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

Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old January 18th 08, 07:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 17, 8:48*pm, wrote:
Approach lights are part of runway environment...


Then you are clearly wrong. The fact that you see the approach lights
certainly does not indiciate that you have any visibility. As I
mentioned before you can see the approach lights through the fog but
not be able to see the ground around the lights. So your statement
that seeing the environment demonstrates the visibility, if you
include the apporach lights, cannot be correct.

-robert, CFII

  #112  
Old January 18th 08, 07:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr, rec.aviation.student
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 18, 5:26*am, " wrote:
On Jan 17, 9:15 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:



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?


Nope --100-90 KIAS in an A36, 90 KIAS in a 172. Approach flaps set in
the A36 and 10 degrees in 172.


I never noticed that as a problem in the A36. It was very stable at
100 knots without flaps. I never felt any tendancy for it to be
unstable.


But either way you have full flaps once you go visual so the landings
distance is the same in each technique.


While that may be the case in a particular Mooney or Cherokee or
Skyhawk, this method will not work in a faster (more slippery)
airplane.


What plane are you flying that is more slippery than a Mooney and that
does not slow when you deploy the flaps? Your A36 is a truck compared
to the slippery Mooney. I used to cook into San Jose Int'l in the A36
at 150 knots and drop the gear/flaps on short final. I could feel the
G's of the decelleration, so you can't tell me that your A36 won't
slow with flaps.

-Robert
  #113  
Old January 18th 08, 09:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,886
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"



Marco Leon wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
That was wrong on the controllers part.


Wouldn't it be covered under here? Maybe he forgot to specifically say
"runway xx unsafe?"


No, this section has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

  #114  
Old January 19th 08, 02:32 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr, rec.aviation.student
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 302
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 18, 2:05 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:


What plane are you flying that is more slippery than a Mooney and that
does not slow when you deploy the flaps? Your A36 is a truck compared
to the slippery Mooney. I used to cook into San Jose Int'l in the A36
at 150 knots and drop the gear/flaps on short final. I could feel the
G's of the decelleration, so you can't tell me that your A36 won't
slow with flaps.

-Robert


The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so
it's pretty slippery.

In the Army we differentiated between doctrine and technique. Doctrine
everybody was to do, period. Technique was the method you employed to
achieve doctrine.

In this case "doctrine" is to arrive at the runway with as little
energy as possible, given the requirements of safety in the conditions
at hand.

If you can reconfigure the airplane on short final and reduce the
speed as appropriate to achieve this, then that's your technique.

But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every
airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast
landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane.

It just seems to me that a consistent, less drastic change in
configuration is the better technique.

Dan





  #115  
Old January 19th 08, 02:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr, rec.aviation.student
Robert M. Gary
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,767
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 18, 6:32*pm, " wrote:


The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so
it's pretty slippery.


True, but its still a truck compared to a Mooney.

But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every
airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast
landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane.


I think anyone who teaches either technique and claims its good for
all aircraft is probably full of crap. I wouldn't teach flying
approaches w/o flaps in a 767. When I'm giving training in the Mooney
or occasionally in the A36 people are looking for type specific
training. Showing them how its done in other aircraft (like a 767) is
not what they are looking for. In both those aircraft I find the no
flap approach best. Add to that that I live in a fog valley and
finding nothing but 0/0 at mins is not uncommon so shooting approaches
to mins in actual is not theory around here and neither are missed in
actual.

-Robert
  #116  
Old January 19th 08, 02:46 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr, rec.aviation.student
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 302
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 18, 9:37 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Jan 18, 6:32 pm, " wrote:



The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so
it's pretty slippery.


True, but its still a truck compared to a Mooney.

But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every
airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast
landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane.


I think anyone who teaches either technique and claims its good for
all aircraft is probably full of crap. I wouldn't teach flying
approaches w/o flaps in a 767. When I'm giving training in the Mooney
or occasionally in the A36 people are looking for type specific
training. Showing them how its done in other aircraft (like a 767) is
not what they are looking for. In both those aircraft I find the no
flap approach best. Add to that that I live in a fog valley and
finding nothing but 0/0 at mins is not uncommon so shooting approaches
to mins in actual is not theory around here and neither are missed in
actual.

-Robert


Well then there ya go...

Dan
  #117  
Old January 19th 08, 03:59 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
Jim Carter[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 403
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

wrote in message
...

Some of them are never wrong...




Jeeze - I'd never have to take my wife to the comedy club if I could just
get her to read this group....


--
Jim Carter
Rogers, Arkansas


  #119  
Old January 19th 08, 12:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:01:44 -0800 (PST), "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 8:48*pm, wrote:
Approach lights are part of runway environment...


Then you are clearly wrong. The fact that you see the approach lights
certainly does not indiciate that you have any visibility. As I
mentioned before you can see the approach lights through the fog but
not be able to see the ground around the lights. So your statement
that seeing the environment demonstrates the visibility, if you
include the apporach lights, cannot be correct.

-robert, CFII



I am not saying that at all.

Descent below the MDA, or continuation of the approach beyond DA,
requires 3 conditions:

1) Runway environment in sight
2) Normal rates of descent, etc...
3)Flight visibility as specified...

All 3 conditions must be met. Approach lights satisfy condition 1.


  #120  
Old January 19th 08, 01:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting, rec.aviation.ifr, rec.aviation.student
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 302
Default Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 18, 9:37 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Jan 18, 6:32 pm, " wrote:



The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so
it's pretty slippery.


True, but its still a truck compared to a Mooney.

But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every
airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast
landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane.


I think anyone who teaches either technique and claims its good for
all aircraft is probably full of crap. I wouldn't teach flying
approaches w/o flaps in a 767. When I'm giving training in the Mooney
or occasionally in the A36 people are looking for type specific
training. Showing them how its done in other aircraft (like a 767) is
not what they are looking for. In both those aircraft I find the no
flap approach best. Add to that that I live in a fog valley and
finding nothing but 0/0 at mins is not uncommon so shooting approaches
to mins in actual is not theory around here and neither are missed in
actual.

-Robert


So, you are able to:
Apply full flaps
Reduce speed from 90-100 K to 70 K
Continue descending to the touchdown point
Stabilize the approach at somewhere near 1.3-1.4 Vso
All beginning at 200' AGL?

Dan
 




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
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:04 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.