Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
:

On Jan 16, 8:49*am, "Barry" wrote:
and I'd say that seeing some
light through the fog doesn't count as "distinctly visible and
identifiabl
e".

I disagree. When you see the approach lights they are quiet
identifiable, even if you cannot see the grass around them.

Concerning landing out of an approach like this, I think that most GA
pilo
ts,
like myself, have very little chance to practice. *We don't have
simulat
ors
like the airline pilots do, and it's hard in most places to get this
type
of
practice in actual. *The only time I did an actual approach all the
way
down
to minimum (reported viz was 3/8) I found that it was not so easy to
transition to landing. *I'm sure that with practice it would become
much

easier, as you describe, but I don't find the FAA requirement
unreasonable
.
It doesn't leave much margin for error.

Come to Sacramento. You'll get lots of practice in the winter. The
transition is not really that hard. From my experience as a CFII the
transition to missed is much more difficult for students. Its very
common for students to pour on the coals but not pitch up; resulting
in racing down the runway but not climbing. In fact, I'd say more than
50% of instrument rated pilots who have lapsed have this issue. Going
from visual to instrument is more difficult. Most CFIIs around here
require pilots to practice zero/zero take offs by putting the hood on
our students before applying power on take off. Its not that we want
you to take off in zero vis, its because you could be rolling down the
runway and encounter it.


How about 0/0 landings?


Bertie