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

Full deflection = missed approach ???



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 12th 05, 06:19 PM
pgbnh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Full deflection = missed approach ???

It is common wisdom, and often common sense, that if a full deflection of a
CDI (or GS) is experienced, a missed approach is to be flown. But a lot of
people seem to think that it is REQUIRED. I have had a CFII tell me it is
required. But I can not find anything in FAR or AIM that states such a
requirement.

Again, in a lot of cases I can understand why to do it. But I can also
imagine others where it might make just as much sense to recover the
approach and not go missed.

Can anyone point me at a rule that requires a missed?


  #2  
Old October 12th 05, 06:31 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"pgbnh" wrote in message
...

It is common wisdom, and often common sense, that if a full deflection of
a CDI (or GS) is experienced, a missed approach is to be flown. But a lot
of people seem to think that it is REQUIRED. I have had a CFII tell me it
is required. But I can not find anything in FAR or AIM that states such a
requirement.

Again, in a lot of cases I can understand why to do it. But I can also
imagine others where it might make just as much sense to recover the
approach and not go missed.

Can anyone point me at a rule that requires a missed?


If you agree it's the proper thing to do, does it matter if it's required or
not?


  #3  
Old October 12th 05, 06:39 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"pgbnh" wrote in message
...

I did not say that it is ALWAYS the right thing to do. Sometimes, yes.
Sometimes, no. If there is a requirement someplace, then that would seem
to trump my making the decison to recover the approach when I have decided
that that is a safe thing to do.

So yes, it DOES make a difference


When is it not the right thing to do?


  #4  
Old October 12th 05, 06:39 PM
pgbnh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I did not say that it is ALWAYS the right thing to do. Sometimes, yes.
Sometimes, no. If there is a requirement someplace, then that would seem to
trump my making the decison to recover the approach when I have decided that
that is a safe thing to do.

So yes, it DOES make a difference
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"pgbnh" wrote in message
...

It is common wisdom, and often common sense, that if a full deflection of
a CDI (or GS) is experienced, a missed approach is to be flown. But a lot
of people seem to think that it is REQUIRED. I have had a CFII tell me it
is required. But I can not find anything in FAR or AIM that states such a
requirement.

Again, in a lot of cases I can understand why to do it. But I can also
imagine others where it might make just as much sense to recover the
approach and not go missed.

Can anyone point me at a rule that requires a missed?


If you agree it's the proper thing to do, does it matter if it's required
or not?



  #5  
Old October 12th 05, 06:42 PM
Michelle P
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

in an emergency, say low on fuel and not able to do a missed and another
approach.
Michelle

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"pgbnh" wrote in message
...


I did not say that it is ALWAYS the right thing to do. Sometimes, yes.
Sometimes, no. If there is a requirement someplace, then that would seem
to trump my making the decison to recover the approach when I have decided
that that is a safe thing to do.

So yes, it DOES make a difference




When is it not the right thing to do?




  #6  
Old October 12th 05, 06:46 PM
Jose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

If you agree it's the proper thing to do, does it matter if it's required or
not?


He doesn't. He agrees it's =often= proper.

If you have full deflection, you don't know how far off course you are
(although you do know how far off course you aren't). You don't know
what the terrain clearance is, since you are no longer in the protected
area (although I believe "some" protection is provided for "some
distance" outside the zone). So, if you don't know where you are or
what's below you, then continuing the approach doesn't make sense, and
the "careless and reckless" clause could be applied.

However, in some circumstances, for example in broken clouds and with
some ground contact to give you terrain assurance, when you =just= went
full deflection so you do know where you are (it's just not where you
want to be), and a low fuel or other critical situation in busy
airspace, and you know why you went full deflection and can come right
back (you didn't just zone out), it =may= make more sense to recover the
approach.

I know of no specific rule for part 91 ops that requires a missed.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #7  
Old October 12th 05, 06:47 PM
Michelle P
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Think about it it just makes sense. Once you have full deflection you
can no longer tell where you are latterly on the approach. An unsafe
situation.
Michelle

pgbnh wrote:

It is common wisdom, and often common sense, that if a full deflection of a
CDI (or GS) is experienced, a missed approach is to be flown. But a lot of
people seem to think that it is REQUIRED. I have had a CFII tell me it is
required. But I can not find anything in FAR or AIM that states such a
requirement.

Again, in a lot of cases I can understand why to do it. But I can also
imagine others where it might make just as much sense to recover the
approach and not go missed.

Can anyone point me at a rule that requires a missed?




