"License to taxi"

Ron Natalie writes:

That movie is pretty accurate for the day (the PAR approach at the
end seems pretty word for word right0.

Does PAR predate ILS? Watching the movie I wondered why they didn't
use ILS, so I presume it simply didn't exist in 1971 (?).

The book it's based on is fabulous as well, you should dig it up.
Arthur Hailey writes "insider" books for a number of fields. This
is perhaps his best.

I did read the book (while actually on a TWA plane to St. Louis, in
fact), and it was excellent ... better than the movie. The movie
wasn't too bad, either, at least for the aviation parts. Times have
changed, though!

The sequels were pretty much all wacko however.

I thought _Airplane_ was funny.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Ron Natalie writes:

That movie is pretty accurate for the day (the PAR approach at the
end seems pretty word for word right0.

Does PAR predate ILS? Watching the movie I wondered why they didn't
use ILS, so I presume it simply didn't exist in 1971 (?).


No they had both, but they had a stricken aircraft after the
depressurization and they had a lot of things to worry about.
Doing the PAR approach lessens the pilot workload.


I thought _Airplane_ was funny.


It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.
It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.

Ron Natalie writes:

No they had both, but they had a stricken aircraft after the
depressurization and they had a lot of things to worry about.
Doing the PAR approach lessens the pilot workload.

Did things like autopilot ILS approach and autoland exist back then?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Ron Natalie writes:

No they had both, but they had a stricken aircraft after the
depressurization and they had a lot of things to worry about.
Doing the PAR approach lessens the pilot workload.

Did things like autopilot ILS approach and autoland exist back then?

Autopilot did, but it's much cruder than it was today. With an aircraft
that's aerodymanically challenged however, I'm not sure I'd have trusted
the autopilot. Let me concentrate on moving the controls, off load
navigation to ATC. That's what a PAR is good for.

Ron Natalie writes:

Autopilot did, but it's much cruder than it was today. With an aircraft
that's aerodymanically challenged however, I'm not sure I'd have trusted
the autopilot. Let me concentrate on moving the controls, off load
navigation to ATC. That's what a PAR is good for.

Seeing the movie, I was surprised that a PAR even existed or was
possible. I don't see how ATC could have a better idea of the
aircraft's exact position than the pilot, given that the pilot has
many more instruments. I know ATC has radar echos that position the
aircraft laterally with a varying degree of precision, but how can ATC
know the heading or attitude of the a/c, both important on an
approach? I guess the transponder can provide altitude (if mode C
existed back then).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote
Seeing the movie, I was surprised that a PAR even existed or was
possible.

PAR was the Navy's only means of precision approach for most
of its aircraft during the years that I was a Naval Aviator,
1958-1967. During that period, PAR minimums were 100'-1/4 mi.
while ILS minimums were 200'-1/2 mile. GCA (PAR) controllers
were damn good!

Bob Moore

"Bob Moore" wrote in message
. 122...
Mxsmanic wrote
Seeing the movie, I was surprised that a PAR even existed or was
possible.

PAR was the Navy's only means of precision approach for most
of its aircraft during the years that I was a Naval Aviator,
1958-1967. During that period, PAR minimums were 100'-1/4 mi.
while ILS minimums were 200'-1/2 mile. GCA (PAR) controllers
were damn good!

Bob Moore

Damn right they were good. I am a retired Master Army Aviator, and a PAR
controller saved my life and those of my crew one night (1965) in Vietnam.
Zero/zero , in fog, minimum fuel, no place to go. Brought me down safely in
a helicopter. Was well worth the 2 quarts of Cutty Sark I gave them the next
day. G God bless them all!!!!

Paul

Mxsmanic wrote:

Seeing the movie, I was surprised that a PAR even existed or was
possible. I don't see how ATC could have a better idea of the
aircraft's exact position than the pilot, given that the pilot has
many more instruments.


PAR is a VERY accurate radar for approaches. There aren't many
around these days outside of military fields. It's a special
scope different from the normal radar that looks up the final
approach path. It uses the radar returns for both horizontal
and vertical guideance, it does not need a transponder.