![]() |
| 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 |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Russ MacDonald" wrote in message news:YtfQd.31190$uc.1103@trnddc03... I thought my question was simple. I have never flown a contact approach in 30 years of professional flying. I'm trying to learn why. Am I (and all my Texas buddies) missing some big advantage? All I am asking is what are the differences in the weather, or the terrain, or whatever, in the northeast that cause lots of contact approaches instead of visual approaches? Is it because the weather is not good enough for a visual approach? It would seem that the weather and terrain are similar to the Carolinas and Georgia where I have done a lot of flying, yet I never have heard pilots there requesting contact approaches. As far as the visual approaches I fly regularly, many are at fields that don't have any weather reporting (so I know that the contact approach would not be authorized there). ATC just drops me down to the minumum vectoring altitude, and tells me to let them know when I have the field, and then they clear me for the visual. There is no consideration as to whether or not the field is IFR or VFR. I have flown hundreds, if not thousands of approaches, like this. It is not uncommon on an attempted visual approach in bad weather, to call ATC back and tell them I couldn't maintain contact with the runway environment, and need an approach. This usually happens near the Gulf due to quickly developing fog. Maybe what I am asking is for some of you who regularly fly contact approaches to describe the weather conditions that prompt you to request it. I requested and received a Contact Approach on about my third flight after receiving my instrument rating! I was being vectored "outbound" for the ILS at Temple. Clouds were scattered-to-broken at about 700 ft AGL, and visibity was excellent. Once I saw that I could easily get under them and get back to the field, I got the contact approach and it saved me about 10-15 miles of vectoring. Visual approach would not have worked because of the cloud clearance. Well I guess you could say it would've "worked" but it wouldn't have been legal ![]() I'm certainly no pro, and I don't "regularly" fly contact approaches, but, there you go... Cheers, John Clonts Temple, Texas N7NZ |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| GPS approach question | Matt Whiting | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | August 29th 08 04:54 AM |
| Contact approach question | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 114 | January 31st 05 07:40 PM |
| VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 06:03 AM |
| Why is ADF or Radar Required on MFD ILS RWY 32 Approach Plate? | S. Ramirez | Instrument Flight Rules | 17 | April 2nd 04 12:13 PM |
| USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 04:17 PM |