not credible that you do have the required visibility) At 200AGL (DH), you get to decide whether to continue the approach on the basis of the visibility at that instant and the presence of at least one the visual references listed in 91.175. If at some time thereafter, eg at 100AGL you still can't see the threshold, or for that matter the beginning of the TDZ which is now 1500 feet away (the fixed distance marker is still 2000 feet away, so with a 1800RVR minimum, you maybe can't see it yet) *then* you have to miss the approach. So you haven't thought through the logic here. It's true you'll need to be able to see the runway before 100AGL, but you won't necessarily be able to see it before DH. So you can't say you shouldn't have gone below DH on the basis of not being able to see the runway at DH! You also can't say retroactively that you shouldn't have gone below DH on the basis of what you didn't see later. The required visibility is a requirement that applies continuously below DH. In addition, there are *specific* required visual references that apply at DH and 100AGL. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IFR checkride: passed | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | July 6th 05 10:14 PM |
Instrument Checkride passed (Long) | Paul Folbrecht | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | February 11th 05 02:41 AM |
Instrument Rating Checkride PASSED (Very Long) | Alan Pendley | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | December 16th 04 02:16 PM |
IFR checkride in IMC: PASSED! | gatt | Instrument Flight Rules | 25 | November 3rd 04 12:24 AM |
IFR checkride in IMC: PASSED! | gatt | Piloting | 44 | October 21st 04 06:02 PM |