I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited 2 months to
try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to schedule it.
Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with another examiner,
then going back to the first one, and weather delayed it.

Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can remember.

We went into one of the conference rooms and he asked to see all my
paperwork: pilot certificate, medical, application, picture ID, and
logbook endorsement. He started asking a few questions and my
answers:

What is required to be current for IFR?
Everything for VFR, plus 6 approaches, holding procedures and
intercepting/tracking courses
(He was looking for more...)
I said you have 6 months to meet this then if you don't, you have
another six months. After that you'll need an IPC.
Who can give an IPC?
A CFII, examiners, FAA...
What instruments are required for IFR? (GRABCARD)
How do you check the VOR?
VOT +/- 4 deg., Air checkpoint +/- 6 deg., Ground checkpoint +/- 4
deg. (dual VOR, but I didn't get to that) I started to explain where
to find these (AF/D), but he went on to the next question:
Using a VOT, must you be in a certain location on the airport?
No, as long as you can receive the frequency.
Does it matter which way your airplane is facing?
No (I hope nobody would get that wrong!)
What should the VOR indicate?
360 deg. with a FROM when needle is centered, 180 TO.
If the needle is centered and it reads 356 FROM, is that legal?
Yes
Would you apply this error to navigation?
No, this is a tolerance and you shouldn't adjust your courses because
of the error.
He then explained if your VOR was 4 degrees off and you applied that
to tracking a course outbound, how you could get very far off course
the further you got away from the VOR. He said it may be 4 degrees
off on one radial but not on the other. I related this to flying
different headings with a compass using a compass card, and you
shouldn't do this with the VOR errors.
Was my aircraft certified for known icing?
No
How could I determine freezing levels?
I said a freezing levels chart, winds aloft...
He asked how from the winds aloft? (He sort of acted like I gave a
wrong answer at first)
I said from the temperatures you could determine the freezing
altitude
(He was still looking for something else...)
I said a very crude way would be to use the average lapse rate from
the temperature at the ground...
He confirmed it would be very crude, and said not to overcomplicate
this.
I got it right with just saying call the FSS and get the freezing
levels at the airports on the route.
Could I fly if the freezing level was 4,000, the cloud bases at 3,000,
and an MEA in the clouds, legally?
Legally, yes
He asked what was the major problem with ice?
I said the accumulation of the added weight.
I sort of hesitated on the known icing questions, and he stated that
there is no clear definition of known icing in the regulations. He
said he wanted to ask these questions as there has been those legal
rulings on pilots flying into known icing and whether "conditions
favorable to icing" was "known icing" or not.
The general consensus was (legally) the FAA may question if you fly
your non-icing-certified aircraft in "icing conditions", but it is
legal as long as it is not "known icing" such as an actual PIREP.
He said he flies in an icing certified airplane with his son, which
is equipped with deicing equipment, and it melts it off as fast as it
accumulates. He said the icing area is about 10 degrees either side
of freezing temperatures, and a lot of people don't know that you can
climb above it into below freezing temperatures where it will bounce
off the airplane, which isn't a problem.

He then asked for me to get out my enroute chart to ask a few
questions. What does the V mean on victor airways?
I couldn't figure out what he wanted, I said it was just an airway.
After a while I finally got it, it would be J on a high enroute chart.
How high is this chart good for?
18,000 ft.
What is the change over point (pointing to a straight course, no COP
marked)?
The halfway point.
Is it regulatory that you change it there?
Yes
He then explained how you could still have a centered needle past the
halfway point but be drifting to the side because maybe your VOR was a
few degrees off. Where is the COP on this course (pointing to one
marked with DME)?
The mark.
He then explained how this is because one of the VORs doesn't have as
strong a signal. Then he very thoroughly gave me a scenario of flying
out from KRBL (I think), with a MCA fix a few miles after takeoff. He
asked if I lost radios just before reaching it and I was assigned
3,000, expect 9,000, what should I climb to?
The highest of assigned/expected/minimum altitude, so 9,000.
What if I was 3,000 upon reaching the MCA fix (with a MCA of 5,000)?
Hold at the fix while in a climb to the MCA.
Continuing on, if I arrived at a fix from which an approach begins (he
pointed to an airport near the coast), what would I do if I arrived
early?
Hold at the fix until EFC or ETA expires.
If I arrived late?
Begin approach immediately.
If there are VOR, NDB, GPS, ILS approaches...which one?
Any approach.
He then asked to look at the SMF ILS 16R approach. What are the
minimums?
1800 RVR visibility, 226 decision height.
What is MDA?
Minimum Decent Altitude
When you get to DH, what do you do?
That is when you make the decision to go missed or continue.
What if you are on the ILS and ATC calls you and says, "the RVR just
went to 900, what are your intentions?" Must you go missed
immediately, continue the approach, or?
I knew you couldn't descend from the DH if it's below minimums, but I
didn't know about before that.
He asked me to sort of guess.
I said because I haven't read anything you couldn't continue to the
DH, I said you can.
He said that was correct, he said part 135 and others must go missed
immediately, but part 91 can descend to the DH. If I descend to DH
and it's 900 RVR, can I land?
No, it's below minimums.
He explained how someone had gone below the DH in this scenario and
went off the runway on landing because the visibility was too poor.
They lost their flying job and had their license suspended. Somehow
we got to talking about being cleared to land, as they can't clear you
to land with the Wx below minimums. He said the tower responded with
"Roger" when the pilot contacted him, never clearing him to land.

Can you go below DH?
Yes, by 50 ft.
He then explained how a jet is unable to go from a descent in the
landing configuration, start retracting the flaps, gear, and starting
a climb without going below the DH. What about MDA?
You can't descend below MDA at all, and you are level so there's no
reason to go below it.

He then said he had one more question he forgot to ask, he went to a
white board and drew a runway, was very clear on the altitude I was at
(circling altitude) and where the airplane he was drawing was circling
around to land on the opposite end. As he drew the line he said to
tell him when I could descend to land from circling minimums. I told
him when he just started to turn in on final. He said this was a
little late, but was fine. He said many people thought they could
descend on downwind or base, etc.


Flying portion:

He gave me a clearance while still on the ground. Cleared to
Stockton, SAC V585 ECA Direct, 4,500, 1200. I asked him if he could
tell me in advance before I request the approaches (so I'll know what
to ask for when they ask for what's next). He said we'll do the SAC
ILS with vectors, VOR own nav, then LOC own nav. He told me ahead of
time to be sure to make all reports (entering hold, etc.) if ATC loses
radar, which he'll be simulating. He played ATC for the cross country
portion.

I setup all the radios, etc and did the instrument check, departed MHR
and identified the SAC VOR. As we're getting fairly close to it, he
says ATC has lost radar and report reaching 4,500 and the SAC VOR. I
report both fine, and track onto V585.

He says he has holding instructions when I'm ready to copy. He says
hold at WAGER as published, maintain 4,500 (and says normally you'd
get an EFC). I was correcting to the right and the entry was on the
borderline of being parallel, but I didn't want to do a parallel...I
said I'd be doing a teardrop and he says that's what he'd do as it's
the least maneuvering, etc.

I was finishing the first lap in the hold when he asked how I'd
determine the leg timing. I reached 1 minute right then and said it's
right on so I wouldn't need to adjust the outbound leg. He then said
he has an amended clearance when I'm ready to copy. I was in the turn
to go outbound in the hold so I told him to standby (I wanted to get
setup on the outbound heading). I got a clearance to Linden VOR,
V113, Manteca, direct. I started heading towards Linden and
identified it when he said we're done with this and he'll give me
vectors now.

He gave me a vector and told me to just hold this for a minute. He
then pulled the power to idle and said I was in full IMC, what would I
do? I said I'd troubleshoot the failure, announce it on the radio,
squawk 7700... He said Ok, you've already done that. (Meanwhile I've
got it trimmed at 65 knots, best glide). I said I should know my
approximate location and the terrain around me for the safest
landing. He said he's looking for something simple... I then said as I
started getting lower, I'd slow down and lower the flaps all the way
for the slowest landing speed. He then suggested to be as close to
stall as reasonably possible.

