A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Full procedure versu vectors



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 8th 07, 01:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default Full procedure versu vectors


"Wyatt Emmerich" wrote in message
. ..

With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure
GPS approaches rather than take vectors.


Full procedure GPS approaches? Do you mean proceeding direct to an IAF on a
basic-T approach versus being vectored to join the FAC?



Does it complicate life for
controllers when you request the full procedure?


Not if there's no other traffic.


  #2  
Old November 8th 07, 06:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Wyatt Emmerich[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Full procedure versu vectors

By full approach, I mean flying it as published. Usually a T approach, but
sometimes there's a hold as part of the approach. Flying the full approach
is easier with the WAAS. You don't have to input headings on the heading
bug. It is more predictable because it's published. No chance of
miscommunication on vectors. No constantly adjusting the heading bug. No
chance of the controller bringing you around to close of an automatic
glideslope couples.

--

Wyatt Emmerich
President, Emmerich Newspapers
601-977-0470

PO Box 16709, Jackson MS 39236
Shipping: 246 Briarwood Drive, Suite 101, Jackson MS 39206
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"Wyatt Emmerich" wrote in message
. ..

With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure
GPS approaches rather than take vectors.


Full procedure GPS approaches? Do you mean proceeding direct to an IAF on
a basic-T approach versus being vectored to join the FAC?



Does it complicate life for
controllers when you request the full procedure?


Not if there's no other traffic.



  #3  
Old November 8th 07, 08:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Denny
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 562
Default Full procedure versu vectors



If you are making routine instrument approaches, sitting there
watching the magic box move the little airplane on the screen and
drive the autopilot and your prime job in life is to control the
throttle as you whistle and tap in time to the music, you are not
current (in reality) and will be in a load of crap the day the
autopilot goes off line in real crud...

Far better you accept the vectors for every other flight and hand fly
the airplane on the steam gauges as you drip sweat in time to the
flopping of the indicator needles... Then someday when it actually
becomes life or death you will be ready...

denny

  #4  
Old November 11th 07, 09:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Full procedure versu vectors

On Nov 8, 2:48 pm, Denny wrote:
If you are making routine instrument approaches, sitting there
watching the magic box move the little airplane on the screen and
drive the autopilot and your prime job in life is to control the
throttle as you whistle and tap in time to the music, you are not
current (in reality) and will be in a load of crap the day the
autopilot goes off line in real crud...

Far better you accept the vectors for every other flight and hand fly
the airplane on the steam gauges as you drip sweat in time to the
flopping of the indicator needles... Then someday when it actually
becomes life or death you will be ready...

denny


I am quite current, thank you, and often hand fly approaches for
precisely that reason. Knowing the ins and outs of the autopilot and
its capabilities is an important part of flying. A pilot needs to be
able to do both. They are not mutually exclusive. When I use the
autopilot, I want to use it to its fullest capability. With the new
Garmin 500W, that means a GPS approach. It is proving to be smoother
and more precise than an ILS.

  #5  
Old November 8th 07, 11:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,477
Default Full procedure versu vectors


"Wyatt Emmerich" wrote in message
. ..

By full approach, I mean flying it as published. Usually a T approach, but
sometimes there's a hold as part of the approach. Flying the full approach
is easier with the WAAS. You don't have to input headings on the heading
bug. It is more predictable because it's published. No chance of
miscommunication on vectors. No constantly adjusting the heading bug. No
chance of the controller bringing you around to close of an automatic
glideslope couples.


What specific approaches are you referring to?


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
bad vectors, no hand off Lurker Instrument Flight Rules 23 February 13th 07 10:03 PM
RNAV vectors Dan Luke Instrument Flight Rules 74 December 26th 06 10:31 PM
Vectors over water paul kgyy Instrument Flight Rules 22 May 4th 05 09:15 PM
Radio protocol regarding full stops on full stop only nights Ben Hallert Piloting 33 February 9th 05 07:52 PM
Approach to an LOM/IAF with PT (not vectors to final) O. Sami Saydjari Instrument Flight Rules 35 April 13th 04 09:54 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.