Approach speeds for ILS

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:20:43 -0800, "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 that you can land
at that speed. You don't need to configure for a short field landing, but
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.

I would respectfully disagree, although I haven't flown a Skyhawk in years.
However, my Mooney is also an a/c known for being "slippery" with a Vso of
49 kts, a bit faster than the Skyhawk. However, for an approach to
minimums, especially at an airport with "heavy iron", I would view my
limiting speed to be the gear down speed of 105 Kts. (And if I had a newer
Mooney, it would be even faster).

I think an instrument rated pilot should have had the necessary training so
that he can fly the approach at the higher speeds desireable to blend in
with faster traffic -- and not have to worry about "balloning back up into
the soup". Also, most ILS's are into runways of at least 4,000' lengths,
so you don't need to be at 1.2 Vso coming over the threshold (although it
is nice to touch down in the touchdown zone).

Don't forget, at a DA of 200' you will still be about 1/2 mile from the
runway. Given that it's a 4,000' or longer runway, you should be able to
touchdown in the first 1/2 and not run off the far end.

In my Mooney, I have no particular problem with, after reaching a DA of
200' and making the decision to land, lowering the additional two notches
of flaps and slowing speed by the runway threshold (60-65 KIAS -- the
slower speed if there is an operational advantage).

I will say, however, that with a DA of 100', I do not drop the last two
notches of flaps, and I will use about 4,000' of runway if I am using a 105
kt approach speed. But at airports where that may occur, that distance is
usually less than 60% of the total runway length -- again, plenty of room.

So I think that instrument rated pilots who, after all, are legal to fly
into any airport, should have the training and experience to deal with the
faster approach speeds. It really is not that difficult once one starts to
practice.

My most difficult approach, in terms of speed control, came with a request
from PWM approach to "maintain present speed until the (outer) marker". At
the time, my speed was 125 Kts; I was under the hood; and there was an FAA
examiner in the right seat. My gear down speed is 105 kts, flaps 109 kts,
and this approach was being done to a 100' DA with a landing planned. So
it was a matter of coming down, slowing down, and reconfiguring on the way
down. (And yes, I discussed with the examiner the fact that I had not done
something like this before; that I wanted to see how it would work out; and
that if it were the first time doing this procedure in real IMC, my
response would have been "unable").

So I think these instrument pilots should be trained and practiced in
faster approaches.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Ron's thoughts are very realistic and deal with real world scenearios.
All of my instrument students get the experience of flying 140 KT ILS
speeds in my skyhawk at the later points of their training. Of
course, I don't advocate that kind of speed for everyday use, but it
is absolutely no problem getting it stopped on a 5000' runway. There
are only a few ILS's on shorter runways.


On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 23:53:59 -0500, Ron Rosenfeld
wrote:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:20:43 -0800, "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 that you can land
at that speed. You don't need to configure for a short field landing, but
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.

I would respectfully disagree, although I haven't flown a Skyhawk in years.
However, my Mooney is also an a/c known for being "slippery" with a Vso of
49 kts, a bit faster than the Skyhawk. However, for an approach to
minimums, especially at an airport with "heavy iron", I would view my
limiting speed to be the gear down speed of 105 Kts. (And if I had a newer
Mooney, it would be even faster).

I think an instrument rated pilot should have had the necessary training so
that he can fly the approach at the higher speeds desireable to blend in
with faster traffic -- and not have to worry about "balloning back up into
the soup". Also, most ILS's are into runways of at least 4,000' lengths,
so you don't need to be at 1.2 Vso coming over the threshold (although it
is nice to touch down in the touchdown zone).

Don't forget, at a DA of 200' you will still be about 1/2 mile from the
runway. Given that it's a 4,000' or longer runway, you should be able to
touchdown in the first 1/2 and not run off the far end.

In my Mooney, I have no particular problem with, after reaching a DA of
200' and making the decision to land, lowering the additional two notches
of flaps and slowing speed by the runway threshold (60-65 KIAS -- the
slower speed if there is an operational advantage).

I will say, however, that with a DA of 100', I do not drop the last two
notches of flaps, and I will use about 4,000' of runway if I am using a 105
kt approach speed. But at airports where that may occur, that distance is
usually less than 60% of the total runway length -- again, plenty of room.

