VOR approach SMO

Just for kicks I flew this approach in MS FSX with the CRJ700. I set
the wx to 800 & 3 (no wind) and figured I'd see what kind of
acrobatics I would have to do. I crossed CULVE at 1100' with 130 kts
and flaps 45. I descended for 680 MDA at around 1800 fpm, which
surprisingly did not require any deploy of the spoilers. I broke out
of the clouds and continued this descent until reaching the VASI
glideslope at around 450' and 1/2 mile out. From here on it was a
normal descent and I was able to plop down on the aiming point
markers. For what it's worth, FSX had the threshold being at 0.9 DME.

I know FSX isn't the same as the real world, and I'm not sure I would
want to be dropping that fast at such a low altitude, but it seems
like it wouldn't be a stretch for that Gulfstream to make it in on the
numbers if they were on top of their game....

Erik
CFII, MEI


On Jul 23, 12:39 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
The other day I shot the VOR approach into SMO for the first time in
low actual. I've often looked at that approach as one of the most
difficult I've seen published so it was interesting to actually try
it. The weather was 008OVC with something like 3sm HZ. I touched down
about 3/4 down the runway and was able to stop without a problem.
However, while taxiing back, I noticed a Gulf Stream land right on the
numbers. There is no way you can tell me he properly flew the approach
and was able to touch on the numbers.
The approach is published as a circle to land (I assume because of the
extreme nature of the decent) but they certainly were not offering to
allow anyone to circle. In fact there was a steady line of jets coming
in, it would probably have been unlikely to get a circle approved.

Last night I departed. AWOS was reporting 005OVC. I took off right
around 21:10. There was a large Citation right behind me picking up
his clearance. I didn't ever hear him depart on approach frequency so
I'm assuming he missed his curfew and his execs got stranded.

-Robert

On Jul 27, 6:39 pm, TakeFlight wrote:
Just for kicks I flew this approach in MS FSX with the CRJ700. I set
the wx to 800 & 3 (no wind) and figured I'd see what kind of
acrobatics I would have to do. I crossed CULVE at 1100' with 130 kts
and flaps 45. I descended for 680 MDA at around 1800 fpm, which
surprisingly did not require any deploy of the spoilers.

FWIW, I believe I remember reading an NTSB report of a Gulf crash (at
i believe Aspen). While it wasn't in the POH, the policy of the
charter company was that spoilers were not to be deployed when landing
gear or flaps were extended...It was mentioned in the report because
investigation revealed that the spoilers were extended on impact...

I broke out
of the clouds and continued this descent until reaching the VASI
glideslope at around 450' and 1/2 mile out. From here on it was a
normal descent and I was able to plop down on the aiming point
markers.

Out of curiosity, what was your "speed" at 1800 fpm? I thought SMO
had a PAPI on 21 but it is FSX...

For what it's worth, FSX had the threshold being at 0.9 DME.


Sounds about right (maybe a bit long...)

I was able to hold 130 kts all the way down. My intent was to pin the
speed and see what kind of descent rate I would get (and need) to pull
it off. I wasn't expecting to get that much without dropping the
spoilers at least 1/4, but I was at idle, which probably isn't
SOP...In all fairness, I've never flown a "real" jet, unless the 737
sim at UAL counts

You're right about the lights...it is a PAPI in FSX.


Out of curiosity, what was your "speed" at 1800 fpm? I thought SMO
had a PAPI on 21 but it is FSX...

For what it's worth, FSX had the threshold being at 0.9 DME.

Sounds about right (maybe a bit long...)

On Jul 23, 12:39 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:

However, while taxiing back, I noticed a Gulf Stream land right on the
numbers. There is no way you can tell me he properly flew the approach
and was able to touch on the numbers.


After reading the 123 messages in this thread, I am convinced the
Gulfstream pilot had CFII Gruber for Instrument flight training

In all seriousness, when I first looked at the chart, I read it
correctly, but after examining the multiple astericks, I can now see
how it's possible that this could be confusing. This is just the sort
of example of how the ASRS is useful in identifying safety issues
relating to charting. I wonder if this sort of thing was ever
reported? Nevertheless, I glad to hear someone got NACO charting
involved.

Brad wrote:
On Jul 23, 12:39 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:


However, while taxiing back, I noticed a Gulf Stream land right on the
numbers. There is no way you can tell me he properly flew the approach
and was able to touch on the numbers.



After reading the 123 messages in this thread, I am convinced the
Gulfstream pilot had CFII Gruber for Instrument flight training

In all seriousness, when I first looked at the chart, I read it
correctly, but after examining the multiple astericks, I can now see
how it's possible that this could be confusing. This is just the sort
of example of how the ASRS is useful in identifying safety issues
relating to charting. I wonder if this sort of thing was ever
reported? Nevertheless, I glad to hear someone got NACO charting
involved.


Yes, it has recently been reported. You missed one of the 123 messages. ;-)