Approach speeds for ILS

"John R Weiss" wrote in message
news:mYlPb.109959$xy6.321478@attbi_s02...
|
| 1) If the field is really at minimums, you have 200 feet to slow down to
| landing speed. That is not much time. Better you should be ready to land
| before you break out.
|
| Nope -- not unless you are flying a Cat III certified airplane.
|
| You should be ready to transition to land AFTER you break out! A C172 at
90
| knots is only descending at 400-500 FPM. At 200' AGL, you have 20-30
seconds
| until touchdown, even if you don't flare at all! You can do a lot of
| decelerating, reconfiguring, and flaring in 20 seconds. Since the only
| reconfiguring you should have to do, if any, is final flaps, you have
plenty of
| time!

Well, one would think so, and I don't have any problem with it, but I sure
see a lot of pilots that just can't seem to handle it. But I am a CFII who
flies and demonstrates these approaches constantly. I think my point is that
pilots who do not fly as frequently should consider a different 'approach,'
so to speak.

AARP encourages older drivers to take things a little slower -- to drive
within their skill level. Perhaps rusty pilots should do the same.

"C J Campbell" wrote...

Well, one would think so, and I don't have any problem with it, but I sure
see a lot of pilots that just can't seem to handle it. But I am a CFII who
flies and demonstrates these approaches constantly. I think my point is that
pilots who do not fly as frequently should consider a different 'approach,'
so to speak.

Again, I disagree.

Pilots who don't fly as frequently should use the time they DO get to practice
their skills, lest they be lost. An instrument rated pilot should NOT go out
and fly when the weather is near minimums, just to avoid going non-current! He
should, instead, get out and practice those approaches -- including the
transitions -- every couple weeks. If he can't do that, some instrument time
with his favorite CFII should precede any attempt to go out in the real weather,
and that CFII should ensure he CAN handle it before signing off any currency
check.

Flying an ILS at 60 knots instead of 90 puts the airplane much closer to stall,
giving much less margin of error if the pilot gets distracted or fixated. The
transition to visual is part of EVERY (Cat III excluded) actual approach that
results in a landing, so that transition should be practiced as much as flying
the needles.

In article ,
C J Campbell wrote:
I have no problem with flying the ILS at 90 or 100 knots if the ceiling is
well above minimums, but it seems to me that if the ceiling is 200 feet
overcast you ought to be flying the approach slowly enough

You really want people flying differently in tough weather conditions?
You're better off flying what you practiced. If you can't fly a 100kt
ILS and land after breaking out at 200' you should either practice that
or fly all of your approaches at 90kt.

If you pull power and put in 10 degrees of flaps (haven't the last 30
years or so worth of 172 allowed the first 10 degrees at like 110kts?)
you'll be down to full flap speed in a matter of seconds and after that
you can drop like a brick if you want.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

you are not going to slow from 90 knots to 60 in a Skyhawk in only 200
feet
of altitude, especially if you can't risk ballooning back up into the
soup.

What speed do you use to fly the ILS if asked to "keep your speed up"?

ILS runways are usually 5,000 feet or longer. You could dissipate speed
over the runway.

I suspect if you cross the runway threshold right on the glideslope at 90
knots in a Skyhawk with a 5,000 foot runway, there is no way you could
overrun the runway if you tried.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

I suspect if you cross the runway threshold right on the glideslope at 90
knots in a Skyhawk with a 5,000 foot runway, there is no way you could
overrun the runway if you tried.


I have seen it done. A pilot (NOT one of my students) in a rental C-172 from a
flight school I used to teach at ran off the end of a 5300' rwy after a normal
approach in VFR (65 kts).
Unreal. I just stood there with my mouth hanging open as I watched the Cessna
float down the rwy, carrying power and touching down with about 300 feet of rwy
remaining. With about 100 feet left, the tires locked up and there the plane
went, off the end in a cloud-O-dust. No damage, except for flat spots on the
tires and bruised ego.




-John
*You are nothing until you have flown a Douglas, Lockheed, Grumman or North
American*

"Ditch" wrote in message
...

Unreal. I just stood there with my mouth hanging open as I watched the
Cessna
float down the rwy, carrying power and touching down with about 300 feet
of rwy

Well OK, if you do not cut the power then you can run off the end of a
12,000 foot runway. But then that is not an instrument-flying issue; that
is an issue with basic airplane control.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote
What speed do you use to fly the ILS if asked to "keep your speed up"?

These are different situations. If you're asked to keep your speed
up, it's generally because you're landing at an air carrier airport.
That means only minimal tailwinds (if any) and very long runways. You
can float and float and float and land 5000+ ft down the runway and
it's still fine. Being able to fly an ILS fast is an important skill,
but it's not the ONLY important skill.

ILS runways are usually 5,000 feet or longer. You could dissipate speed
over the runway.

