Fact or satirical fiction?

wrote in message

Flight Conditions: IMC; apparent ceiling 200 ft
ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi visibility

It's been a while since I flew, but are ILS minimums now as shown above?
3/8 mile?

The controlling visibility, once a flight is at or past the
FAF, is flight visibility. If the pilot can see the
required distance, he has minimums and can land. Commercial
operations can't make the approach to "look see" unless the
reported visibility is above minimums, but can continue if
at/past the FAF. Part 91 can fly the approach in any
condition, but must have the required items identified at DH
and have the flight visibility to land.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...
|
| wrote in message
|
| Flight Conditions: IMC; apparent ceiling 200 ft
| ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi visibility
|
| It's been a while since I flew, but are ILS minimums now
as shown above?
| 3/8 mile?
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
newspGVf.850$t22.20@dukeread08...
The controlling visibility, once a flight is at or past the
FAF, is flight visibility. If the pilot can see the
required distance, he has minimums and can land. Commercial
operations can't make the approach to "look see" unless the
reported visibility is above minimums, but can continue if
at/past the FAF. Part 91 can fly the approach in any
condition, but must have the required items identified at DH
and have the flight visibility to land.

Jim, Jim, Jim...... All that is very nice, and proves you can regurgitate
arcana with the best of them, but doesn't answer my question. The report as
posted seems to indicate that the ILS minimums of the approach in question
are 200 and 3/8 mile. Is that legit? All the time I was flying, basic ILS
minimums were 200 and 1/2.

I can't answer that because I never saw the airport or
approach identified, so I can't look it up. Was it in the
USA or Europe? But if there was an accident, the current
reported weather would be reported.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| newspGVf.850$t22.20@dukeread08...
| The controlling visibility, once a flight is at or past
the
| FAF, is flight visibility. If the pilot can see the
| required distance, he has minimums and can land.
Commercial
| operations can't make the approach to "look see" unless
the
| reported visibility is above minimums, but can continue
if
| at/past the FAF. Part 91 can fly the approach in any
| condition, but must have the required items identified
at DH
| and have the flight visibility to land.
|
| Jim, Jim, Jim...... All that is very nice, and proves you
can regurgitate
| arcana with the best of them, but doesn't answer my
question. The report as
| posted seems to indicate that the ILS minimums of the
approach in question
| are 200 and 3/8 mile. Is that legit? All the time I was
flying, basic ILS
| minimums were 200 and 1/2.
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:9MLVf.913$t22.188@dukeread08...
I can't answer that because I never saw the airport or
approach identified, so I can't look it up. Was it in the
USA or Europe? But if there was an accident, the current
reported weather would be reported.




https://extranet.nasdac.faa.gov/pls/portal/STAGE.ASRS_BRIEF_REPORT?RPT_NBR=294800&AC_VAR=TRUE &RPRT_VAR=TRUE&ANMLY_VAR=TRUE&SYN_VAR=TRUE&NARR_VA R=TRUE&NARR_SRCH=''

Didn't see 3/8 mile anywhere.

NASDAC BRIEF REPORT

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL INFORMATION

Data Source: AVIATION SAFETY REPORTING SYSTEM
Report Number: 294800
Local Date(Yr/Mon): 199501
Local Day:
Local Quarter Time: 0601 To 1200
Facilty ID Nr Aircraft: ATL
State of Facility Nr Acft: GA
Magnetic Bearing (deg):
Facility Distance (nm):
Altitude AGL - LO(ft) 0
Altitude AGL - HI(ft) 200
Altitude MSL - LO(ft)
Altitude MSL - HI(ft)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental/Location Information

Weather Conditions: IMC
Ceiling: 200
Light Condition: Daylight
Runway Vis - LO(ft): 5000
Runway Vis - HI(ft): 5000
Visual Range - LO (sm): .5
Visual Range - HI (sm): .5



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SYNOPSIS

ACFT DEVIATED FROM LOC (FULL-SCALE DEFLECTION), AND
CONTINUED BELOW DECISION HEIGHT TO LNDG, AFTER SEVERAL WILD
BANKS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NARRATIVE

ON APCH INTO ATL, 2700 FT MSL, 1 MI OUTSIDE FINAL APCH FIX,
THE ACFT WAS STABILIZED. CAPT FLYING FLEW THROUGH THE LOC,
OVER COMPENSATED AND FLEW BACK THROUGH THE LOC AGAIN AT THE
MARKER. ONCE THE MARKER LIGHT ILLUMINATED, THE 'GEAR
DOWN/LNDG CHKLIST, TO THE LINE, WAS CALLED. I PROCEEDED WITH
THE LNDG CHKLIST AND CALLED OUT THE MAJOR DEVS. SEVERAL WILD
EXCURSIONS ENSUED. AT 400 FT AGL, WE WERE FULL-SCALE R OF
LOC AND ON GS. I CALLED GAR, AT THAT POINT, NOW 200 FT AGL,
WE BROKE OUT WELL R OF THE RWY AND ADJACENT TO THE TOUCHDOWN
ZONE. THE CAPT CALLED GAR. I PUSHED UP THE PWR, TO WHICH HE
CALLED, 'NO, I GOT THE RWY MADE.' LNDG WAS MADE AFTER
SEVERAL WILD BANKS AND AN ENSUING JEST BY THE TWR. I SHOULD
HAVE BEEN MORE ASSERTIVE AS AN FO AND NEVER ALLOWED THE APCH
TO PASS THE FIRST DEV AFTER MISSING THE LOC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft Information



