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

VOR approach SMO



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 23rd 07, 10:23 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Doug Semler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 175
Default VOR approach SMO

On Jul 23, 5:07 pm, "pgbnh" wrote:
I think all but one of the posters have missed the fact that the MDA is not
1120 but 680. If indeed the vis was 3 miles, then the runway should have
been in sight from the MDA of 680 feet about a mile OUTSIDE of Culve.
(Remember what you can do once you have the runway in sight????) At which
point it's not a particularly big deal to lose 500 feet to land on the
numbers. Maybe even crossing Culve at 3-400 feet agl


Please, tell me how you read the plate in a way that you can cross
CULVE below 1120 when you don't have the airport in sight?
Note I am not an IA pilot, but I really want to understand this. My
reading of the plate is:

Cross CULVE at or above 1120. If you are DME equipped and radar, you
can then descend to 680. Otherwise you gotta remain at 1120. If you
get to the VOR before seeing the airport, you execute missed.

Now if the conditions are 800 overcast 3mi, how can you see the
airport before hitting CULVE unless you are below the crossing
restriction?

  #22  
Old July 23rd 07, 10:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
karl gruber[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 396
Default VOR approach SMO

You can cross CULVE at 680 because the chart says "CULVE DME/RADAR MINIMA*
680-1"
You can descend to 680 past BEVEY. Look at the chart...........that's how
it's read.

Karl


"Doug Semler" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Jul 23, 5:07 pm, "pgbnh" wrote:
I think all but one of the posters have missed the fact that the MDA is
not
1120 but 680. If indeed the vis was 3 miles, then the runway should have
been in sight from the MDA of 680 feet about a mile OUTSIDE of Culve.
(Remember what you can do once you have the runway in sight????) At
which
point it's not a particularly big deal to lose 500 feet to land on the
numbers. Maybe even crossing Culve at 3-400 feet agl


Please, tell me how you read the plate in a way that you can cross
CULVE below 1120 when you don't have the airport in sight?
Note I am not an IA pilot, but I really want to understand this. My
reading of the plate is:

Cross CULVE at or above 1120. If you are DME equipped and radar, you
can then descend to 680. Otherwise you gotta remain at 1120. If you
get to the VOR before seeing the airport, you execute missed.

Now if the conditions are 800 overcast 3mi, how can you see the
airport before hitting CULVE unless you are below the crossing
restriction?



  #23  
Old July 23rd 07, 10:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Doug Semler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 175
Default VOR approach SMO

On Jul 23, 5:28 pm, "karl gruber" wrote:
You can cross CULVE at 680 because the chart says "CULVE DME/RADAR MINIMA*
680-1"
You can descend to 680 past BEVEY. Look at the chart...........that's how
it's read.


So, iff you have DME and RADAR, the _1120_ in profile view changes to
_680_, right?

That is a *bit* confusing.

  #24  
Old July 23rd 07, 10:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
pgbnh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default VOR approach SMO

Note this is a VOR or GPS approach. Sorry if I just assumed that there would
be on-board EITHER a DME or an IFR certified GPS that would provide the
distance-measuring requirements of the DME/Radar minima. Pretty good chance
the jet in question had both. And maybe you understand this, but youir
reference to Radar implies that maybe you do not. The 'Radar' reference is
NOT referring to whether the plane is radar equipped, but rather whether
there is radar coverage from the ground. Which in fact should allow an
aircraft WITHOUT DME to descend to 680 (if receiving advisories from the
tower/approach)
"Doug Semler" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Jul 23, 5:07 pm, "pgbnh" wrote:
I think all but one of the posters have missed the fact that the MDA is
not
1120 but 680. If indeed the vis was 3 miles, then the runway should have
been in sight from the MDA of 680 feet about a mile OUTSIDE of Culve.
(Remember what you can do once you have the runway in sight????) At
which
point it's not a particularly big deal to lose 500 feet to land on the
numbers. Maybe even crossing Culve at 3-400 feet agl


Please, tell me how you read the plate in a way that you can cross
CULVE below 1120 when you don't have the airport in sight?
Note I am not an IA pilot, but I really want to understand this. My
reading of the plate is:

Cross CULVE at or above 1120. If you are DME equipped and radar, you
can then descend to 680. Otherwise you gotta remain at 1120. If you
get to the VOR before seeing the airport, you execute missed.

Now if the conditions are 800 overcast 3mi, how can you see the
airport before hitting CULVE unless you are below the crossing
restriction?



  #25  
Old July 23rd 07, 10:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
karl gruber[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 396
Default VOR approach SMO

Correct. That's why there's a little * next to the 1120*.


Karl
"Doug Semler" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 23, 5:28 pm, "karl gruber" wrote:
You can cross CULVE at 680 because the chart says "CULVE DME/RADAR
MINIMA*
680-1"
You can descend to 680 past BEVEY. Look at the chart...........that's how
it's read.