I held another heading and he said to slow down to 80 kts maintaining
altitude. Then turn to another heading. Then speed back up, then
descend at 80 kts 200 ft and level off at 80 kts. Then two unusual
attitudes then off to do the 3 approaches at SAC.

I contact NorCal approach and tell him I'm 15 miles SE of SAC VOR and
the approaches. My examiner wanted to tell ATC it's for a checkride
(to do full approaches at busy SAC), but his mic was garbled and the
controller said I was clear but my examiner wasn't. I got vectors for
the ILS and it went fine, but the examiner kept placing my enroute
chart on the windshield to make sure I wouldn't look out. One time
getting close to DH the chart fell on the controls...does this count as
one of the distractions?

I was getting setup for the VOR approach when the examiner wanted to
ask ATC what altitude we were reporting (I had mentioned it was
slightly off during preflight)... ATC couldn't understand him good
enough, so I said I'd ask. (Does this count also for
distractions? :) Luckily I decided what holding entry I'd do before
we took off to use at the IAF if I was coming from the west side of
the airport, as I only had a few seconds left now to get it figured
out.

We went around again for the LOC approach. When we got on the ground
back at Mather, he said I flew the airplane very smoothly (even though
I was nervous, it actually wasn't my best!). He said my first two
approaches were perfect. I think the second one I was starting to get
tired and got off on the LOC close to the limits right before the
missed approach. I think because I did very well on the rest he was
more lenient on the last approach. He also said my DG was getting off
very quickly (I was resetting it every 5 minutes or so). So no
partial panel, and a total of 1.6 flying time.

One more thing (it's all coming back now) that I thought was
interesting. He said how is the static system hooked up? I said each
instrument is hooked to the other, then to the static port. He said
why do you think it's this way? I had actually never thought about
it, but said probably so if you loose one you'll notice on all of
them. He said if they each had their one static source in different
locations, your altimeter might say your in a climb while your VS says
your descending, etc.

On Mar 20, 2:15 pm, "kevmor" > wrote:
> I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited 2 months to
> try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to schedule it.
> Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with another examiner,
> then going back to the first one, and weather delayed it.
>
> Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can remember.
>
> We went into one of the conference rooms and he asked to see all my
> paperwork: pilot certificate, medical, application, picture ID, and
> logbook endorsement. He started asking a few questions and my
> answers:
>
> What is required to be current for IFR?
> Everything for VFR, plus 6 approaches, holding procedures and
> intercepting/tracking courses
> (He was looking for more...)
> I said you have 6 months to meet this then if you don't, you have
> another six months. After that you'll need an IPC.
> Who can give an IPC?
> A CFII, examiners, FAA...
> What instruments are required for IFR? (GRABCARD)
> How do you check the VOR?
> VOT +/- 4 deg., Air checkpoint +/- 6 deg., Ground checkpoint +/- 4
> deg. (dual VOR, but I didn't get to that) I started to explain where
> to find these (AF/D), but he went on to the next question:
> Using a VOT, must you be in a certain location on the airport?
> No, as long as you can receive the frequency.
> Does it matter which way your airplane is facing?
> No (I hope nobody would get that wrong!)
> What should the VOR indicate?
> 360 deg. with a FROM when needle is centered, 180 TO.
> If the needle is centered and it reads 356 FROM, is that legal?
> Yes
> Would you apply this error to navigation?
> No, this is a tolerance and you shouldn't adjust your courses because
> of the error.
> He then explained if your VOR was 4 degrees off and you applied that
> to tracking a course outbound, how you could get very far off course
> the further you got away from the VOR. He said it may be 4 degrees
> off on one radial but not on the other. I related this to flying
> different headings with a compass using a compass card, and you
> shouldn't do this with the VOR errors.
> Was my aircraft certified for known icing?
> No
> How could I determine freezing levels?
> I said a freezing levels chart, winds aloft...
> He asked how from the winds aloft? (He sort of acted like I gave a
> wrong answer at first)
> I said from the temperatures you could determine the freezing
> altitude
> (He was still looking for something else...)
> I said a very crude way would be to use the average lapse rate from
> the temperature at the ground...
> He confirmed it would be very crude, and said not to overcomplicate
> this.
> I got it right with just saying call the FSS and get the freezing
> levels at the airports on the route.
> Could I fly if the freezing level was 4,000, the cloud bases at 3,000,
> and an MEA in the clouds, legally?
> Legally, yes
> He asked what was the major problem with ice?
> I said the accumulation of the added weight.
> I sort of hesitated on the known icing questions, and he stated that
> there is no clear definition of known icing in the regulations. He
> said he wanted to ask these questions as there has been those legal
> rulings on pilots flying into known icing and whether "conditions
> favorable to icing" was "known icing" or not.
> The general consensus was (legally) the FAA may question if you fly
> your non-icing-certified aircraft in "icing conditions", but it is
> legal as long as it is not "known icing" such as an actual PIREP.
> He said he flies in an icing certified airplane with his son, which
> is equipped with deicing equipment, and it melts it off as fast as it
> accumulates. He said the icing area is about 10 degrees either side
> of freezing temperatures, and a lot of people don't know that you can
> climb above it into below freezing temperatures where it will bounce
> off the airplane, which isn't a problem.
>
> He then asked for me to get out my enroute chart to ask a few
> questions. What does the V mean on victor airways?
> I couldn't figure out what he wanted, I said it was just an airway.
> After a while I finally got it, it would be J on a high enroute chart.
> How high is this chart good for?
> 18,000 ft.
> What is the change over point (pointing to a straight course, no COP
> marked)?
> The halfway point.
> Is it regulatory that you change it there?
> Yes
> He then explained how you could still have a centered needle past the
> halfway point but be drifting to the side because maybe your VOR was a
> few degrees off. Where is the COP on this course (pointing to one
> marked with DME)?
> The mark.
> He then explained how this is because one of the VORs doesn't have as
> strong a signal. Then he very thoroughly gave me a scenario of flying