It's true that ILS runways with a total length of less than 5000 ft
are pretty rare - at least I've never seen one. However, the ILS and
(typically available) visual glideslope aid will not put you on the
numbers. Having an available landing distance of less than 5000 ft is
actually pretty common. Unfortunately, this typically happens at
airports served by only one ILS. If the weather is low enough to need
an ILS, it may require a tailwind landing. At such a place you will
not be asked to keep your speed up (unless the controller really
screwed up). On the other hand, if you're a bit fast on the ILS and a
bit slow to retard the throttle, you do risk overrunning the runway.

This brings us to another interesting problem. When visibilities are
less than a mile, especially at night, the visual cues available are
not really sufficient for precise control of the airplane. The visual
segment must be flown with at least some reference to instruments.
This is not something that is normally taught, and it's not really
something you can effectively practice in blue sky conditions. I
suspect that most of the pilots having trouble slowing down would have
done fine in good VMC flying under the hood.

I personally like to take an advanced instrument student to an airport
served by only one ILS when that approach is downwind, preferably in
low vis, at night, or both. This quickly reveals any lingering
technique issues, and lets us work them out in an environment that
won't cover them up. Once he can handle landing out of an ILS at
night with a 10 kt tailwind, he can pretty much handle any straight in
visual segment.

I suspect if you cross the runway threshold right on the glideslope at 90
knots in a Skyhawk with a 5,000 foot runway, there is no way you could
overrun the runway if you tried.

I suspect you're right - as long as there is really 5000 ft of landing
distance available and no significant tailwind. However, lately I'm
seeing a lot of people flying the ILS at 100+ kts in Cherokees and
Skyhawks. I find this fascinating since it's faster than I fly the
ILS in my twin, unless I am specifically instructed to keep my speed
up.

Michael

chino california (CNO) the ILS on 26R is 4858 ft.
my wife took pictures all the way down the glideslope a few months ago, there
was no clouds that day, just some ground fog.
http://www.turboarrow3.com/newplane/chino/index.html



Michael wrote:

"Richard Kaplan" wrote
What speed do you use to fly the ILS if asked to "keep your speed up"?

These are different situations. If you're asked to keep your speed
up, it's generally because you're landing at an air carrier airport.
That means only minimal tailwinds (if any) and very long runways. You
can float and float and float and land 5000+ ft down the runway and
it's still fine. Being able to fly an ILS fast is an important skill,
but it's not the ONLY important skill.

ILS runways are usually 5,000 feet or longer. You could dissipate speed
over the runway.

It's true that ILS runways with a total length of less than 5000 ft
are pretty rare - at least I've never seen one. However, the ILS and
(typically available) visual glideslope aid will not put you on the
numbers. Having an available landing distance of less than 5000 ft is
actually pretty common. Unfortunately, this typically happens at
airports served by only one ILS. If the weather is low enough to need
an ILS, it may require a tailwind landing. At such a place you will
not be asked to keep your speed up (unless the controller really
screwed up). On the other hand, if you're a bit fast on the ILS and a
bit slow to retard the throttle, you do risk overrunning the runway.

This brings us to another interesting problem. When visibilities are
less than a mile, especially at night, the visual cues available are
not really sufficient for precise control of the airplane. The visual
segment must be flown with at least some reference to instruments.
This is not something that is normally taught, and it's not really
something you can effectively practice in blue sky conditions. I
suspect that most of the pilots having trouble slowing down would have
done fine in good VMC flying under the hood.

I personally like to take an advanced instrument student to an airport
served by only one ILS when that approach is downwind, preferably in
low vis, at night, or both. This quickly reveals any lingering
technique issues, and lets us work them out in an environment that
won't cover them up. Once he can handle landing out of an ILS at
night with a 10 kt tailwind, he can pretty much handle any straight in
visual segment.

I suspect if you cross the runway threshold right on the glideslope at 90
knots in a Skyhawk with a 5,000 foot runway, there is no way you could
overrun the runway if you tried.

I suspect you're right - as long as there is really 5000 ft of landing
distance available and no significant tailwind. However, lately I'm
seeing a lot of people flying the ILS at 100+ kts in Cherokees and
Skyhawks. I find this fascinating since it's faster than I fly the
ILS in my twin, unless I am specifically instructed to keep my speed
up.

Michael

French Bulldog? This is my idea of a French Bulldog:
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=191673

:-)

Paul

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
http://www.turboarrow3.com/newplane/chino/index.html

"Michael" wrote in message
om...

I suspect you're right - as long as there is really 5000 ft of landing
distance available and no significant tailwind. However, lately I'm

I would say an overrun cannot happen in a 172 on ILS into the wind or with
calm winds as long as the power is cut at decision height. If the airspeed
is high as discussed in this thread and the airplane is on the glideslope,
then the airplane should be within gliding distance of the runway at
decision height.

As far as flying an ILS with a tailwind, I agree that could cause an
overrun. I would also suggest that landing out of an ILS in actual IMC
conditions with a tailwind is an exercise which should be attempted only by
an experienced, advanced IFR pilot and/or with an experienced CFII on-board.
In particular, a pilot who is uncomfortable flying a high-airspeed ILS with
a headwind certainly should not attempt a tailwind ILS.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com