So, iff you have DME and RADAR, the _1120_ in profile view changes to
_680_, right?

That is a *bit* confusing.



  #26  
Old July 23rd 07, 10:46 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
karl gruber[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 396
Default VOR approach SMO

Exactly, you don't need DME or GPS. ATC can tell you where CULVE
is........with THEIR Radar.


Karl


"pgbnh" wrote in message
. ..
Note this is a VOR or GPS approach. Sorry if I just assumed that there
would be on-board EITHER a DME or an IFR certified GPS that would provide
the distance-measuring requirements of the DME/Radar minima. Pretty good
chance the jet in question had both. And maybe you understand this, but
youir reference to Radar implies that maybe you do not. The 'Radar'
reference is NOT referring to whether the plane is radar equipped, but
rather whether there is radar coverage from the ground. Which in fact
should allow an aircraft WITHOUT DME to descend to 680 (if receiving
advisories from the tower/approach)
"Doug Semler" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Jul 23, 5:07 pm, "pgbnh" wrote:
I think all but one of the posters have missed the fact that the MDA is
not
1120 but 680. If indeed the vis was 3 miles, then the runway should have
been in sight from the MDA of 680 feet about a mile OUTSIDE of Culve.
(Remember what you can do once you have the runway in sight????) At
which
point it's not a particularly big deal to lose 500 feet to land on the
numbers. Maybe even crossing Culve at 3-400 feet agl


Please, tell me how you read the plate in a way that you can cross
CULVE below 1120 when you don't have the airport in sight?
Note I am not an IA pilot, but I really want to understand this. My
reading of the plate is:

Cross CULVE at or above 1120. If you are DME equipped and radar, you
can then descend to 680. Otherwise you gotta remain at 1120. If you
get to the VOR before seeing the airport, you execute missed.

Now if the conditions are 800 overcast 3mi, how can you see the
airport before hitting CULVE unless you are below the crossing
restriction?





  #27  
Old July 23rd 07, 10:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default VOR approach SMO

On Jul 23, 2:07 pm, "pgbnh" wrote:
I think all but one of the posters have missed the fact that the MDA is not
1120 but 680.


Generally people who's method of explaining things starts by insulting
them, telling them that they don't know what they are doing, and then
explaining that he's much smarter than everyone else have a more
difficult time explaining things. Sadly, the one poster you referenced
uses this has his methodology. Let's all pray that he's not a CFI.

-Robert


  #28  
Old July 23rd 07, 11:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default VOR approach SMO

On Jul 23, 2:12 pm, "karl gruber" wrote:
No.

You can be 6.7 miles out at 680/DME.


ATC certainly never offered that but I guess I never asked. They keep
you at 4,000 until about 3 miles outside of CULVE. Maybe for Burbank
traffic?? Remeber this is VERY busy airspace and ATC has very small
windows for you.

-Robert

  #29  
Old July 23rd 07, 11:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Roy Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 478
Default VOR approach SMO

In article ,
"karl gruber" wrote:

No.

You can be 6.7 miles out at 680/DME.


Maybe I'm just thick, but that's not how I read the chart.

After DARTS, you can descend to 2600. After BEVEY, you can descend to
1120. What happens after that depends on whether you can identify CULVE or
not. If you can identify CULVE, once you reach it, you can descend to 680.
Without CULVE, you have to stay at 1120 until you have the runway in sight.

Look at the plan view. There's a 863 tower at what looks like about 1/2
mile right of the FAC. I'm sure that's the controlling terrain for the
1120 MDA between BEVEY and CULVE.

To identify CULVE, you need one of two things: either DME in the aircraft,
or the tower has to be open AND you have to be in radar contact. It
doesn't explicitly say so on the chart, but I assume the tower has a BRITE
scope in the cab with CULVE marked on it and will call it for you on tower
frequency.

CULVE is 1.6 nm from the threshold. If you cross it at 1120, you're 945
feet AGL (referenced to the runway surface). So, to hit the numbers, you
need to keep a 590 ft/nm descent gradient from CULVE to the runway.
Looking at it another way, at 90 kts and no wind, you need an 885 ft/min
descent rate. That's fast, but not outrageously so. It's about twice as
steep as an ILS. It's certainly the kind of approach you need to brief
ahead of time and know what you're going to need to do before you get there.
  #30  
Old July 23rd 07, 11:18 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Roy Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 478
Default 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.
 




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
VOR approach SMO Robert M. Gary Piloting 124 August 3rd 07 02:17 AM
first approach in IMC G. Sylvester Instrument Flight Rules 10 July 12th 05 02:14 AM
No FAF on an ILS approach...? John Harper Instrument Flight Rules 7 December 24th 03 03:54 AM
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach John Clonts Instrument Flight Rules 45 November 20th 03 05:20 AM
Brief an approach Ditch Instrument Flight Rules 11 October 14th 03 12:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:17 AM.


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