So I think that instrument rated pilots who, after all, are legal to fly
into any airport, should have the training and experience to deal with the
faster approach speeds. It really is not that difficult once one starts to
practice.

My most difficult approach, in terms of speed control, came with a request
from PWM approach to "maintain present speed until the (outer) marker". At
the time, my speed was 125 Kts; I was under the hood; and there was an FAA
examiner in the right seat. My gear down speed is 105 kts, flaps 109 kts,
and this approach was being done to a 100' DA with a landing planned. So
it was a matter of coming down, slowing down, and reconfiguring on the way
down. (And yes, I discussed with the examiner the fact that I had not done
something like this before; that I wanted to see how it would work out; and
that if it were the first time doing this procedure in real IMC, my
response would have been "unable").

So I think these instrument pilots should be trained and practiced in
faster approaches.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Bill Zaleski wrote in message . ..
Ron's thoughts are very realistic and deal with real world scenearios.
All of my instrument students get the experience of flying 140 KT ILS
speeds in my skyhawk at the later points of their training.

Bill,

Just curious, how do you fly 140 kt ILS in a Skyhawk? Or do you
have a controllable prop?

Cheers,
Sydney

180 H.P engine @ about 2500 RPM fixed pitch prop


On 21 Jan 2004 12:15:25 -0800, (Snowbird)
wrote:

Bill Zaleski wrote in message . ..
Ron's thoughts are very realistic and deal with real world scenearios.
All of my instrument students get the experience of flying 140 KT ILS
speeds in my skyhawk at the later points of their training.

Bill,

Just curious, how do you fly 140 kt ILS in a Skyhawk? Or do you
have a controllable prop?

Cheers,
Sydney

I think an instrument rated pilot should have had the necessary training so
that he can fly the approach at the higher speeds desireable to blend in
with faster traffic -- and not have to worry about "balloning back up into
the soup". Also, most ILS's are into runways of at least 4,000' lengths,
so you don't need to be at 1.2 Vso coming over the threshold (although it
is nice to touch down in the touchdown zone).

I agree. My American instruction was usually to fly the glide slope
with one notch of flaps at about 90kts (PA28), and then do whatever was
necessary to land the plane. In the UK, one instructor made me fly the
ILS 10 kts faster and with no flaps (easier to perform a missed if you
don't have to clean up), and land more often than not flapless - which
we have all been trained to do, and is rarely a problem on the usual
4000'+ runway.
--
John H. Kay

Ron Rosenfeld wrote in message . ..

I think an instrument rated pilot should have had the necessary training so
that he can fly the approach at the higher speeds desireable to blend in
with faster traffic -- and not have to worry about "balloning back up into
the soup". ...
So I think that instrument rated pilots who, after all, are legal to fly
into any airport, should have the training and experience to deal with the
faster approach speeds. It really is not that difficult once one starts to
practice.

I think this is eminantly practical advice.

I don't think of 90 kts as a "faster approach speed". It seems
very common, at a larger airport, to be asked something like "keep
your speed up -- say best forward speed?" If the answer is "N12345
can maintain 120 kts" it's presumably a heck of a lot easier for
ATC to work you in between a bunch of jets than if your answer
is "N12345 needs 60 kts (or even 90 kts) at the marker".

My CFI would say "either train until you can do it or don't
fly IMC".

Cheers,
Sydney

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 that you can land
at that speed.

A slow ILS approach speed won't cut it when landing at Boston's Logan.
Granted I have only landed there four times in a C172S, but three of the
times we were IMC to just above DH. In every case ATC wanted us very fast
due to the long line of airliners behind us.

I do not think I am a skilled pilot yet, but I am able to slow the C172
down quickly enough to simulate braking pretty hard in an automobile; power
to idle, raise nose slightly, one notch of flaps, at 85 dump remaining
flaps. Knowing that the runway is over 10,000 feet certainly adds comfort
when flying the fast approach.


--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Peter R." wrote in message news:MPG.1a785834a2862bf5989961@text-
I do not think I am a skilled pilot yet, but I am able to slow the C172
down quickly enough to simulate braking pretty hard in an automobile; power
to idle, raise nose slightly, one notch of flaps, at 85 dump remaining
flaps. Knowing that the runway is over 10,000 feet certainly adds comfort
when flying the fast approach.

Same problem with Dulles. Not only is there 11,000+ fee of runway, but
even if you plant 500 feet passed fixed distance marker, you've still got 3000
feet before the first taxiway you can turn off on.

