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
|
|||
|
|||
First, I am not defending the technique, only trying to explain the POI's
position. Second, the minumums don't change. No need to get lawerly on me. Third, the FAA muddies the waters by creating a situation where you can go below DH to 100' above the touchdown zone without actually having the runway insight. How you manage that is clearly technique, and not something I would even think of attempting in a single pilot aircraft. Even with two pilots, the technique must be briefed and coordinated or it is likely to be more dangerous than just going missed. wrote in message ink.net... Paul Lynch wrote: Not really. The minimums don't change. He is suggesting a radalt technique, one which I do not concur with. His suggestion does comply with the regs, but adds complexity to an already complex situation (ceiling right at decision height and actual viz right at mins, possibly lower). "Not really" is the operative phrase. Does it or does it not modify minimums. It can be argued both ways. And, the use of a radar altitmeter at such a critically low height without an "RA" survey further muddies the waters. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Lynch wrote:
First, I am not defending the technique, only trying to explain the POI's position. Second, the minumums don't change. No need to get lawerly on me. Well, this issue was raised and put to bed on my airline quite a few years ago. So, you see it one way at your carrier, my carrier saw it differently. ALPA's All-Weather Flying Committee viewed it at the time as a second DA, and FAA Washington agreed at the time. Third, the FAA muddies the waters by creating a situation where you can go below DH to 100' above the touchdown zone without actually having the runway insight. How you manage that is clearly technique, and not something I would even think of attempting in a single pilot aircraft. Even with two pilots, the technique must be briefed and coordinated or it is likely to be more dangerous than just going missed. I wouldn't even know how to apply it on a Cat I ILS or NPA. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
And that is why we are politely ignoring the POI. He has other crazy ideas
at times too. wrote in message k.net... Paul Lynch wrote: First, I am not defending the technique, only trying to explain the POI's position. Second, the minumums don't change. No need to get lawerly on me. Well, this issue was raised and put to bed on my airline quite a few years ago. So, you see it one way at your carrier, my carrier saw it differently. ALPA's All-Weather Flying Committee viewed it at the time as a second DA, and FAA Washington agreed at the time. Third, the FAA muddies the waters by creating a situation where you can go below DH to 100' above the touchdown zone without actually having the runway insight. How you manage that is clearly technique, and not something I would even think of attempting in a single pilot aircraft. Even with two pilots, the technique must be briefed and coordinated or it is likely to be more dangerous than just going missed. I wouldn't even know how to apply it on a Cat I ILS or NPA. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
My Approach and takeoff Videos | A Lieberman | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | April 16th 05 04:50 AM |
Why fly fast approaches? | EDR | Piloting | 54 | July 8th 04 01:20 AM |
FS2004 approaches, ATC etc | henri Arsenault | Simulators | 14 | September 27th 03 12:48 PM |