"Jay Somerset" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 20:19:10 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:


"Jay Somerset" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:54:52 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller"
wrote:

Don't Time That ILS Approach! -
http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182042-1.html

I have no problem with the article as far as not continung the
approach as
a
LOC-only one, just vecause you are timing it.

The whole reason to tinme the ILS is in case of GS failure, you can
still
locate the MAP. An immediate climb is safe, but any turns on the
missed
approach segment assume that you initiated the miss at the MAP. If
the GS
flags, the only way you can begin to determine where the MAP is, is by
the
time.

So, time all ILS approaches, and use the time ONLY to identify the MAP
on
a
missed approach.

I'd agree with this last, but only in using time as a cross-check to
other
measurements such as VOR, DME, GPS. Changing winds and other conditions
can
throw time checks out the window very quickly.

If the time is accurate enough to identify the MAP on the LOC approach.
then
it is adequate for the ILS appraoch as well.

Sounds like you're describing more of a stablized/precision approach.??

If you are on on ILS approach,
and the GS flags, you really don't want to be messing around with setting
up
cross-checks that are only used with the LOC approach, and which you don't
have already set up.

Which is why I said I'd use time primarily a a cross-check. By the very
meaning of the word (okay...somebody with a PhD in English Lit can chime in)
cross-checking is done from the beginning and monitored.


I think we are basically in agreement, but I would emphasize that timing
the
ILS is prudent, but as a way to do a missed, and not to convert a flagged
GS
into a LOC approah.

I think we're more in agreement than you realize, but in an approach with a
lot of wind (particularly swirling winds as the have around the front range
lf the mountains) and a lot of turns, that'll mean a hell of a lot more time
recalculating and less time actually flying the approach.

So, yes, I'd saying time every approach, but I'd be damn concerned about
relying on it for much of anything.