Circle to land question

On Sat, 14 May 2005 08:55:03 -0500, A Lieberman
wrote:

Since the airspace would be all mine for an IFR arrival,

The point I was trying to make is that that is not necessarily the case.
ATC will separate you from other IFR traffic, but they have NO
responsibility to separate you from VFR traffic.

I **wouldn't think** JAN Approach would care how I maneuvered to get to 35

I'd agree with that. But that does not make it safe or legal.

I doubt that I would find VFR traffic in the pattern when ceilings are 900 feet.
Of course, anything is possible!

Since VFR traffic can legally be in the pattern in that airspace with
weather at 900/5, you only have to be wrong once to have a really bad day.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I have legally flown to a similar
airport in similar weather, VFR. I have also seen, at my home airport,
powered parachutes in the pattern and the vicinity at a few hundred feet
AGL.

My preference on a circling approach is to always fly a left hand pattern.
If there is some safety reason to execute a right hand pattern (or if the
airport has right traffic), then I will fly a right hand pattern.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 13:28:40 -0400, Ron Rosenfeld wrote:

My preference on a circling approach is to always fly a left hand pattern.
If there is some safety reason to execute a right hand pattern (or if the
airport has right traffic), then I will fly a right hand pattern.

Hi Ron,

I really appreciate your input. Let me ask you this question as I really
learn from others....

Seeing how the VOR Alpha approach leads you into the airport, and if you
reached midfield at minimums, how would you execute the landing for runway
35 if you don't execute a right hand pattern?

There are no noise sensitive areas, nor any unusual considerations around
MBO.

Allen

On Sat, 14 May 2005 16:05:26 -0500, A Lieberman
wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2005 13:28:40 -0400, Ron Rosenfeld wrote:

My preference on a circling approach is to always fly a left hand pattern.
If there is some safety reason to execute a right hand pattern (or if the
airport has right traffic), then I will fly a right hand pattern.

Hi Ron,

I really appreciate your input. Let me ask you this question as I really
learn from others....

Seeing how the VOR Alpha approach leads you into the airport, and if you
reached midfield at minimums, how would you execute the landing for runway
35 if you don't execute a right hand pattern?

There are no noise sensitive areas, nor any unusual considerations around
MBO.

Allen

It's good that you describe a specific approach, because all of these sorts
of questions depend critically on the approach one is flying.

For the KMBO VOR-A approach, the missed approach point is at MAFCA which is
west of the runway. When I reached MAFCA, if I had the field in sight, the
runway would be ahead of me, and crossing my flight path. So I would turn
right to enter the left downwind, and fly a normal left handed pattern.
If, at MAFCA, I did not have the runway in sight, I would be executing a
missed approach.

In addition to the above considerations, there is also the fact that the
minimum visibility for this approach (for a Category A a/c) is one mile.
MAFCA is only 1000' from the runway. If I do not pick up the runway prior
to MAFCA, it is likely I will not have the required visibility to make the
approach. (Not definite, as there could be an obstruction to visibility
that clears up directly over the airport). So it is likely that if I just
barely see the airport upon reaching the MAP, I'll have to execute a "miss"
anyway.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Lighten up man. I stated I did not have the sectional and you never stated
that it was under the C airspace.

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 13 May 2005 17:10:18 -0400, "Paul Lynch" wrote:

The sectional may also show that MBO is actually in or
partially in the surface to 4000AGL Class C airspace since it is so close
to
Jackson. If that is the case, then the viz and cloud clearance
requirements
would preclude that VFR traffic from LEGALLY operating.

I reviewed data prior to MY posting which indicates the contrary to your
assumption.

With regard to your specific statement regarding the CCA, over MBO the
floor of the CCA is at 1700'MSL (or 1374' AGL).


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 18:07:04 -0400, Ron Rosenfeld wrote:

In addition to the above considerations, there is also the fact that the
minimum visibility for this approach (for a Category A a/c) is one mile.
MAFCA is only 1000' from the runway. If I do not pick up the runway prior
to MAFCA, it is likely I will not have the required visibility to make the
approach. (Not definite, as there could be an obstruction to visibility
that clears up directly over the airport). So it is likely that if I just
barely see the airport upon reaching the MAP, I'll have to execute a "miss"
anyway.