> out from KRBL (I think), with a MCA fix a few miles after takeoff. He
> asked if I lost radios just before reaching it and I was assigned
> 3,000, expect 9,000, what should I climb to?
> The highest of assigned/expected/minimum altitude, so 9,000.
> What if I was 3,000 upon reaching the MCA fix (with a MCA of 5,000)?
> Hold at the fix while in a climb to the MCA.
> Continuing on, if I arrived at a fix from which an approach begins (he
> pointed to an airport near the coast), what would I do if I arrived
> early?
> Hold at the fix until EFC or ETA expires.
> If I arrived late?
> Begin approach immediately.
> If there are VOR, NDB, GPS, ILS approaches...which one?
> Any approach.
> He then asked to look at the SMF ILS 16R approach. What are the
> minimums?
> 1800 RVR visibility, 226 decision height.
> What is MDA?
> Minimum Decent Altitude
> When you get to DH, what do you do?
> That is when you make the decision to go missed or continue.
> What if you are on the ILS and ATC calls you and says, "the RVR just
> went to 900, what are your intentions?" Must you go missed
> immediately, continue the approach, or?
> I knew you couldn't descend from the DH if it's below minimums, but I
> didn't know about before that.
> He asked me to sort of guess.
> I said because I haven't read anything you couldn't continue to the
> DH, I said you can.
> He said that was correct, he said part 135 and others must go missed
> immediately, but part 91 can descend to the DH. If I descend to DH
> and it's 900 RVR, can I land?
> No, it's below minimums.
> He explained how someone had gone below the DH in this scenario and
> went off the runway on landing because the visibility was too poor.
> They lost their flying job and had their license suspended. Somehow
> we got to talking about being cleared to land, as they can't clear you
> to land with the Wx below minimums. He said the tower responded with
> "Roger" when the pilot contacted him, never clearing him to land.
>
> Can you go below DH?
> Yes, by 50 ft.
> He then explained how a jet is unable to go from a descent in the
> landing configuration, start retracting the flaps, gear, and starting
> a climb without going below the DH. What about MDA?
> You can't descend below MDA at all, and you are level so there's no
> reason to go below it.
>
> He then said he had one more question he forgot to ask, he went to a
> white board and drew a runway, was very clear on the altitude I was at
> (circling altitude) and where the airplane he was drawing was circling
> around to land on the opposite end. As he drew the line he said to
> tell him when I could descend to land from circling minimums. I told
> him when he just started to turn in on final. He said this was a
> little late, but was fine. He said many people thought they could
> descend on downwind or base, etc.
>
> Flying portion:
>
> He gave me a clearance while still on the ground. Cleared to
> Stockton, SAC V585 ECA Direct, 4,500, 1200. I asked him if he could
> tell me in advance before I request the approaches (so I'll know what
> to ask for when they ask for what's next). He said we'll do the SAC
> ILS with vectors, VOR own nav, then LOC own nav. He told me ahead of
> time to be sure to make all reports (entering hold, etc.) if ATC loses
> radar, which he'll be simulating. He played ATC for the cross country
> portion.
>
> I setup all the radios, etc and did the instrument check, departed MHR
> and identified the SAC VOR. As we're getting fairly close to it, he
> says ATC has lost radar and report reaching 4,500 and the SAC VOR. I
> report both fine, and track onto V585.
>
> He says he has holding instructions when I'm ready to copy. He says
> hold at WAGER as published, maintain 4,500 (and says normally you'd
> get an EFC). I was correcting to the right and the entry was on the
> borderline of being parallel, but I didn't want to do a parallel...I
> said I'd be doing a teardrop and he says that's what he'd do as it's
> the least maneuvering, etc.
>
> I was finishing the first lap in the hold when he asked how I'd
> determine the leg timing. I reached 1 minute right then and said it's
> right on so I wouldn't need to adjust the outbound leg. He then said
> he has an amended clearance when I'm ready to copy. I was in the turn
> to go outbound in the hold so I told him to standby (I wanted to get
> setup on the outbound heading). I got a clearance to Linden VOR,
> V113, Manteca, direct. I started heading towards Linden and
> identified it when he said we're done with this and he'll give me
> vectors now.
>
> He gave me a vector and told me to just hold this for a minute. He
> then pulled the power to idle and said I was in full IMC, what would I
> do? I said I'd troubleshoot the failure, announce it on the radio,
> squawk 7700... He said Ok, you've already done that. (Meanwhile I've
> got it trimmed at 65 knots, best glide). I said I should know my
> approximate location and the terrain around me for the safest
> landing. He said he's looking for something simple... I then said as I
> started getting lower, I'd slow down and lower the flaps all the way
> for the slowest landing speed. He then suggested to be as close to
> stall as reasonably possible.
>
> I held another heading and he said to slow down to 80 kts maintaining
> altitude. Then turn to another heading. Then speed back up, then
> descend at 80 kts 200 ft and level off at 80 kts. Then two unusual
> attitudes then off to do the 3 approaches at SAC.
>
> I contact NorCal approach and tell him I'm 15 miles SE of SAC VOR and
> the approaches. My examiner wanted to tell ATC it's for a checkride
> (to do full approaches at busy SAC), but his mic was garbled and the
> controller said I was clear but my examiner wasn't. I got vectors for
> the ILS and it went fine, but the examiner kept placing my enroute
> chart on the windshield to make sure I wouldn't look out. One time
> getting close to DH the chart fell on the controls...does this count as
> one of the distractions?
>
> I was getting setup for the VOR approach when the examiner wanted to
> ask ATC what altitude we were reporting (I had mentioned it was
> slightly off during preflight)... ATC couldn't understand him good
> enough, so I said I'd ask. (Does this count also for
> distractions? :) Luckily I decided what holding entry I'd do before
> we took off to use at the IAF if I was coming from the west side of
> the airport, as I only had a few seconds left now to get it figured
> out.
>
> We went around again for the LOC approach. When we got on the ground
> back at Mather, he said I flew the airplane very smoothly (even though
> I was nervous, it actually wasn't my best!). He said my first two
> approaches were perfect. I think the second one I was starting to get
> tired and got off on the LOC close to the limits right before the
> missed approach. I think because I did very well on the rest he was
> more lenient on the last approach. He also said my DG was getting off
> very quickly (I was resetting it every 5 minutes or so). So no
> partial panel, and a total of 1.6 flying time.

