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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
chino california (CNO) the ILS on 26R is 4858 ft.
my wife took pictures all the way down the glideslope a few months ago, there was no clouds that day, just some ground fog. http://www.turboarrow3.com/newplane/chino/index.html Michael wrote: "Richard Kaplan" wrote What speed do you use to fly the ILS if asked to "keep your speed up"? These are different situations. If you're asked to keep your speed up, it's generally because you're landing at an air carrier airport. That means only minimal tailwinds (if any) and very long runways. You can float and float and float and land 5000+ ft down the runway and it's still fine. Being able to fly an ILS fast is an important skill, but it's not the ONLY important skill. ILS runways are usually 5,000 feet or longer. You could dissipate speed over the runway. It's true that ILS runways with a total length of less than 5000 ft are pretty rare - at least I've never seen one. However, the ILS and (typically available) visual glideslope aid will not put you on the numbers. Having an available landing distance of less than 5000 ft is actually pretty common. Unfortunately, this typically happens at airports served by only one ILS. If the weather is low enough to need an ILS, it may require a tailwind landing. At such a place you will not be asked to keep your speed up (unless the controller really screwed up). On the other hand, if you're a bit fast on the ILS and a bit slow to retard the throttle, you do risk overrunning the runway. This brings us to another interesting problem. When visibilities are less than a mile, especially at night, the visual cues available are not really sufficient for precise control of the airplane. The visual segment must be flown with at least some reference to instruments. This is not something that is normally taught, and it's not really something you can effectively practice in blue sky conditions. I suspect that most of the pilots having trouble slowing down would have done fine in good VMC flying under the hood. I personally like to take an advanced instrument student to an airport served by only one ILS when that approach is downwind, preferably in low vis, at night, or both. This quickly reveals any lingering technique issues, and lets us work them out in an environment that won't cover them up. Once he can handle landing out of an ILS at night with a 10 kt tailwind, he can pretty much handle any straight in visual segment. I suspect if you cross the runway threshold right on the glideslope at 90 knots in a Skyhawk with a 5,000 foot runway, there is no way you could overrun the runway if you tried. I suspect you're right - as long as there is really 5000 ft of landing distance available and no significant tailwind. However, lately I'm seeing a lot of people flying the ILS at 100+ kts in Cherokees and Skyhawks. I find this fascinating since it's faster than I fly the ILS in my twin, unless I am specifically instructed to keep my speed up. Michael |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
. .. "Roy Smith" wrote in message ... In article eMvPb.97683$5V2.322914@attbi_s53, "Gary Drescher" wrote: Since you have no choice about altitude during an ILS approach, adding kinetic energy is the only way to increase your glide range. That's not really true. You can't go below the GS, but nothing says you can't fly the entire approach above the GS. You're allowed to descend below the GS as part of your normal excursions (the FAR's call them bracketing maneuvers) to track the glide slope. PTS allows a three quarter scale deflection, so I hope that is legal, even if it is not comfortable. I think the responses to Chris's post are "it depends". At nearby Paine, with an 8 mile final over water and a long runway, I'm not dawdling. It's normal there for trainees at least to cross the threshhold with no flaps and take your time to bleed speed. I agree it is a good idea to know how to slow down without gaining altitude. -- David Brooks |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
"Roy Smith" wrote...
Since the only reconfiguring you should have to do, if any, is final flaps, you have plenty of time! Pulling the power back to idle might be nice too :-) I consider that part of the 'stick and throttle' part of flying that is done constantly, not "reconfiguring," which is done a couple times per flight. Besides, some airplanes don't take well to idle at 200' (including my current 744)... ;-) |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote...
Well, one would think so, and I don't have any problem with it, but I sure see a lot of pilots that just can't seem to handle it. But I am a CFII who flies and demonstrates these approaches constantly. I think my point is that pilots who do not fly as frequently should consider a different 'approach,' so to speak. Again, I disagree. Pilots who don't fly as frequently should use the time they DO get to practice their skills, lest they be lost. An instrument rated pilot should NOT go out and fly when the weather is near minimums, just to avoid going non-current! He should, instead, get out and practice those approaches -- including the transitions -- every couple weeks. If he can't do that, some instrument time with his favorite CFII should precede any attempt to go out in the real weather, and that CFII should ensure he CAN handle it before signing off any currency check. Flying an ILS at 60 knots instead of 90 puts the airplane much closer to stall, giving much less margin of error if the pilot gets distracted or fixated. The transition to visual is part of EVERY (Cat III excluded) actual approach that results in a landing, so that transition should be practiced as much as flying the needles. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
I think 90 knots is too slow, unless you have to deal with a tailwind.