Thanks Ron!

You did clear up one thing. I was thinking that 5.0 DME was mid field for
MBO, when in reality it is MAFCA.

Duhh, read the chart Allen.....

If you are interested,
http://www.archive.org/details/ALieb...pproachintoMBO is the
actual approach. I took a VFR pilot friend up who had never been in IMC.
File is 40 meg. For my DSL, it takes 2 1/2 minutes to download.

This was the first time I did it by myself down this close to minimums.
Ceilings were right at 1000, and visibility was about 2 miles below the
ceiling. I broke out 4.8 DME from the JAN VOR.

Couple of things to note...

Below NAV one, I have a "digital" VOR. It tells me what radial I am on
when I switch it from NAV1 or NAV2. I can tell it to indicate to or from
the VOR. So, you can see, I was as close as I can be on that 137 radial.

I overshot final, as I didn't take into account the tail wind on my turn to
base. I had a 40 knot tail wind!

Surface winds were 21 gusting to 29 knots, so I did a no flaps landing.

I have done the approach with my instructor 2 other times right at minimums
in my IFR training, and when we broke out, it was right at mid field, which
maybe because of my prior experiences had in my mind that mid field was
MAFCA for my missed approaches. On these two approaches we used 17.

There was one other lesson, where we did a missed approach for the real
deal, as ceilings dropped below minimums after we left.

I have noticed in my experiences that the ceilings tend to be a little
higher east of the field. Probably the reservoir has something to do with
that, though I don't know for sure.

Allen

On Sat, 14 May 2005 18:15:48 -0400, "Paul Lynch" wrote:

Lighten up man. I stated I did not have the sectional and you never stated
that it was under the C airspace.

Sorry about that. After I typed and hit send I realized it sounded
harsh. And I did not intend that. Usually I check my posts for that sort
of thing, but I was in a hurry.




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

On Sat, 14 May 2005 21:18:31 -0500, A Lieberman
wrote:

Thanks Ron!

You're welcome.

A few things to keep in mind:

1. Low visibility *circling* approaches are tough. And they get more
tough with faster/larger a/c. I have been told that a number of the
commercial carriers are far more restrictive with regard to circling
approaches than the FAA minimums.

2. There are many non-precision approaches (although MBO is not one of
them) where, if you do not see the airport until reaching the MAP, you will
not be "continuously in a position from which a descent to a landing on the
intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal
maneuvers" which is one of the requirements to operate below the MDA
(91.175).

3. I think your DSL is faster than my wireless ISP. But it was an
interesting video. I've not done anything like that, but I can see where
it could be a great learning tool.

And you'll get used to compensating for the wind as you gain more
experience; but we all still screw up from time to time, in any number of
ways.

Always remember to have fun. And remember:

"Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad
judgement" :-)


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

A Lieberman writes:

[...] If you are interested,
http://www.archive.org/details/ALieb...pproachintoMBO is
the actual approach. [...] This was the first time I did it by
myself down this close to minimums. [...]

Unless I misheard the video, your stall warning horn came on a few
times during the downwind-to-final turn. Be careful, so you can keep
making neat approaches.

- FChE

On 15 May 2005 08:52:05 -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:

Unless I misheard the video, your stall warning horn came on a few
times during the downwind-to-final turn. Be careful, so you can keep
making neat approaches.

*smile* You did hear correctly, and if you noticed, immediately after the
chirps, I decreased my bank and increased power.

Spin at that altitude would not be pretty....

Allen

No problem. I may be oversensitive from some other newsgroups where the
shotguns are always out and blasting away!


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 May 2005 18:15:48 -0400, "Paul Lynch" wrote:

Lighten up man. I stated I did not have the sectional and you never
stated
that it was under the C airspace.

Sorry about that. After I typed and hit send I realized it sounded
harsh. And I did not intend that. Usually I check my posts for that sort
of thing, but I was in a hurry.




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)