On 03/20/07 14:15, kevmor wrote:
> I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited 2 months to
> try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to schedule it.
> Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with another examiner,
> then going back to the first one, and weather delayed it.
>
> Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can remember.
>
>

[ snip ]

Great story, Kevin. We should get together one of these days and swap
checkride war stories!


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

DH, you make a decision AT DH while in a descent on GS, so
if you decide to go-around you will be below DH before the
airplane starts back up. It isn't 50 feet, you just have to
decide and either continue or discontinue the approach.
You can use the approach light rabbit to continue below DH,
but only to 100 feet unless you get more of the required
visual cues.

Ice is aerodynamic spoiler, not weight.

VOR check, to check properly, swing the OBS and make sure
you get the proper deflection, 10 ° should be full scale
80° and the TO/FROM flag should be switching, if it doesn't
your VOR has low sensitivity and may not should course
deviation at 25-50 miles, the needle will just center while
you drift off course...

Other than that, congratulations.

--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.

US Court on DC gun law...
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf


"kevmor" > wrote in message
ps.com...
|I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited 2
months to
| try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to
schedule it.
| Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with
another examiner,
| then going back to the first one, and weather delayed it.
|
| Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can
remember.
|
| We went into one of the conference rooms and he asked to
see all my
| paperwork: pilot certificate, medical, application,
picture ID, and
| logbook endorsement. He started asking a few questions
and my
| answers:
|
| What is required to be current for IFR?
| Everything for VFR, plus 6 approaches, holding procedures
and
| intercepting/tracking courses
| (He was looking for more...)
| I said you have 6 months to meet this then if you don't,
you have
| another six months. After that you'll need an IPC.
| Who can give an IPC?
| A CFII, examiners, FAA...
| What instruments are required for IFR? (GRABCARD)
| How do you check the VOR?
| VOT +/- 4 deg., Air checkpoint +/- 6 deg., Ground
checkpoint +/- 4
| deg. (dual VOR, but I didn't get to that) I started to
explain where
| to find these (AF/D), but he went on to the next question:
| Using a VOT, must you be in a certain location on the
airport?
| No, as long as you can receive the frequency.
| Does it matter which way your airplane is facing?
| No (I hope nobody would get that wrong!)
| What should the VOR indicate?
| 360 deg. with a FROM when needle is centered, 180 TO.
| If the needle is centered and it reads 356 FROM, is that
legal?
| Yes
| Would you apply this error to navigation?
| No, this is a tolerance and you shouldn't adjust your
courses because
| of the error.
| He then explained if your VOR was 4 degrees off and you
applied that
| to tracking a course outbound, how you could get very far
off course
| the further you got away from the VOR. He said it may be
4 degrees
| off on one radial but not on the other. I related this to
flying
| different headings with a compass using a compass card,
and you
| shouldn't do this with the VOR errors.
| Was my aircraft certified for known icing?
| No
| How could I determine freezing levels?
| I said a freezing levels chart, winds aloft...
| He asked how from the winds aloft? (He sort of acted like
I gave a
| wrong answer at first)
| I said from the temperatures you could determine the
freezing
| altitude
| (He was still looking for something else...)
| I said a very crude way would be to use the average lapse
rate from
| the temperature at the ground...
| He confirmed it would be very crude, and said not to
overcomplicate
| this.
| I got it right with just saying call the FSS and get the
freezing
| levels at the airports on the route.
| Could I fly if the freezing level was 4,000, the cloud
bases at 3,000,
| and an MEA in the clouds, legally?
| Legally, yes
| He asked what was the major problem with ice?
| I said the accumulation of the added weight.
| I sort of hesitated on the known icing questions, and he
stated that
| there is no clear definition of known icing in the
regulations. He
| said he wanted to ask these questions as there has been
those legal
| rulings on pilots flying into known icing and whether
"conditions
| favorable to icing" was "known icing" or not.
| The general consensus was (legally) the FAA may question
if you fly
| your non-icing-certified aircraft in "icing conditions",
but it is
| legal as long as it is not "known icing" such as an actual
PIREP.
| He said he flies in an icing certified airplane with his
son, which
| is equipped with deicing equipment, and it melts it off as
fast as it
| accumulates. He said the icing area is about 10 degrees
either side
| of freezing temperatures, and a lot of people don't know
that you can
| climb above it into below freezing temperatures where it
will bounce
| off the airplane, which isn't a problem.
|
| He then asked for me to get out my enroute chart to ask a
few
| questions. What does the V mean on victor airways?
| I couldn't figure out what he wanted, I said it was just
an airway.
| After a while I finally got it, it would be J on a high
enroute chart.
| How high is this chart good for?
| 18,000 ft.
| What is the change over point (pointing to a straight
course, no COP
| marked)?
| The halfway point.
| Is it regulatory that you change it there?
| Yes
| He then explained how you could still have a centered
needle past the
| halfway point but be drifting to the side because maybe
your VOR was a
| few degrees off. Where is the COP on this course
(pointing to one
| marked with DME)?
| The mark.
| He then explained how this is because one of the VORs
doesn't have as
| strong a signal. Then he very thoroughly gave me a
scenario of flying
| out from KRBL (I think), with a MCA fix a few miles after
takeoff. He
| asked if I lost radios just before reaching it and I was
assigned
| 3,000, expect 9,000, what should I climb to?
| The highest of assigned/expected/minimum altitude, so
9,000.
| What if I was 3,000 upon reaching the MCA fix (with a MCA
of 5,000)?
| Hold at the fix while in a climb to the MCA.
| Continuing on, if I arrived at a fix from which an
approach begins (he
| pointed to an airport near the coast), what would I do if
I arrived
| early?
| Hold at the fix until EFC or ETA expires.
| If I arrived late?
| Begin approach immediately.
| If there are VOR, NDB, GPS, ILS approaches...which one?
| Any approach.
| He then asked to look at the SMF ILS 16R approach. What
are the
| minimums?
| 1800 RVR visibility, 226 decision height.
| What is MDA?
| Minimum Decent Altitude
| When you get to DH, what do you do?
| That is when you make the decision to go missed or
continue.
| What if you are on the ILS and ATC calls you and says,
"the RVR just
| went to 900, what are your intentions?" Must you go
missed
| immediately, continue the approach, or?
| I knew you couldn't descend from the DH if it's below
minimums, but I
| didn't know about before that.
| He asked me to sort of guess.
| I said because I haven't read anything you couldn't
continue to the
| DH, I said you can.
| He said that was correct, he said part 135 and others must
go missed
| immediately, but part 91 can descend to the DH. If I
descend to DH
| and it's 900 RVR, can I land?
| No, it's below minimums.
| He explained how someone had gone below the DH in this
scenario and
| went off the runway on landing because the visibility was
too poor.
| They lost their flying job and had their license
suspended. Somehow
| we got to talking about being cleared to land, as they
can't clear you
| to land with the Wx below minimums. He said the tower
responded with
| "Roger" when the pilot contacted him, never clearing him
to land.
|
| Can you go below DH?
| Yes, by 50 ft.
| He then explained how a jet is unable to go from a descent
in the
| landing configuration, start retracting the flaps, gear,
and starting
| a climb without going below the DH. What about MDA?
| You can't descend below MDA at all, and you are level so
there's no
| reason to go below it.
|
| He then said he had one more question he forgot to ask, he
went to a
| white board and drew a runway, was very clear on the
altitude I was at
| (circling altitude) and where the airplane he was drawing
was circling
| around to land on the opposite end. As he drew the line
he said to
| tell him when I could descend to land from circling
minimums. I told
| him when he just started to turn in on final. He said
this was a
| little late, but was fine. He said many people thought
they could
| descend on downwind or base, etc.
|
|
| Flying portion:
|
| He gave me a clearance while still on the ground. Cleared
to
| Stockton, SAC V585 ECA Direct, 4,500, 1200. I asked him
if he could
| tell me in advance before I request the approaches (so
I'll know what
| to ask for when they ask for what's next). He said we'll
do the SAC
| ILS with vectors, VOR own nav, then LOC own nav. He told
me ahead of
| time to be sure to make all reports (entering hold, etc.)
if ATC loses
| radar, which he'll be simulating. He played ATC for the
cross country
| portion.
|
| I setup all the radios, etc and did the instrument check,
departed MHR
| and identified the SAC VOR. As we're getting fairly close
to it, he
| says ATC has lost radar and report reaching 4,500 and the
SAC VOR. I
| report both fine, and track onto V585.
|
| He says he has holding instructions when I'm ready to
copy. He says
| hold at WAGER as published, maintain 4,500 (and says
normally you'd
| get an EFC). I was correcting to the right and the entry
was on the
| borderline of being parallel, but I didn't want to do a
parallel...I
| said I'd be doing a teardrop and he says that's what he'd
do as it's
| the least maneuvering, etc.
|
| I was finishing the first lap in the hold when he asked
how I'd
| determine the leg timing. I reached 1 minute right then
and said it's
| right on so I wouldn't need to adjust the outbound leg.
He then said
| he has an amended clearance when I'm ready to copy. I was
in the turn
| to go outbound in the hold so I told him to standby (I
wanted to get
| setup on the outbound heading). I got a clearance to
Linden VOR,
| V113, Manteca, direct. I started heading towards Linden
and
| identified it when he said we're done with this and he'll
give me
| vectors now.
|
| He gave me a vector and told me to just hold this for a
minute. He
| then pulled the power to idle and said I was in full IMC,
what would I
| do? I said I'd troubleshoot the failure, announce it on
the radio,
| squawk 7700... He said Ok, you've already done that.
(Meanwhile I've
| got it trimmed at 65 knots, best glide). I said I should
know my
| approximate location and the terrain around me for the
safest
| landing. He said he's looking for something simple... I
then said as I
| started getting lower, I'd slow down and lower the flaps
all the way
| for the slowest landing speed. He then suggested to be as
close to
| stall as reasonably possible.
|
| I held another heading and he said to slow down to 80 kts
maintaining
| altitude. Then turn to another heading. Then speed back
up, then
| descend at 80 kts 200 ft and level off at 80 kts. Then
two unusual
| attitudes then off to do the 3 approaches at SAC.
|
| I contact NorCal approach and tell him I'm 15 miles SE of
SAC VOR and
| the approaches. My examiner wanted to tell ATC it's for a
checkride
| (to do full approaches at busy SAC), but his mic was
garbled and the
| controller said I was clear but my examiner wasn't. I got
vectors for
| the ILS and it went fine, but the examiner kept placing my
enroute
| chart on the windshield to make sure I wouldn't look out.
One time
| getting close to DH the chart fell on the controls...does
this count as
| one of the distractions?
|
| I was getting setup for the VOR approach when the examiner
wanted to
| ask ATC what altitude we were reporting (I had mentioned
it was
| slightly off during preflight)... ATC couldn't understand
him good
| enough, so I said I'd ask. (Does this count also for
| distractions? :) Luckily I decided what holding entry I'd
do before
| we took off to use at the IAF if I was coming from the
west side of
| the airport, as I only had a few seconds left now to get
it figured
| out.
|
| We went around again for the LOC approach. When we got on
the ground
| back at Mather, he said I flew the airplane very smoothly
(even though
| I was nervous, it actually wasn't my best!). He said my
first two
| approaches were perfect. I think the second one I was
starting to get
| tired and got off on the LOC close to the limits right
before the
| missed approach. I think because I did very well on the
rest he was
| more lenient on the last approach. He also said my DG was
getting off
| very quickly (I was resetting it every 5 minutes or so).
So no
| partial panel, and a total of 1.6 flying time.
|

"Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message ...
| DH, you make a decision AT DH while in a descent on GS, so
| if you decide to go-around you will be below DH before the
| airplane starts back up. It isn't 50 feet, you just have
to
| decide and either continue or discontinue the approach.
| You can use the approach light rabbit to continue below
DH,
| but only to 100 feet unless you get more of the required
| visual cues.
|
| Ice is aerodynamic spoiler, not weight.
|
| VOR check, to check properly, swing the OBS and make sure
| you get the proper deflection, 10 ° should be full scale
| 80° and the TO/FROM flag should be switching, if it
doesn't
| your VOR has low sensitivity and may not show course
| deviation at 25-50 miles, the needle will just center
while
| you drift off course...
|
| Other than that, congratulations.
|
| --
| James H. Macklin
| ATP,CFI,A&P
|
| --
| The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| some support
| http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf
| See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
duties.
|
| US Court on DC gun law...
|
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf
|
|
| "kevmor" > wrote in message
|
ps.com...
||I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited 2
| months to
|| try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to
| schedule it.
|| Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with
| another examiner,
|| then going back to the first one, and weather delayed it.
||
|| Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can
| remember.
||
|| We went into one of the conference rooms and he asked to
| see all my
|| paperwork: pilot certificate, medical, application,
| picture ID, and
|| logbook endorsement. He started asking a few questions
| and my
|| answers:
||
|| What is required to be current for IFR?
|| Everything for VFR, plus 6 approaches, holding procedures
| and
|| intercepting/tracking courses
|| (He was looking for more...)
|| I said you have 6 months to meet this then if you don't,
| you have
|| another six months. After that you'll need an IPC.
|| Who can give an IPC?
|| A CFII, examiners, FAA...
|| What instruments are required for IFR? (GRABCARD)
|| How do you check the VOR?
|| VOT +/- 4 deg., Air checkpoint +/- 6 deg., Ground
| checkpoint +/- 4
|| deg. (dual VOR, but I didn't get to that) I started to
| explain where
|| to find these (AF/D), but he went on to the next
question:
|| Using a VOT, must you be in a certain location on the
| airport?
|| No, as long as you can receive the frequency.
|| Does it matter which way your airplane is facing?
|| No (I hope nobody would get that wrong!)
|| What should the VOR indicate?
|| 360 deg. with a FROM when needle is centered, 180 TO.
|| If the needle is centered and it reads 356 FROM, is that
| legal?
|| Yes
|| Would you apply this error to navigation?
|| No, this is a tolerance and you shouldn't adjust your
| courses because
|| of the error.
|| He then explained if your VOR was 4 degrees off and you
| applied that
|| to tracking a course outbound, how you could get very far
| off course
|| the further you got away from the VOR. He said it may be
| 4 degrees
|| off on one radial but not on the other. I related this
to
| flying
|| different headings with a compass using a compass card,
| and you
|| shouldn't do this with the VOR errors.
|| Was my aircraft certified for known icing?
|| No
|| How could I determine freezing levels?
|| I said a freezing levels chart, winds aloft...
|| He asked how from the winds aloft? (He sort of acted like
| I gave a
|| wrong answer at first)
|| I said from the temperatures you could determine the
| freezing
|| altitude
|| (He was still looking for something else...)
|| I said a very crude way would be to use the average lapse
| rate from
|| the temperature at the ground...
|| He confirmed it would be very crude, and said not to
| overcomplicate
|| this.
|| I got it right with just saying call the FSS and get the
| freezing
|| levels at the airports on the route.
|| Could I fly if the freezing level was 4,000, the cloud
| bases at 3,000,
|| and an MEA in the clouds, legally?
|| Legally, yes
|| He asked what was the major problem with ice?
|| I said the accumulation of the added weight.
|| I sort of hesitated on the known icing questions, and he
| stated that
|| there is no clear definition of known icing in the
| regulations. He
|| said he wanted to ask these questions as there has been
| those legal
|| rulings on pilots flying into known icing and whether
| "conditions
|| favorable to icing" was "known icing" or not.
|| The general consensus was (legally) the FAA may question
| if you fly
|| your non-icing-certified aircraft in "icing conditions",
| but it is
|| legal as long as it is not "known icing" such as an
actual
| PIREP.
|| He said he flies in an icing certified airplane with his
| son, which
|| is equipped with deicing equipment, and it melts it off
as
| fast as it
|| accumulates. He said the icing area is about 10 degrees
| either side
|| of freezing temperatures, and a lot of people don't know
| that you can
|| climb above it into below freezing temperatures where it
| will bounce
|| off the airplane, which isn't a problem.
||
|| He then asked for me to get out my enroute chart to ask a
| few
|| questions. What does the V mean on victor airways?
|| I couldn't figure out what he wanted, I said it was just
| an airway.
|| After a while I finally got it, it would be J on a high
| enroute chart.
|| How high is this chart good for?
|| 18,000 ft.
|| What is the change over point (pointing to a straight
| course, no COP
|| marked)?
|| The halfway point.
|| Is it regulatory that you change it there?
|| Yes
|| He then explained how you could still have a centered
| needle past the
|| halfway point but be drifting to the side because maybe
| your VOR was a
|| few degrees off. Where is the COP on this course
| (pointing to one
|| marked with DME)?
|| The mark.
|| He then explained how this is because one of the VORs
| doesn't have as
|| strong a signal. Then he very thoroughly gave me a
| scenario of flying
|| out from KRBL (I think), with a MCA fix a few miles after
| takeoff. He
|| asked if I lost radios just before reaching it and I was
| assigned
|| 3,000, expect 9,000, what should I climb to?
|| The highest of assigned/expected/minimum altitude, so
| 9,000.
|| What if I was 3,000 upon reaching the MCA fix (with a MCA
| of 5,000)?
|| Hold at the fix while in a climb to the MCA.
|| Continuing on, if I arrived at a fix from which an
| approach begins (he
|| pointed to an airport near the coast), what would I do if
| I arrived
|| early?
|| Hold at the fix until EFC or ETA expires.
|| If I arrived late?
|| Begin approach immediately.