  #8  
Old October 12th 05, 07:10 PM
pgbnh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I can think of the following situations where I might encounter a full
deflection yet a recovery is the right thing to do:
1. Flying an ILS behind a heavy to a 9000 foot runway with an 800 reported
ceiling. I want to land long, stay well above GS and might accept a full
deflection high.

2. I have a full lateral deflection, but I just WATCHED it deflect full and
I therefore know where I am, my distance from where I want to be, and I know
that I can recover. (as opposed to I was distracted, lost my scan, look up
and see a full deflection but I have NO idea how long it has been deflected
full)

3. On a VOR approach, I just passed the VOR as FAF and the CDI swings to a
full deflection. I know I am on course because I was only one dot off a half
mile before the vor and I will likely be the same one dot off shortly.

"Michelle P" wrote in message
news
Think about it it just makes sense. Once you have full deflection you can
no longer tell where you are latterly on the approach. An unsafe
situation.
Michelle

pgbnh wrote:

It is common wisdom, and often common sense, that if a full deflection of
a CDI (or GS) is experienced, a missed approach is to be flown. But a lot
of people seem to think that it is REQUIRED. I have had a CFII tell me it
is required. But I can not find anything in FAR or AIM that states such a
requirement.

Again, in a lot of cases I can understand why to do it. But I can also
imagine others where it might make just as much sense to recover the
approach and not go missed.

Can anyone point me at a rule that requires a missed?




  #9  
Old October 12th 05, 08:26 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



pgbnh wrote:

It is common wisdom, and often common sense, that if a full deflection of a
CDI (or GS) is experienced, a missed approach is to be flown. But a lot of
people seem to think that it is REQUIRED. I have had a CFII tell me it is
required. But I can not find anything in FAR or AIM that states such a
requirement.

Again, in a lot of cases I can understand why to do it. But I can also
imagine others where it might make just as much sense to recover the
approach and not go missed.

Can anyone point me at a rule that requires a missed?


The rule is implied. The procedure is an FAR. If the needles are fully
deflected you are no longer flying the courses or altitudes specified in the
procedure. Thus, if you don't miss you are continuing the procedure without
following the requirements set forth on the approach chart.

The feds won't bust you for violating Part 97, though, they'll bust you for
careless and reckless.

  #10  
Old October 12th 05, 08:29 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



pgbnh wrote:

I can think of the following situations where I might encounter a full
deflection yet a recovery is the right thing to do:
1. Flying an ILS behind a heavy to a 9000 foot runway with an 800 reported
ceiling. I want to land long, stay well above GS and might accept a full
deflection high.


A full deflection above the G/S is not violating a minimum altitude.


2. I have a full lateral deflection, but I just WATCHED it deflect full and
I therefore know where I am, my distance from where I want to be, and I know
that I can recover. (as opposed to I was distracted, lost my scan, look up
and see a full deflection but I have NO idea how long it has been deflected
full)

3. On a VOR approach, I just passed the VOR as FAF and the CDI swings to a
full deflection. I know I am on course because I was only one dot off a half
mile before the vor and I will likely be the same one dot off shortly.


A full deflection over the station is a transitory condition, like the old cone
of silence on a range station. A full deflection other than over or near the
station is because of a serious tracking error.



"Michelle P" wrote in message
news
Think about it it just makes sense. Once you have full deflection you can
no longer tell where you are latterly on the approach. An unsafe
situation.
Michelle

pgbnh wrote:

It is common wisdom, and often common sense, that if a full deflection of
a CDI (or GS) is experienced, a missed approach is to be flown. But a lot
of people seem to think that it is REQUIRED. I have had a CFII tell me it
is required. But I can not find anything in FAR or AIM that states such a
requirement.

Again, in a lot of cases I can understand why to do it. But I can also
imagine others where it might make just as much sense to recover the
approach and not go missed.

Can anyone point me at a rule that requires a missed?



 




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
GPS approach question Matt Whiting Instrument Flight Rules 30 August 29th 08 03:54 AM
Nearly had my life terminated today Michelle P Piloting 11 September 3rd 05 02:37 AM
Why an NDB approach with a miss to an intersection? Ben Jackson Instrument Flight Rules 10 March 25th 04 04:53 AM
Which of these approaches is loggable? Paul Tomblin Instrument Flight Rules 26 August 16th 03 05:22 PM
IR checkride story! Guy Elden Jr. Instrument Flight Rules 16 August 1st 03 09:03 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:48 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.