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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
Bee wrote: If you were on vectors to the ILS, the final heading for intercept couldn't be greater than 330 coming from that direction. Heading is not the limiting factor. Track is what the controller is concerned with. If I could only give you a 30 degree intercept some days you would never join. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:32:46 -0000, John Godwin
wrote: Ron Rosenfeld wrote in : You can certainly navigate TO ROYCE without being established on the localizer, however. Vectored, maybe but not navigating. Why not navigating? Even without a GPS, you should be able to navigate from 4mi SW of ROYCE to ROYCE using VOR/LOC and DME (and situational awareness). With a GPS, there is no problem. Without a GPS, what you will lack is positive course guidance. But I don't see where, in the definition of "navigation", that PCG is required. Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 12:27:37 -0700, Bee wrote: If you were on vectors to the ILS, But he wrote that he had been cleared for the visual. Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) It was cross ROYCE at or above 2,000, *then* cleared for the visual. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
Newps wrote:
You're doing to the visual approach, it's irrelevant what fix I send you too. It could be a charted one or one I simply made up out of thin air. Okay, I get it. The IAP is not even in the plan. IFR to a fix, then visual or, if unable, a new plan. Maybe, the at or above 2,000 at ROYCE was to keep the pilot at MVA instead of for traffic? You think maybe so? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
Newps wrote:
Bee wrote: If you were on vectors to the ILS, the final heading for intercept couldn't be greater than 330 coming from that direction. Heading is not the limiting factor. Track is what the controller is concerned with. If I could only give you a 30 degree intercept some days you would never join. Oh, yes, I have seen that effect a few times. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
No, I meant SW. I was on a vector to join, and then called the field in sight. But if you were being vectored for the ILS, on the last vector to join the localizer, then you were most likely on a 100 degree heading give or take some wind, on a track to hit the localizer some 3 miles before ROYCE. So I still doubt that you could have been SW of ROYCE. My take on it is that since the controller had already planned on clearing you for the ILS, or perhaps had already done so, your late request for a visual didn't really change anything and so he intended for you to continue on your heading to intercept the localizer, fly to ROYCE and then descend to the runway. This seems simple unless you left still more out of the story. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:29:07 -0700, Bee wrote:
It was cross ROYCE at or above 2,000, *then* cleared for the visual. I don't understand your point. The approach clearance is frequently/usually/always given after a fix/crossing restriction. He was NOT on vectors for an ILS approach. I do not believe that to proceed direct ROYCE, from 4 miles SW of ROYCE, for an ILS approach would even meet the requirements for proper ATC handling. So he was cleared via ROYCE as part of setting him up for a Visual Approach. My guess is that the altitude restriction and course specification was traffic related. Perhaps there was conflicting traffic for the parallel runway. Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:29:07 -0700, Bee wrote: It was cross ROYCE at or above 2,000, *then* cleared for the visual. I don't understand your point. Because you said: "But he wrote that he had been cleared for the visual." The approach clearance is frequently/usually/always given after a fix/crossing restriction. He was NOT on vectors for an ILS approach. I do not believe that to proceed direct ROYCE, from 4 miles SW of ROYCE, for an ILS approach would even meet the requirements for proper ATC handling. So he was cleared via ROYCE as part of setting him up for a Visual Approach. Apparently so. Nonetheless, the visual approach was not authorized until *after* crossing ROYCE at or above 2,000. My guess is that the altitude restriction and course specification was traffic related. Perhaps there was conflicting traffic for the parallel runway. Or, it could have been to assure MVA until ROYCE. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
"Bee" wrote: Maybe, the at or above 2,000 at ROYCE was to keep the pilot at MVA instead of for traffic? You think maybe so? I think it most likely was for sequencing or traffic. Hobby has a lot helicopters and other GA of all sizes mixing with SW Airlines 737s. -- Dan T-182T at BFM |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
When to descend II
wrote: My take on it is that since the controller had already planned on clearing you for the ILS, or perhaps had already done so, your late request for a visual didn't really change anything and so he intended for you to continue on your heading to intercept the localizer, fly to ROYCE and then descend to the runway. This seems simple unless you left still more out of the story. I think that's close to right, but I think he had another reason for the routing, probably traffic. There are an awful lot of helicopters at Hobby. The vector I was on was a "right base" for the ILS, not the intercept vector. I didn't request the visual, just called the field in sight; perhaps that's splitting hairs. -- Dan T-182T at BFM |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
When to descend | Dan Luke[_2_] | Instrument Flight Rules | 44 | October 14th 07 09:12 AM |