|| If there are VOR, NDB, GPS, ILS approaches...which one?
|| Any approach.
|| He then asked to look at the SMF ILS 16R approach. What
| are the
|| minimums?
|| 1800 RVR visibility, 226 decision height.
|| What is MDA?
|| Minimum Decent Altitude
|| When you get to DH, what do you do?
|| That is when you make the decision to go missed or
| continue.
|| What if you are on the ILS and ATC calls you and says,
| "the RVR just
|| went to 900, what are your intentions?" Must you go
| missed
|| immediately, continue the approach, or?
|| I knew you couldn't descend from the DH if it's below
| minimums, but I
|| didn't know about before that.
|| He asked me to sort of guess.
|| I said because I haven't read anything you couldn't
| continue to the
|| DH, I said you can.
|| He said that was correct, he said part 135 and others
must
| go missed
|| immediately, but part 91 can descend to the DH. If I
| descend to DH
|| and it's 900 RVR, can I land?
|| No, it's below minimums.
|| He explained how someone had gone below the DH in this
| scenario and
|| went off the runway on landing because the visibility was
| too poor.
|| They lost their flying job and had their license
| suspended. Somehow
|| we got to talking about being cleared to land, as they
| can't clear you
|| to land with the Wx below minimums. He said the tower
| responded with
|| "Roger" when the pilot contacted him, never clearing him
| to land.
||
|| Can you go below DH?
|| Yes, by 50 ft.
|| He then explained how a jet is unable to go from a
descent
| in the
|| landing configuration, start retracting the flaps, gear,
| and starting
|| a climb without going below the DH. What about MDA?
|| You can't descend below MDA at all, and you are level so
| there's no
|| reason to go below it.
||
|| He then said he had one more question he forgot to ask,
he
| went to a
|| white board and drew a runway, was very clear on the
| altitude I was at
|| (circling altitude) and where the airplane he was drawing
| was circling
|| around to land on the opposite end. As he drew the line
| he said to
|| tell him when I could descend to land from circling
| minimums. I told
|| him when he just started to turn in on final. He said
| this was a
|| little late, but was fine. He said many people thought
| they could
|| descend on downwind or base, etc.
||
||
|| Flying portion:
||
|| He gave me a clearance while still on the ground.
Cleared
| to
|| Stockton, SAC V585 ECA Direct, 4,500, 1200. I asked him
| if he could
|| tell me in advance before I request the approaches (so
| I'll know what
|| to ask for when they ask for what's next). He said we'll
| do the SAC
|| ILS with vectors, VOR own nav, then LOC own nav. He told
| me ahead of
|| time to be sure to make all reports (entering hold, etc.)
| if ATC loses
|| radar, which he'll be simulating. He played ATC for the
| cross country
|| portion.
||
|| I setup all the radios, etc and did the instrument check,
| departed MHR
|| and identified the SAC VOR. As we're getting fairly
close
| to it, he
|| says ATC has lost radar and report reaching 4,500 and the
| SAC VOR. I
|| report both fine, and track onto V585.
||
|| He says he has holding instructions when I'm ready to
| copy. He says
|| hold at WAGER as published, maintain 4,500 (and says
| normally you'd
|| get an EFC). I was correcting to the right and the entry
| was on the
|| borderline of being parallel, but I didn't want to do a
| parallel...I
|| said I'd be doing a teardrop and he says that's what he'd
| do as it's
|| the least maneuvering, etc.
||
|| I was finishing the first lap in the hold when he asked
| how I'd
|| determine the leg timing. I reached 1 minute right then
| and said it's
|| right on so I wouldn't need to adjust the outbound leg.
| He then said
|| he has an amended clearance when I'm ready to copy. I
was
| in the turn
|| to go outbound in the hold so I told him to standby (I
| wanted to get
|| setup on the outbound heading). I got a clearance to
| Linden VOR,
|| V113, Manteca, direct. I started heading towards Linden
| and
|| identified it when he said we're done with this and he'll
| give me
|| vectors now.
||
|| He gave me a vector and told me to just hold this for a
| minute. He
|| then pulled the power to idle and said I was in full IMC,
| what would I
|| do? I said I'd troubleshoot the failure, announce it on
| the radio,
|| squawk 7700... He said Ok, you've already done that.
| (Meanwhile I've
|| got it trimmed at 65 knots, best glide). I said I
should
| know my
|| approximate location and the terrain around me for the
| safest
|| landing. He said he's looking for something simple... I
| then said as I
|| started getting lower, I'd slow down and lower the flaps
| all the way
|| for the slowest landing speed. He then suggested to be
as
| close to
|| stall as reasonably possible.
||
|| I held another heading and he said to slow down to 80 kts
| maintaining
|| altitude. Then turn to another heading. Then speed back
| up, then
|| descend at 80 kts 200 ft and level off at 80 kts. Then
| two unusual
|| attitudes then off to do the 3 approaches at SAC.
||
|| I contact NorCal approach and tell him I'm 15 miles SE of
| SAC VOR and
|| the approaches. My examiner wanted to tell ATC it's for
a
| checkride
|| (to do full approaches at busy SAC), but his mic was
| garbled and the
|| controller said I was clear but my examiner wasn't. I
got
| vectors for
|| the ILS and it went fine, but the examiner kept placing
my
| enroute
|| chart on the windshield to make sure I wouldn't look out.
| One time
|| getting close to DH the chart fell on the controls...does
| this count as
|| one of the distractions?
||
|| I was getting setup for the VOR approach when the
examiner
| wanted to
|| ask ATC what altitude we were reporting (I had mentioned
| it was
|| slightly off during preflight)... ATC couldn't understand
| him good
|| enough, so I said I'd ask. (Does this count also for
|| distractions? :) Luckily I decided what holding entry
I'd
| do before
|| we took off to use at the IAF if I was coming from the
| west side of
|| the airport, as I only had a few seconds left now to get
| it figured
|| out.
||
|| We went around again for the LOC approach. When we got
on
| the ground
|| back at Mather, he said I flew the airplane very smoothly
| (even though
|| I was nervous, it actually wasn't my best!). He said my
| first two
|| approaches were perfect. I think the second one I was
| starting to get
|| tired and got off on the LOC close to the limits right
| before the
|| missed approach. I think because I did very well on the
| rest he was
|| more lenient on the last approach. He also said my DG
was
| getting off
|| very quickly (I was resetting it every 5 minutes or so).
| So no
|| partial panel, and a total of 1.6 flying time.
||
|
|