The approach is easier to fly at 110 or so, and you get a better transition to the miss at these speeds. Control response is much more positive. My Cutlass RG was based at DCA for 8 years. I normally flew at 120 - 140 knots. All you have to do is chop the power at the middle marker and fly both the glideslope and the VASI. Your airspeed will decay quickly. That 200 feet of altitude is nearly a nautical mile horizontally. Starting at 120 knots and decelerating, that's about 30 seconds. If you are on the glideslope, you won't balloon anywhere. Good advice on the miss. If you hit DH and there is nothing to see, pitch to Vy, add power, and get the gear. Paul |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
We get foggy here at Tacoma Narrows this time of year (which is the reason I post more on these groups in the winter than in the summer). One thing we see a lot of is guys who fly the ILS too fast. I have no problem with flying the ILS at 90 or 100 knots if the ceiling is well above minimums, but it seems to me that if the ceiling is 200 feet overcast you ought to be flying the approach slowly enough that you can land at that speed. You don't need to configure for a short field landing, but you are not going to slow from 90 knots to 60 in a Skyhawk in only 200 feet of altitude, especially if you can't risk ballooning back up into the soup. CJ, I don't understand this post at all. It seems to me that 90 kts to DH is standard way most people are taught to fly an ILS. I have a plane that's a bit faster and a bit slippery (and less effective flaps) than a Skyhawk, and I have no trouble throttling back at DH and landing. True, I'm not landing and turning off in 1000 ft, but then, most of the ILS I've met are to 5000+ ft runways. Ballooning back into the soup shouldn't be an issue. I don't understand where your "slow from 90 to 60 in 200 ft of altitude" concern arises. We regularly practice flying the ILS at full cruise -- 130-140 kts -- right down to DH. If I throttle back at DH, I have no idea at what point I slow to landing speed. I simply level off just above the runway and wait until the airplane decides to land. If I wind up a foot off the runway at 90 kts it's not a problem. It seems to me that people should train how they're going to fly and fly how they're going to train. If they haven't trained enough to fly an ILS to DH at 90 kts and land comfortably, I don't think the solution is to have them adopt a different procedure. I think the solution is for them to train more -- and if they're going to do the necessary training to practice the 60 kt ILS thing, why not have them do the necessary training to fly a 90 kt ILS or even a 120 kt ILS? 1) If the field is really at minimums, you have 200 feet to slow down to landing speed. That is not much time. Better you should be ready to land before you break out. I don't understand this at all. Why do I only have 200 ft to slow down to landing speed? I have 200 ft of descent left -- but usually 1/2 mile from the runway threshold and 2000 ft to land in in the TDZ (assuming 4000+ ft runway). So it seems to me that I have something like 4,500 ft to slow down to landing speed. 2) If you decide to go missed, then go missed. Don't change your mind just because you got a glimpse of the runway as you were flying overhead. With this, assuming no malfunctions or fuel criticality, I agree. Cheers, Sydney |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Paul
Hamilton wrote: All you have to do is chop the power at the middle marker and fly both the glideslope and the VASI. That's fine if you have a middle marker. Not all ILS's do. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"John R Weiss" wrote in message news:OSzPb.98715$5V2.327271@attbi_s53... "Roy Smith" wrote... Pulling the power back to idle might be nice too :-) Besides, some airplanes don't take well to idle at 200' (including my current 744)... ;-) If you brought it in 50% faster than normal, it might well do... Paul |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Ron Rosenfeld wrote in message . ..
I think an instrument rated pilot should have had the necessary training so that he can fly the approach at the higher speeds desireable to blend in with faster traffic -- and not have to worry about "balloning back up into the soup". ... So I think that instrument rated pilots who, after all, are legal to fly into any airport, should have the training and experience to deal with the faster approach speeds. It really is not that difficult once one starts to practice. I think this is eminantly practical advice. I don't think of 90 kts as a "faster approach speed". It seems very common, at a larger airport, to be asked something like "keep your speed up -- say best forward speed?" If the answer is "N12345 can maintain 120 kts" it's presumably a heck of a lot easier for ATC to work you in between a bunch of jets than if your answer is "N12345 needs 60 kts (or even 90 kts) at the marker". My CFI would say "either train until you can do it or don't fly IMC". Cheers, Sydney |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Zaleski wrote in message . ..
Ron's thoughts are very realistic and deal with real world scenearios. All of my instrument students get the experience of flying 140 KT ILS speeds in my skyhawk at the later points of their training. Bill, Just curious, how do you fly 140 kt ILS in a Skyhawk? Or do you have a controllable prop? Cheers, Sydney |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
LSA Approach speeds | Ace Pilot | Home Built | 0 | February 3rd 04 05:38 PM |
How much protection on approach? | Michael | Instrument Flight Rules | 20 | January 15th 04 05:58 PM |
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 45 | November 20th 03 05:20 AM |
Which of these approaches is loggable? | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 26 | August 16th 03 05:22 PM |
IR checkride story! | Guy Elden Jr. | Instrument Flight Rules | 16 | August 1st 03 09:03 PM |