A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hardest approach flown so far



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 14th 07, 03:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
q
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Hardest approach flown so far

Everett M. Greene wrote:

..


Having no experience with or data about the Helena IFR procedures,
but having experience with the high Sierras and Rockies, I would find
it hard to believe the someone would "hit some granite" without being
way out of bounds. I'd describe the terrain around Helena as gently
rolling, not mountainous. Even the mountains to the west are little
more than big hills.


Well, you need to look at the charts. It indeed is an open valley with
room for a "200 and 1/2" ILS but it has terminal routes over terrain
some 5,000 feet higher than the airport.
  #22  
Old July 14th 07, 05:29 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Viperdoc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 155
Default Hardest approach flown so far

Basically, it's as I initially said. We were at 13,000 and then were cleared
to intercept the arc from the SW. I was still descending while trying to fly
the arc, and then intercepted the final approach course while still in the
descent.

So, it was descending at a pretty rapid rate, turning to intercept the BC,
turbulence, and ice. I do have WAAS GPS as well as traditional DME, which
made some of it easier, but did not couple the autopilot, and hand flew
instead. (The DME fixes on the GPS may not necessarily be the same as the
DME from the navaid.)

I made very sure that I stayed on the final approach course, and did not get
low (which never happened due to the circumstances). Again, it is a non
radar environment, so the tower was asking for DME readouts.

The second WAAS GPS was set for the terrain page, as added information.

It was in a piston twin.

"q" wrote in message ...
You don't really provide enough specifics about exact route, center
handling while still in radar contact, handoff, etc.

Having said that, at a terrain-laden airport like HLN, a piston aircraft
is often up against the limits (shock cooling, icing limitations, etc.)
compared to turbine aircraft.

Viperdoc wrote:

Recently, on a long cross country from Portland, OR to Wisconsin, we
stopped at Helena, MT for a gas and pit stop.

Coming from the West with the winds calm, I chose the loc DME BC approach
to runway 9. Even though it's the capitol (is it capital?) of the state,
there is no radar coverage.

First, I had to descend and intercept the DME arc. Once on the arc, we
were in turbulence and IMC, and started picking up ice (my Baron had KI
certification).

Once on the loc BC, there are several step down fixes, but since we were
given the approach clearance several thousand feet high, I had a hard
time reaching the DME fixes at a low enough altitude.

Of course, without radar, the tower was asking us to report position, and
I had to keep telling him I was unable to reach the desired altitudes due
to the excessive descent rate required.

Finally, before the last fix we broke out into VMC, with the valley below
and the airport in sight, still several thousand feet high. We circled
once, and then landed without difficulty.

It was a great learning experience, but I'm not sure what to have done
differently. I already had the approach flaps out, and contemplated
putting down the gear to help the descent, but hesitated doing this in
icing conditions (what if I needed to pull up the gear again for some
reason during the approach covered in ice?)

I could have chopped the power (was already at 15 inches) and descending
at over 1,000 fpm near Va, but I felt a stabilized approach in ice and in
mountainous terrain was safer than making even more radical pitch and
power changes.

I felt like I was behind the eight ball from the start. Is there a better
way to have handled the approach?



  #23  
Old July 14th 07, 06:08 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
q
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default Hardest approach flown so far

Viperdoc wrote:
Basically, it's as I initially said. We were at 13,000 and then were cleared
to intercept the arc from the SW. I was still descending while trying to fly
the arc, and then intercepted the final approach course while still in the
descent.

So, it was descending at a pretty rapid rate, turning to intercept the BC,
turbulence, and ice. I do have WAAS GPS as well as traditional DME, which
made some of it easier, but did not couple the autopilot, and hand flew
instead. (The DME fixes on the GPS may not necessarily be the same as the
DME from the navaid.)

I made very sure that I stayed on the final approach course, and did not get
low (which never happened due to the circumstances). Again, it is a non
radar environment, so the tower was asking for DME readouts.

The second WAAS GPS was set for the terrain page, as added information.


Monday Morning quarterbacking:

1. You had the latest and greatest RNAV package available.

2. The RNAV Runway 9 IAP has an MDA 520 feet lower than the LOC DME
(BACK CRS)-C.

3. The back course approach doesn't have straight-in minimums even
though it is lineup up exactly with the runway. That means the descent
gradient is excessive for straight-in minimums. In fact, the descent
gradient is very high; 635 feet per mile from the FAF to the runway at
threshold crossing height.

4. The descent on the RNAV Runway 9 is 3.46 degrees from the FAF. as
shown on the chart; or just less than 370 feet per mile.

5. Because the LOC BC approach does not have straight-in minimums you
can do a 360 once clear of clouds, but you need approval from the tower
to do that. It would have to be done at not less than 5120 and north of
course, and within the circling maneuvering area.

The RNAV 9 would have been my choice, given your equipment, then the
tower would be obligated to make reference to that procedure.

Unless you insist on the RNAV 9 they will always use the back course
because it makes life easier for them (they have all those DME distances
to make you report. ;-)
  #24  
Old July 14th 07, 06:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Viperdoc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 155
Default Hardest approach flown so far

Yes, I looked at and could have chosen that approach. However, how often
does one get to fly a DME arc loc BC approach in a non-radar environment? I
was not necessarily looking for what was easier, and this particular
approach offered a lot of interesting challenges.

The gear in my plane, which is also KI equipped, definitely simplified the
matter, but it was still a challenge and learning experience.