Oh ok, 50 ft. isn't a set allowable limit? I don't remember reading
50, but my CFI told me that and the examiner didn't correct me on it.
Thanks for your input!

-Kevin

On Mar 20, 4:57 pm, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:
> DH, you make a decision AT DH while in a descent on GS, so
> if you decide to go-around you will be below DH before the
> airplane starts back up. It isn't 50 feet, you just have to
> decide and either continue or discontinue the approach.
> You can use the approach light rabbit to continue below DH,
> but only to 100 feet unless you get more of the required
> visual cues.
>
> Ice is aerodynamic spoiler, not weight.
>
> VOR check, to check properly, swing the OBS and make sure
> you get the proper deflection, 10 ° should be full scale
> 80° and the TO/FROM flag should be switching, if it doesn't
> your VOR has low sensitivity and may not should course
> deviation at 25-50 miles, the needle will just center while
> you drift off course...
>
> Other than that, congratulations.
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> some supporthttp://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf
> Seehttp://www.fija.org/more about your rights and duties.
>
> US Court on DC gun law...http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf
>
> "kevmor" > wrote in message
>
> ps.com...
> |I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited 2
> months to
> | try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to
> schedule it.
> | Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with
> another examiner,
> | then going back to the first one, and weather delayed it.
> |
> | Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can
> remember.
> |
> | We went into one of the conference rooms and he asked to
> see all my
> | paperwork: pilot certificate, medical, application,
> picture ID, and
> | logbook endorsement. He started asking a few questions
> and my
> | answers:
> |
> | What is required to be current for IFR?
> | Everything for VFR, plus 6 approaches, holding procedures
> and
> | intercepting/tracking courses
> | (He was looking for more...)
> | I said you have 6 months to meet this then if you don't,
> you have
> | another six months. After that you'll need an IPC.
> | Who can give an IPC?
> | A CFII, examiners, FAA...
> | What instruments are required for IFR? (GRABCARD)
> | How do you check the VOR?
> | VOT +/- 4 deg., Air checkpoint +/- 6 deg., Ground
> checkpoint +/- 4
> | deg. (dual VOR, but I didn't get to that) I started to
> explain where
> | to find these (AF/D), but he went on to the next question:
> | Using a VOT, must you be in a certain location on the
> airport?
> | No, as long as you can receive the frequency.
> | Does it matter which way your airplane is facing?
> | No (I hope nobody would get that wrong!)
> | What should the VOR indicate?
> | 360 deg. with a FROM when needle is centered, 180 TO.
> | If the needle is centered and it reads 356 FROM, is that
> legal?
> | Yes
> | Would you apply this error to navigation?
> | No, this is a tolerance and you shouldn't adjust your
> courses because
> | of the error.
> | He then explained if your VOR was 4 degrees off and you
> applied that
> | to tracking a course outbound, how you could get very far
> off course
> | the further you got away from the VOR. He said it may be
> 4 degrees
> | off on one radial but not on the other. I related this to
> flying
> | different headings with a compass using a compass card,
> and you
> | shouldn't do this with the VOR errors.
> | Was my aircraft certified for known icing?
> | No
> | How could I determine freezing levels?
> | I said a freezing levels chart, winds aloft...
> | He asked how from the winds aloft? (He sort of acted like
> I gave a
> | wrong answer at first)
> | I said from the temperatures you could determine the
> freezing
> | altitude
> | (He was still looking for something else...)
> | I said a very crude way would be to use the average lapse
> rate from
> | the temperature at the ground...
> | He confirmed it would be very crude, and said not to
> overcomplicate
> | this.
> | I got it right with just saying call the FSS and get the
> freezing
> | levels at the airports on the route.
> | Could I fly if the freezing level was 4,000, the cloud
> bases at 3,000,
> | and an MEA in the clouds, legally?
> | Legally, yes
> | He asked what was the major problem with ice?
> | I said the accumulation of the added weight.
> | I sort of hesitated on the known icing questions, and he
> stated that
> | there is no clear definition of known icing in the
> regulations. He
> | said he wanted to ask these questions as there has been
> those legal
> | rulings on pilots flying into known icing and whether
> "conditions
> | favorable to icing" was "known icing" or not.
> | The general consensus was (legally) the FAA may question
> if you fly
> | your non-icing-certified aircraft in "icing conditions",
> but it is
> | legal as long as it is not "known icing" such as an actual
> PIREP.
> | He said he flies in an icing certified airplane with his
> son, which
> | is equipped with deicing equipment, and it melts it off as
> fast as it
> | accumulates. He said the icing area is about 10 degrees
> either side
> | of freezing temperatures, and a lot of people don't know
> that you can
> | climb above it into below freezing temperatures where it
> will bounce
> | off the airplane, which isn't a problem.
> |
> | He then asked for me to get out my enroute chart to ask a
> few
> | questions. What does the V mean on victor airways?
> | I couldn't figure out what he wanted, I said it was just
> an airway.
> | After a while I finally got it, it would be J on a high
> enroute chart.
> | How high is this chart good for?
> | 18,000 ft.
> | What is the change over point (pointing to a straight
> course, no COP
> | marked)?
> | The halfway point.
> | Is it regulatory that you change it there?
> | Yes
> | He then explained how you could still have a centered
> needle past the
> | halfway point but be drifting to the side because maybe
> your VOR was a
> | few degrees off. Where is the COP on this course
> (pointing to one
> | marked with DME)?
> | The mark.
> | He then explained how this is because one of the VORs
> doesn't have as
> | strong a signal. Then he very thoroughly gave me a
> scenario of flying
> | out from KRBL (I think), with a MCA fix a few miles after
> takeoff. He
> | asked if I lost radios just before reaching it and I was
> assigned
> | 3,000, expect 9,000, what should I climb to?
> | The highest of assigned/expected/minimum altitude, so
> 9,000.
> | What if I was 3,000 upon reaching the MCA fix (with a MCA
> of 5,000)?
> | Hold at the fix while in a climb to the MCA.
> | Continuing on, if I arrived at a fix from which an
> approach begins (he
> | pointed to an airport near the coast), what would I do if
> I arrived
> | early?
> | Hold at the fix until EFC or ETA expires.
> | If I arrived late?
> | Begin approach immediately.
> | If there are VOR, NDB, GPS, ILS approaches...which one?
> | Any approach.
> | He then asked to look at the SMF ILS 16R approach. What
> are the
> | minimums?
> | 1800 RVR visibility, 226 decision height.
> | What is MDA?
> | Minimum Decent Altitude
> | When you get to DH, what do you do?
> | That is when you make the decision to go missed or
> continue.
> | What if you are on the ILS and ATC calls you and says,
> "the RVR just
> | went to 900, what are your intentions?" Must you go
> missed
> | immediately, continue the approach, or?
> | I knew you couldn't descend from the DH if it's below
> minimums, but I
> | didn't know about before that.
> | He asked me to sort of guess.
> | I said because I haven't read anything you couldn't
> continue to the
> | DH, I said you can.
> | He said that was correct, he said part 135 and others must
> go missed
> | immediately, but part 91 can descend to the DH. If I
> descend to DH
> | and it's 900 RVR, can I land?
> | No, it's below minimums.
> | He explained how someone had gone below the DH in this
> scenario and
> | went off the runway on landing because the visibility was
> too poor.
> | They lost their flying job and had their license
> suspended. Somehow
> | we got to talking about being cleared to land, as they
> can't clear you
> | to land with the Wx below minimums. He said the tower
> responded with
> | "Roger" when the pilot contacted him, never clearing him
> to land.
> |
> | Can you go below DH?
> | Yes, by 50 ft.
> | He then explained how a jet is unable to go from a descent
> in the
> | landing configuration, start retracting the flaps, gear,
> and starting
> | a climb without going below the DH. What about MDA?
> | You can't descend below MDA at all, and you are level so
> there's no
> | reason to go below it.
> |
> | He then said he had one more question he forgot to ask, he
> went to a
> | white board and drew a runway, was very clear on the
> altitude I was at
> | (circling altitude) and where the airplane he was drawing
> was circling
> | around to land on the opposite end. As he drew the line
> he said to
> | tell him when I could descend to land from circling
> minimums. I told
> | him when he just started to turn in on final. He said
> this was a
> | little late, but was fine. He said many people thought
> they could
> | descend on downwind or base, etc.
> |
> |
> | Flying portion:
> |
> | He gave me a clearance while still on the ground. Cleared
> to
> | Stockton, SAC V585 ECA Direct, 4,500, 1200. I asked him
> if he could
> | tell me in advance before I request the approaches (so
> I'll know what
> | to ask for when they ask for what's next). He said we'll
> do the SAC
> | ILS with vectors, VOR own nav, then LOC own nav. He told
> me ahead of
> | time to be sure to make all reports (entering hold, etc.)
> if ATC loses
> | radar, which he'll be simulating. He played ATC for the
> cross country
> | portion.
> |
> | I setup all the radios, etc and did the instrument check,
> departed MHR
> | and identified the SAC VOR. As we're getting fairly close
> to it, he
> | says ATC has lost radar and report reaching 4,500 and the
> SAC VOR. I
> | report both fine, and track onto V585.
> |
> | He says he has holding instructions when I'm ready to
> copy. He says
> | hold at WAGER as published, maintain 4,500 (and says
> normally you'd
> | get an EFC). I was correcting to the right and the entry
> was on the
> | borderline of being parallel, but I didn't want to do a
> parallel...I
> | said I'd be ...
>
> read more »

No problem, nobody has every done a "perfect" check-ride and
that includes me.

Fly as often as you can.


"kevmor" > wrote in message
oups.com...
Oh ok, 50 ft. isn't a set allowable limit? I don't remember
reading
50, but my CFI told me that and the examiner didn't correct
me on it.
Thanks for your input!

