VOR approach SMO

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

"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

Why do you think this is difficult? The only thing I see that's tricky
about it is that you need to keep up a steep descent (360 ft/nm from DARTS
to the threshold, and about 500 ft/nm from CULVE to the threshold, by my
calculations), but that's just a matter of energy management.

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.

Why not? Follow the descent profile until you can see the runway, then fly
the rest visually. The only thing is you need to realize ahead of time
that this is a steep descent profile and you'll need to reduce power and/or
add drag to stay on the descent profile without picking up too much speed.
In a spam can, I would certainly be flying this with the first notch of
flaps in from DARTS or FAC intercept if on vectors.

On Jul 23, 10:58 am, Roy Smith wrote:
"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

Why do you think this is difficult?

Landing from 1100 feet when less than 2 miles from the runway. Notice
the VOR is on the OTHER side of the runway.

-Robert

Roy Smith wrote:
"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


Why do you think this is difficult? The only thing I see that's tricky
about it is that you need to keep up a steep descent (360 ft/nm from DARTS
to the threshold, and about 500 ft/nm from CULVE to the threshold, by my
calculations), but that's just a matter of energy management.

The gradient from CULVE to the threshold is all that matters and that is
well over 600 feet per mile. You need to have the Jepp airport diagram
to figure that out.

In article ,
Roy Smith wrote:

"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

Why do you think this is difficult? The only thing I see that's tricky
about it is that you need to keep up a steep descent (360 ft/nm from DARTS
to the threshold, and about 500 ft/nm from CULVE to the threshold, by my
calculations), but that's just a matter of energy management.

Indeed. The only time I've done that approach for real (in marginal VMC
through a thin layer of stratus) SoCal vectored me well inside DARTS at
6,000' in a 172, which is SOP, apparently. Energy management's
definitely the key in a situation like that -- there's a reason I've
heard it called the "Santa Monica Slam" -- but dropping like a rock like
that would surely take a bit of faith in hard IMC....

The other point is that you're on an approach with a lot of faster
aircraft behind you, and I'm sure the temptation is to keep going like a
bat out of hell right up until the MDA, at which point you don't have a
lot of time and space to slow down. That hasn't happened to me, but I
can understand why it might. I was asked for best forward speed all the
way from somewhere out near OHIGH to CULVE. But it was VFR below the
stratus, and I knew my way around...

Hamish

In article
,
Hamish Reid wrote:

The other point is that you're on an approach with a lot of faster
aircraft behind you, and I'm sure the temptation is to keep going like a
bat out of hell right up until the MDA, at which point you don't have a
lot of time and space to slow down. That hasn't happened to me, but I
can understand why it might. I was asked for best forward speed all the
way from somewhere out near OHIGH to CULVE.

You worry about flying the approach and let ATC worry about the aircraft
behind you. If you're not comfortable flying it any faster than 90 kts,
when they ask you for best speed, just tell them 90 kts IS your best speed.
They'll deal with it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy Smith ]
Posted At: Monday, July 23, 2007 5:19 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: VOR approach SMO
Subject: VOR approach SMO

In article
,
Hamish Reid wrote:

The other point is that you're on an approach with a lot of faster
aircraft behind you, and I'm sure the temptation is to keep going
like a
bat out of hell right up until the MDA, at which point you don't
have a
lot of time and space to slow down. That hasn't happened to me, but
I
can understand why it might. I was asked for best forward speed all
the
way from somewhere out near OHIGH to CULVE.

You worry about flying the approach and let ATC worry about the
aircraft
behind you. If you're not comfortable flying it any faster than 90
kts,
when they ask you for best speed, just tell them 90 kts IS your best
speed.
They'll deal with it.

Of course the way they deal with it could easily have you practicing a
hold for quite a while.

When I was working out of Boeing Field, I intentionally took my advanced
instrument students down to Portland because it gave them an exposure to
pressure situations they couldn't get in Seattle. Portland required good
speed down final which often meant no gear or flaps until the middle
marker or minimums. Students taught to stabilize the approach at 90
knots without getting to experience an approach at 120 or 140 or more
are often very uncomfortable in high-traffic situations. I'd rather they
were uncomfortable when I was there to help them. Besides, it is best if
we all try to work together.

I still practice high-speed approaches occasionally just to keep myself
comfortable with the reactions and timing necessary and to stay
comfortable with the aircraft handling during the quick configuration
changes.


Kindest regards,
Jim Carter

Politicians fear most an armed, educated electorate.

In article ,
Roy Smith wrote:

In article
,
Hamish Reid wrote:

The other point is that you're on an approach with a lot of faster
aircraft behind you, and I'm sure the temptation is to keep going like a
bat out of hell right up until the MDA, at which point you don't have a
lot of time and space to slow down. That hasn't happened to me, but I
can understand why it might. I was asked for best forward speed all the
way from somewhere out near OHIGH to CULVE.

You worry about flying the approach and let ATC worry about the aircraft
behind you. If you're not comfortable flying it any faster than 90 kts,
when they ask you for best speed, just tell them 90 kts IS your best speed.
They'll deal with it.

Well, yes. I wasn't suggesting I had any problems with this at all, just
that I can understand how someone unfamiliar with the approach and the
area might botch things under the pressure, assuming they had more time
to slow down than they really did... I actually enjoyed the experience.

Hamish

I see no problem with the weather 800/3 as you point out. Inside BEVEY drive
down to 680 outside CULVE, and have 3 miles to descend 505 feet. Any jet
will do that all day long.

Karl
"Curator" N185KG


"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...
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

karl gruber wrote:
I see no problem with the weather 800/3 as you point out. Inside BEVEY drive
down to 680 outside CULVE, and have 3 miles to descend 505 feet. Any jet
will do that all day long.

Karl
"Curator" N185KG

So, now you're past the runway and landing on the VOR shack.

It is 1.54 miles from CULVE to the beginning of the runway.