CJ

I've got to respectfully disagree with you.

I teach my instrument students to fly approaches at 100 KIAS for most
single-engine bug-smashers because it's a lot easier to stay on course
when going faster, the cross wind has less effect, you don't hold up
traffic as much and, for any ILS equipped runway, you've got far more
runway available than you need, even if you up the speed to 120 KIAS.

On the other hand, having looked at too many accidents where the
pilots broke out at 200-300 feet up and started making changes to the
airplane configuration right then, including reducing power, and wound
up sticking the airplane into the approach lights (often in rain at
night where the refraction through the rain on the windshield caused
them to think they were high, despite having glideslope info on the
panel) I also empahsize that the pilot should not change ANYTHING
until crossing the runway threshold. The power setting, configuration
and speed were working just fine to stay on glide slope all the way
down, why change anything just because you are transitioning to
visual. In fact, that's the worst possible time to pull the power or
add flaps or what have you, as, if the wx is really crappy, you may
very well fly into a bit of scud that is below 200 feet and have to
make a go around...it's best to still have that energey so you can
zoom climb away from the ground. Plus, at 200 feet AGL, you aren't to
the runway, yet. So, leave everything as it is and take some time to
look around...you've got lots of time, you are only descending at
roughly 500-600 fpm at 100 KIAS, you aren't to the runway yet, so let
yourself figure out what's going on while keeping power and speed the
same for a while. If you leave well enough alone, you cross the
threshold at slightly over 50 feet AGL. Then, smoothly close the
throttle, roll in some nose up trip to hold your altitude right there,
above ground effect, when the airplane decelerates into the white arc,
select full flaps, trim as needed, then when it decelerates to normal
speed for final, descend, flare and land. Yes, you'll use about 3,000
feet of runway. Big deal. That's not the risky part of the ILS. The
risky part is crashing short of the runway, if the accident reports
are to be believed.

All the best,
Rick

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
We get foggy here at Tacoma Narrows this time of year (which is the reason I
post more on these groups in the winter than in the summer). One thing we
see a lot of is guys who fly the ILS too fast.

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 that you can land
at that speed. You don't need to configure for a short field landing, but
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.

You just want to hold your breath when you hear somebody coming down the
ILS. You don't see him, but you hear the engine start to roar as he begins
his missed approach. Then he suddenly breaks through and tries to land
anyway. Sometimes they make it, probably touching down on the last half of
the runway, and sometimes they don't, having to make a go around back up
into the soup, only now the missed approach is all messed up, too.

Two lessons he

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.

2) If you decide to go missed, then go missed. Don't change your mind just
because you got a glimpse of the runway as you were flying overhead.

As soon as I intercept the glideslope I like to get my planed configured to
land, gear down, start putting in flaps, slow down, I use 90 kts when its for
real, but I sometimes use some stupid speeds when its under the hood and I am
going around (one time I had a tail wind on an ILS under the hood and and I did
it with gear up and no flaps, had 140 kts indicated and and like 170 kts GS.
that was a pretty quick approach)
but I choose to use 90 kts because I can slow down to 70 to land from that speed
real quick and also if I need to do a missed, I have just enough speed to be
able to take off again. I have a turbo charged engine so I have to apply power
slowly.
Even at places like long beach, ca where its very busy I use 90. they have never
asked for more when its IFR, they do when its VFR, but not IFR. So far.

C J Campbell wrote:

We get foggy here at Tacoma Narrows this time of year (which is the reason I
post more on these groups in the winter than in the summer). One thing we
see a lot of is guys who fly the ILS too fast.

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 that you can land
at that speed. You don't need to configure for a short field landing, but
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.

You just want to hold your breath when you hear somebody coming down the
ILS. You don't see him, but you hear the engine start to roar as he begins
his missed approach. Then he suddenly breaks through and tries to land
anyway. Sometimes they make it, probably touching down on the last half of
the runway, and sometimes they don't, having to make a go around back up
into the soup, only now the missed approach is all messed up, too.

Two lessons he

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.

2) If you decide to go missed, then go missed. Don't change your mind just
because you got a glimpse of the runway as you were flying overhead.

--
Christopher J. Campbell
World Famous Flight Instructor
Port Orchard, WA

If you go around beating the Bush, don't complain if you rile the animals.