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Aircraft Sequence 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Info

Acft Make/Model Desc: Brasilia EMB-120 All Series
Crew Count: 2
Passenger Count:
Aircraft Involved: Unique Event
Flight Conduct Rule: Part 121
Flight Purpose: Passenger

Operation Type

Carrier Operation: Air Carrier
GA Operation:
Other Operation:

Phase of Flight

Climbout:
Climbout Other:
Cruise:
Other Cruise:
Descent: Approach
Other Descent:
Ground:
Other Ground:
Landing
Other Landing: Landing
Other Flight Phase:

Airspace Info

Class A:
Class B: ATL
Class C:
Class D: ATL
Class E:
Class G:
Special Use:
Temp Use:




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings


Anomaly Descriptors

Acft Equip Anomaly:
ASP Anomaly:
Alt Dev Anomaly:
Cabin Event Anomaly:
Conflict Anomaly:
Excursion Anomaly:
Ground Encounter Anomaly:
Incursion Anomaly:
In-Flight Anomaly:
Maintenance Anomaly:
Non-Adherence Anomaly: Published Procedure
Non-Adherence Other Anomaly:
Other Anomaly:
Other Spatial Dev. Anomaly: Track Or Heading
Deviation

Anomaly Consequences

Consequence Desc:
Other Consequence Desc:
Misc. Consequence Desc:

Anomaly Detected By

Controller A: Unspecified
Controller B:
Crew A: Unspecified
Crew B:

Anomaly Resolution

Aircraft:
Controller:
Crew:
Other Action:
No Action: Anomaly Accepted
Event Type: Unique Event




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporter Information



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Reporter Sequence 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reporter Function

Controller:
Flight Attendant:
Flight Crew: First Officer
Instructor:
Maintenance:
Observer:
Other Personell:
Oversight:
Reporter Activity: Monitoring

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Reporter Sequence 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reporter Function

Controller:
Flight Attendant:
Flight Crew: Captain
Instructor:
Maintenance:
Observer:
Other Personell:
Oversight: PIC
Reporter Activity: Pilot Flying

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings For Reporter Sequence 3

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reporter Function

Controller: Local
Flight Attendant:
Flight Crew:
Instructor:
Maintenance:
Observer:
Other Personell:
Oversight:
Reporter Activity: Controlling




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
END REPORT

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:9MLVf.913$t22.188@dukeread08...
| I can't answer that because I never saw the airport or
| approach identified, so I can't look it up. Was it in
the
| USA or Europe? But if there was an accident, the
current
| reported weather would be reported.
|
|
|
|
|
https://extranet.nasdac.faa.gov/pls/portal/STAGE.ASRS_BRIEF_REPORT?RPT_NBR=294800&AC_VAR=TRUE &RPRT_VAR=TRUE&ANMLY_VAR=TRUE&SYN_VAR=TRUE&NARR_VA R=TRUE&NARR_SRCH=''
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in

Didn't see 3/8 mile anywhere.

here's the first segment of the original post in this thread:
********************
NASA ASRS Incident #294800, Atlanta, GA (ATL):
------------------------------------
Crew: Two-man crew, Captain (CAPT) and First Officer (FO); report
submitted
by FO
Aircraft: MDT (Medium Transport, 30,001 - 60,000 lbs); large turboprop
Flight Conditions: IMC; apparent ceiling 200 ft
ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi visibility
*****************************

"Jim Macklin" wrote in

I can't answer that because I never saw the airport or
approach identified, so I can't look it up. Was it in the
USA or Europe? But if there was an accident, the current
reported weather would be reported.

here's the first segment of the original post in this thread:
********************
NASA ASRS Incident #294800, Atlanta, GA (ATL):
------------------------------------
Crew: Two-man crew, Captain (CAPT) and First Officer (FO); report
submitted
by FO
Aircraft: MDT (Medium Transport, 30,001 - 60,000 lbs); large turboprop
Flight Conditions: IMC; apparent ceiling 200 ft
ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi visibility
*****************************

Note: "Atlanta, GA (ATL)" and "ILS Approach Min: 200 ft ceiling and 3/8 mi
visibility"

That's what I'm referring to. I've never seen an ILS with these minimums,
and I've flown lotsa lotsa ILSs into ATL (although, some were Cat II and
III) Maybe a typo, but that's why I asked.