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 |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
"Robert M. Gary" wrote Now, if a car pulled in front of me that would be a different story but I don't think the FAA can protect against that anyway. But isn't a clearance him saying that a car is not going to pull onto the runway in front of you? If he can't see the end of the runway, can he issue a clearance to land? -- Jim in NC |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Flaps on approach help stabilize the platform and reduce the drastic configuration changes brought about 200' AGL when the runway suddenly pops into view. I guess I"m just lucky to be flying a Mooney. The Mooney is very, very stable on approach without flaps. One less thing to worry about during missed. Its very, very common for students to forget to pull the gear up on missed, I"m sure adding complexity with flaps would make that worse. -Robert |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Its very, very common for students to forget to pull the gear
up on missed, I"m sure adding complexity with flaps would make that worse. For this reason I think it's sometimes a good idea to teach a student to use flaps on approach. If the training is in a fixed-gear but the pilot plans to fly a retractable later on, using flaps from the beginning helps establish the habit of reconfiguring the airplane at (or near) the FAF and again on the missed. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
"Morgans" wrote in message ... "Robert M. Gary" wrote We were speaking legall; I think we agree that legally the 001OVC 1/8SM is not significant. I think everyone is hung up on the visibility of the runway from the plane. Could it be that if he could not see you, he could not guarantee that there was not someone else around that he could not see also, (so could not clear you) so he told you what runway was in use and turned over separation responsibility to you. No, that couldn't be. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
"Morgans" wrote in message ... Now, if a car pulled in front of me that would be a different story but I don't think the FAA can protect against that anyway. But isn't a clearance him saying that a car is not going to pull onto the runway in front of you? No, a clearance is him saying a car is not authorized to pull onto the runway in front of him. If he can't see the end of the runway, can he issue a clearance to land? Yes. He can issue a clearance to land even if he can't see any of the runway. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:41:03 GMT, "Jim Carter" wrote: "Robert M. Gary" wrote in message ... ... No, several planes did land. -Robert I think you're confusing with practicality with legality. OVC represents an overcast which represents a ceiling. 001 OVC is 100' ceiling which is less than any of the published minimums. 1/8 SM represents a visibility and on the ground that is less than RVR 2400 or any of the other published minimums. Planes landing have nothing to do with legality if someone breaks something here. Your original question was why the controller used "landing runway 22" instead of "cleared to land". You are correct that as a Part 91 flight you can begin the approach even if it is reported Zero-Zero, and you are allowed to land if you have the runway environment in site when you reach the decision point on the approach. You must also have the prescribed flight visibility Nope, just the runway environment. Al G |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 17, 10:32 am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
Flaps on approach help stabilize the platform and reduce the drastic configuration changes brought about 200' AGL when the runway suddenly pops into view. I guess I"m just lucky to be flying a Mooney. The Mooney is very, very stable on approach without flaps. One less thing to worry about during missed. Its very, very common for students to forget to pull the gear up on missed, I"m sure adding complexity with flaps would make that worse. -Robert The point of an approach is to land. If a missed is required, the 285 HP and 10 degrees nose up will maintain 96 KIAS (Vy) with gear and flaps down. The drill is simple: Prop is already full forward, so MP goes to 25" Confirm Vy and positive rate of climb -- Flaps Up Confirm Vy and positive rate of climb -- Gear Up All this happens in sequence, with no rush required. Applying full flaps when the runway is in sight seems to introduce overly complex recations at the most critical phase of flight (low and slow). |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Applying full flaps when the runway is in sight seems to introduce
overly complex recations at the most critical phase of flight (low and slow). I think it's more important to stay stabilized on the approach while still in the clouds and on instruments - I don't want to change speed or configuration until I'm visual. Then the choices a 1) Full flaps at 1.3 Vs, stabilized all the way to the flare as a large airplane would - but that would mean 65 knots or so in a Cherokee 2) Full flaps at 90 or 100 knots - which would require a lot of power and be much different from all other phase of flight 3) No (or partial) flaps at 90 or 100 knots - my preference. Barry |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 17, 1:59 pm, "Barry" wrote:
Applying full flaps when the runway is in sight seems to introduce overly complex reactions at the most critical phase of flight (low and slow). I think it's more important to stay stabilized on the approach while still in the clouds and on instruments - I don't want to change speed or configuration until I'm visual. Then the choices a 90 KIAS with approach flaps is nice and stable. 1) Full flaps at 1.3 Vs, stabilized all the way to the flare as a large airplane would - but that would mean 65 knots or so in a Cherokee 2) Full flaps at 90 or 100 knots - which would require a lot of power and be much different from all other phase of flight 3) No (or partial) flaps at 90 or 100 knots - my preference. Barry 90-100 knots to land? In a Cherokee? The NTSB reports are rife with airplanes wrecked after skidding off runways after touching down too fast (and there are probably 2x as many wrecked that the NTSB doesn't hear about). Landing too fast results in all sorts of bad endings. 1.3 x Vs1 fpr landing works every time, all the time. Add whatever for gusts and you don't have to change techniques, IFR or VFR. Dan |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
You are correct that as a Part 91 flight you can begin the approach even if
it is reported Zero-Zero, and you are allowed to land if you have the runway environment in site when you reach the decision point on the approach. You must also have the prescribed flight visibility Nope, just the runway environment. FAR 91.175 is pretty clear that the prescribed flight visibility is required to land: (d) Landing. No pilot operating an aircraft, except a military aircraft of the United States, may land that aircraft when— (1) [refers to use of enhanced vision systems]; or (2) For all other part 91 operations and parts 121, 125, 129, and 135 operations, the flight visibility is less than the visibility prescribed in the standard instrument approach procedure being used. Also, as I've already posted, 91.175(c) prohibits even continuing below DH unless you have the prescribed visibility. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land" | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 168 | February 5th 08 05:32 PM |
"First Ospreys Land In Iraq; One Arrives After 2 Setbacks" | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 50 | November 30th 07 05:25 AM |
Old polish aircraft TS-8 "Bies" ("Bogy") - for sale | >pk | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | October 16th 06 07:48 AM |
"Airplane Drivers" and "Self Centered Idiots" | Skylune | Piloting | 28 | October 16th 06 05:40 AM |