"q" wrote in message ...
Viperdoc wrote:
Basically, it's as I initially said. We were at 13,000 and then were
cleared to intercept the arc from the SW. I was still descending while
trying to fly the arc, and then intercepted the final approach course
while still in the descent.

So, it was descending at a pretty rapid rate, turning to intercept the
BC, turbulence, and ice. I do have WAAS GPS as well as traditional DME,
which made some of it easier, but did not couple the autopilot, and hand
flew instead. (The DME fixes on the GPS may not necessarily be the same
as the DME from the navaid.)

I made very sure that I stayed on the final approach course, and did not
get low (which never happened due to the circumstances). Again, it is a
non radar environment, so the tower was asking for DME readouts.

The second WAAS GPS was set for the terrain page, as added information.


Monday Morning quarterbacking:

1. You had the latest and greatest RNAV package available.

2. The RNAV Runway 9 IAP has an MDA 520 feet lower than the LOC DME (BACK
CRS)-C.

3. The back course approach doesn't have straight-in minimums even though
it is lineup up exactly with the runway. That means the descent gradient
is excessive for straight-in minimums. In fact, the descent gradient is
very high; 635 feet per mile from the FAF to the runway at threshold
crossing height.

4. The descent on the RNAV Runway 9 is 3.46 degrees from the FAF. as shown
on the chart; or just less than 370 feet per mile.

5. Because the LOC BC approach does not have straight-in minimums you can
do a 360 once clear of clouds, but you need approval from the tower to do
that. It would have to be done at not less than 5120 and north of course,
and within the circling maneuvering area.

The RNAV 9 would have been my choice, given your equipment, then the tower
would be obligated to make reference to that procedure.

Unless you insist on the RNAV 9 they will always use the back course
because it makes life easier for them (they have all those DME distances
to make you report. ;-)



  #25  
Old July 14th 07, 07:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
bluenosepiperflyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Hardest approach flown so far

Yes, Helena is the capitol of Montana. Visit the refurbished
capitol building. Very casual atmosphere when the legislature
is not in session.



Not that it matters much (or at all), but "capitol" is the commonly
accepted spelling for the building in which the state or federal
legislature is located; "capital" is the usual spelling of the word
used when referring to the town where the capitol building is located,
such as Helena, or Washington, D.C.


  #26  
Old July 14th 07, 10:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default Hardest approach flown so far

On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 06:30:41 -0700, q wrote:

Mountainous terrain is modeled for percipitious terrain additives.


Mr Q, can you fill us in on what the additives are? For initial,
intermediate, and final segments?

Thanks, Stan
  #28  
Old July 16th 07, 06:03 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Everett M. Greene[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40
Default Hardest approach flown so far

bluenosepiperflyer writes:
Yes, Helena is the capitol of Montana. Visit the refurbished
capitol building. Very casual atmosphere when the legislature
is not in session.


Not that it matters much (or at all), but "capitol" is the commonly
accepted spelling for the building in which the state or federal
legislature is located; "capital" is the usual spelling of the word
used when referring to the town where the capitol building is located,
such as Helena, or Washington, D.C.


I stand corrected. Your statement is almost a verbatim quote of
what I find in The American Heritage Dictionary about usage of
"capital". [Isn't English a fun language!]
  #29  
Old July 16th 07, 02:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
frank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Hardest approach flown so far

Everett M. Greene wrote:
bluenosepiperflyer writes:

Yes, Helena is the capitol of Montana. Visit the refurbished
capitol building. Very casual atmosphere when the legislature
is not in session.


Not that it matters much (or at all), but "capitol" is the commonly
accepted spelling for the building in which the state or federal
legislature is located; "capital" is the usual spelling of the word
used when referring to the town where the capitol building is located,
such as Helena, or Washington, D.C.



I stand corrected. Your statement is almost a verbatim quote of
what I find in The American Heritage Dictionary about usage of
"capital". [Isn't English a fun language!]


In our nation's capital a bunch of self-serving white-collar criminals
sit in our capitol building and **** away our capital.
  #30  
Old July 16th 07, 04:13 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Matt Barrow[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,119
Default Hardest approach flown so far


"frank" wrote in message
...
Everett M. Greene wrote:
bluenosepiperflyer writes:

Yes, Helena is the capitol of Montana. Visit the refurbished
capitol building. Very casual atmosphere when the legislature
is not in session.

Not that it matters much (or at all), but "capitol" is the commonly
accepted spelling for the building in which the state or federal
legislature is located; "capital" is the usual spelling of the word
used when referring to the town where the capitol building is located,
such as Helena, or Washington, D.C.



I stand corrected. Your statement is almost a verbatim quote of
what I find in The American Heritage Dictionary about usage of
"capital". [Isn't English a fun language!]


In our nation's capital a bunch of self-serving white-collar criminals sit
in our capitol building and **** away our capital.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Easiest and Hardest [email protected] Piloting 13 July 4th 06 02:39 PM
Has anyone flown in here? john smith Piloting 2 October 2nd 05 11:36 AM
Approach Question- Published Missed Can't be flown? Brad Z Instrument Flight Rules 8 May 6th 04 04:19 AM
has anyone flown with these ? Damian John Paul Brown General Aviation 0 April 15th 04 04:26 AM
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach John Clonts Instrument Flight Rules 45 November 20th 03 06:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.