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 |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 17, 4:18 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
But landing is easy, missed is hard. Make the hard part easier and the easy part will take care of itself. Going Missed is the scary monster because: 1) You're close to the ground 2) You have configuration and power changes 3) You didn't get to land 4) You're still in the soup The anxiety level can be reduced by: 1) Minimize configuration changes 2) Anticipate a missed 3) Take comfort in having been in the soup for however long it took you to get to this phase of the flight. If you're still uncomfortable in IMC, some dual is probably in order. I think the student will have to unlearn the fast approach technique once he/she steps into a more aerodynamically slippery airplane. In a fast airplane you have to manage your energy if you want to land on a small field at the conclusion of the approach. With the proliferation of VNAV GPS approaches more and more smaller runways have basically ILS minimums. A typical ILS ends with a 5,000 foot+ runway -- not so for VNAV GPS. To clarify -- my point is that the approach should be flown in a way that is a consistent and predictable. This presumes a specific Power- Attitude-Configuration combination that requires only minor changes to transition from the approach phase to the landing phase. The Missed approach requires minimal PAC change -- Power to full, Flaps up, gear up. If you're in a fixed gear, it's doubly important that you teach configuration change as part of the missed to prepare them for retracts. Try this next time -- see what happens to the ILS needles when your student drops full flaps once the runway is in sight. Dan |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
The Missed approach requires minimal PAC change -- Power to full,
Flaps up, gear up. And please, let's not forget PITCH UP right away. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 17, 6:05 pm, "Barry" wrote:
The Missed approach requires minimal PAC change -- Power to full, Flaps up, gear up. And please, let's not forget PITCH UP right away. Good point, though I've found that the trim I've applied to maintain the target airspeed on approach takes care of that pretty well when I apply full power. Mostly, I need to maintain some forward pressure until I can get the flaps retracted. Dan |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Ron Natalie wrote: wrote: Extended gear prior to FAF, slow to 90 KIAS, add approach flaps, descend and trim for 90 KIAS works just fine in an A36. Yeah doesn't work for me. The gear speed on my plane is 87 knots. I fly most of the approach at the gear speed and drop the gear at the FAF (or equivalent). 87 knots? You've got to be kidding. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Marco Leon wrote: Perhaps the controller deemed that the runway was unsafe due to the visibility. Without being able to see if the runway was clear, he could not verify it was safe: Never the controllers call. Always the pilots call. 3-3-2. CLOSED/UNSAFE RUNWAY INFORMATION If an aircraft requests to takeoff, land, or touch-and-go on a closed or unsafe runway, inform the pilot the runway is closed or unsafe, and a. If the pilot persists in his/her request, quote him/her the appropriate parts of the NOTAM applying to the runway and inform him/her that a clearance cannot be issued. b. Then, if the pilot insists and in your opinion the intended operation would not adversely affect other traffic, inform him/her that the operation will be at his/her own risk. This has nothing to do with weather. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Jim Macklin wrote: Rwy 22L was open. They don't "clear" you to do things when you are the only one who can determine the weather is at or above landing minimums. Sure we do. Every day, all day. Contact approaches. VFR on Top. VFR thru a surface area when the primary airport is IFR. Thus they said... you are not in sight, since he can't see crap except snow. They are using rwy 22L and you can land if you decide that all required visual cues and visibility exist. ATC is always required to say "Not in sight" when they don't have you either actually in sight or on radar. A clearance to land is never withheld because ATC can't see the runway. |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in news:13osru9nohbb0b0
@corp.supernews.com: It doesn't work that way. You mean controllers never forget? |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Robert,
When did fog start getting reported as a ceiling? 001OVC is a ceiling report. Fog would be reported as 1/8F or smoke / haze would be 1/8K wouldn't it? Also, the controller reported that he couldn't see you, so he probably couldn't determine if the runway was clear for your landing. I don't see where the confusion is here. He told you to land at your own risk. I think you're also skewing the situation to fit your personal preferences (hence the comment about 1/2 dot off) rather than strictly discuss the technicalities of the situation. The controller had no visual sighting of you (or probably the runway) so there was nothing else for him or her to say other than "not in sight, land at your own risk" regardless of training level. You were gonna do what you were gonna do anyway, so who is he or she to tell you you can't? He couldn't clear you to land unless he knew the runway was clear could he? Based on your original comments the airport wasn't closed. -- Jim Carter Rogers, Arkansas |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
On Jan 17, 2:01*pm, " wrote:
On Jan 17, 4:18 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote: I think the student will have to unlearn the fast approach technique once he/she steps into a more aerodynamically slippery airplane. In a fast airplane you have to manage your energy if you want to land on a small field at the conclusion of the approach. I only teach in Monneys but I'm not sure why you would need to be faster without flaps. Even if I used flaps I wouldn't change the speed on the approach. Are you flying ILSs in a 172 at 50 knots such that you need flaps? With the proliferation of VNAV GPS approaches more and more smaller runways have basically ILS minimums. A typical ILS ends with a 5,000 foot+ runway -- not so for VNAV GPS. But either way you have full flaps once you go visual so the landings distance is the same in each technique. Try this next time -- see what happens to the ILS needles when your student drops full flaps once the runway is in sight. Once you're visual holding the needles in the middle is trivial because you are looking at the runway. -robert, CFII |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"
Jim Carter wrote: Robert, When did fog start getting reported as a ceiling? 001OVC is a ceiling report. Fog would be reported as 1/8F or smoke / haze would be 1/8K wouldn't it? Fog would be reported as vertical visibility and you would see it on the METAR as VV001 Also, the controller reported that he couldn't see you, so he probably couldn't determine if the runway was clear for your landing. If the controller doesn't know the runway is clear he doesn't let you land. Period. There are other ways to determine that. The controller had no visual sighting of you (or probably the runway) so there was nothing else for him or her to say other than "not in sight, land at your own risk" regardless of training level. That was wrong on the controllers part. |
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 |