-Kevin

On Mar 20, 4:57 pm, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:
> DH, you make a decision AT DH while in a descent on GS, so
> if you decide to go-around you will be below DH before the
> airplane starts back up. It isn't 50 feet, you just have
> to
> decide and either continue or discontinue the approach.
> You can use the approach light rabbit to continue below
> DH,
> but only to 100 feet unless you get more of the required
> visual cues.
>
> Ice is aerodynamic spoiler, not weight.
>
> VOR check, to check properly, swing the OBS and make sure
> you get the proper deflection, 10 ° should be full scale
> 80° and the TO/FROM flag should be switching, if it
> doesn't
> your VOR has low sensitivity and may not should course
> deviation at 25-50 miles, the needle will just center
> while
> you drift off course...
>
> Other than that, congratulations.
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> some supporthttp://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf
> Seehttp://www.fija.org/more about your rights and duties.
>
> US Court on DC gun
> law...http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf
>
> "kevmor" > wrote in message
>
> ps.com...
> |I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited
> 2
> months to
> | try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to
> schedule it.
> | Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with
> another examiner,
> | then going back to the first one, and weather delayed
> it.
> |
> | Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can
> remember.
> |
> | We went into one of the conference rooms and he asked to
> see all my
> | paperwork: pilot certificate, medical, application,
> picture ID, and
> | logbook endorsement. He started asking a few questions
> and my
> | answers:
> |
> | What is required to be current for IFR?
> | Everything for VFR, plus 6 approaches, holding
> procedures
> and
> | intercepting/tracking courses
> | (He was looking for more...)
> | I said you have 6 months to meet this then if you don't,
> you have
> | another six months. After that you'll need an IPC.
> | Who can give an IPC?
> | A CFII, examiners, FAA...
> | What instruments are required for IFR? (GRABCARD)
> | How do you check the VOR?
> | VOT +/- 4 deg., Air checkpoint +/- 6 deg., Ground
> checkpoint +/- 4
> | deg. (dual VOR, but I didn't get to that) I started to
> explain where
> | to find these (AF/D), but he went on to the next
> question:
> | Using a VOT, must you be in a certain location on the
> airport?
> | No, as long as you can receive the frequency.
> | Does it matter which way your airplane is facing?
> | No (I hope nobody would get that wrong!)
> | What should the VOR indicate?
> | 360 deg. with a FROM when needle is centered, 180 TO.
> | If the needle is centered and it reads 356 FROM, is that
> legal?
> | Yes
> | Would you apply this error to navigation?
> | No, this is a tolerance and you shouldn't adjust your
> courses because
> | of the error.
> | He then explained if your VOR was 4 degrees off and you
> applied that
> | to tracking a course outbound, how you could get very
> far
> off course
> | the further you got away from the VOR. He said it may
> be
> 4 degrees
> | off on one radial but not on the other. I related this
> to
> flying
> | different headings with a compass using a compass card,
> and you
> | shouldn't do this with the VOR errors.
> | Was my aircraft certified for known icing?
> | No
> | How could I determine freezing levels?
> | I said a freezing levels chart, winds aloft...
> | He asked how from the winds aloft? (He sort of acted
> like
> I gave a
> | wrong answer at first)
> | I said from the temperatures you could determine the
> freezing
> | altitude
> | (He was still looking for something else...)
> | I said a very crude way would be to use the average
> lapse
> rate from
> | the temperature at the ground...
> | He confirmed it would be very crude, and said not to
> overcomplicate
> | this.
> | I got it right with just saying call the FSS and get the
> freezing
> | levels at the airports on the route.
> | Could I fly if the freezing level was 4,000, the cloud
> bases at 3,000,
> | and an MEA in the clouds, legally?
> | Legally, yes
> | He asked what was the major problem with ice?
> | I said the accumulation of the added weight.
> | I sort of hesitated on the known icing questions, and he
> stated that
> | there is no clear definition of known icing in the
> regulations. He
> | said he wanted to ask these questions as there has been
> those legal
> | rulings on pilots flying into known icing and whether
> "conditions
> | favorable to icing" was "known icing" or not.
> | The general consensus was (legally) the FAA may question
> if you fly
> | your non-icing-certified aircraft in "icing conditions",
> but it is
> | legal as long as it is not "known icing" such as an
> actual
> PIREP.
> | He said he flies in an icing certified airplane with his
> son, which
> | is equipped with deicing equipment, and it melts it off
> as
> fast as it
> | accumulates. He said the icing area is about 10 degrees
> either side
> | of freezing temperatures, and a lot of people don't know
> that you can
> | climb above it into below freezing temperatures where it
> will bounce
> | off the airplane, which isn't a problem.
> |
> | He then asked for me to get out my enroute chart to ask
> a
> few
> | questions. What does the V mean on victor airways?
> | I couldn't figure out what he wanted, I said it was just
> an airway.
> | After a while I finally got it, it would be J on a high
> enroute chart.
> | How high is this chart good for?
> | 18,000 ft.
> | What is the change over point (pointing to a straight
> course, no COP
> | marked)?
> | The halfway point.
> | Is it regulatory that you change it there?
> | Yes
> | He then explained how you could still have a centered
> needle past the
> | halfway point but be drifting to the side because maybe
> your VOR was a
> | few degrees off. Where is the COP on this course
> (pointing to one
> | marked with DME)?
> | The mark.
> | He then explained how this is because one of the VORs
> doesn't have as
> | strong a signal. Then he very thoroughly gave me a
> scenario of flying
> | out from KRBL (I think), with a MCA fix a few miles
> after
> takeoff. He
> | asked if I lost radios just before reaching it and I was
> assigned
> | 3,000, expect 9,000, what should I climb to?
> | The highest of assigned/expected/minimum altitude, so
> 9,000.
> | What if I was 3,000 upon reaching the MCA fix (with a
> MCA
> of 5,000)?
> | Hold at the fix while in a climb to the MCA.
> | Continuing on, if I arrived at a fix from which an
> approach begins (he
> | pointed to an airport near the coast), what would I do
> if
> I arrived
> | early?
> | Hold at the fix until EFC or ETA expires.
> | If I arrived late?
> | Begin approach immediately.
> | If there are VOR, NDB, GPS, ILS approaches...which one?
> | Any approach.
> | He then asked to look at the SMF ILS 16R approach. What
> are the
> | minimums?
> | 1800 RVR visibility, 226 decision height.
> | What is MDA?
> | Minimum Decent Altitude
> | When you get to DH, what do you do?
> | That is when you make the decision to go missed or
> continue.
> | What if you are on the ILS and ATC calls you and says,
> "the RVR just
> | went to 900, what are your intentions?" Must you go
> missed
> | immediately, continue the approach, or?
> | I knew you couldn't descend from the DH if it's below
> minimums, but I
> | didn't know about before that.
> | He asked me to sort of guess.
> | I said because I haven't read anything you couldn't
> continue to the
> | DH, I said you can.
> | He said that was correct, he said part 135 and others
> must
> go missed
> | immediately, but part 91 can descend to the DH. If I
> descend to DH
> | and it's 900 RVR, can I land?
> | No, it's below minimums.
> | He explained how someone had gone below the DH in this
> scenario and
> | went off the runway on landing because the visibility
> was
> too poor.
> | They lost their flying job and had their license
> suspended. Somehow
> | we got to talking about being cleared to land, as they
> can't clear you
> | to land with the Wx below minimums. He said the tower
> responded with
> | "Roger" when the pilot contacted him, never clearing him
> to land.
> |
> | Can you go below DH?
> | Yes, by 50 ft.
> | He then explained how a jet is unable to go from a
> descent
> in the
> | landing configuration, start retracting the flaps, gear,
> and starting
> | a climb without going below the DH. What about MDA?
> | You can't descend below MDA at all, and you are level so
> there's no
> | reason to go below it.
> |
> | He then said he had one more question he forgot to ask,
> he
> went to a
> | white board and drew a runway, was very clear on the
> altitude I was at
> | (circling altitude) and where the airplane he was
> drawing
> was circling
> | around to land on the opposite end. As he drew the line
> he said to
> | tell him when I could descend to land from circling
> minimums. I told
> | him when he just started to turn in on final. He said
> this was a
> | little late, but was fine. He said many people thought
> they could
> | descend on downwind or base, etc.
> |
> |
> | Flying portion:
> |
> | He gave me a clearance while still on the ground.
> Cleared
> to
> | Stockton, SAC V585 ECA Direct, 4,500, 1200. I asked him
> if he could
> | tell me in advance before I request the approaches (so
> I'll know what
> | to ask for when they ask for what's next). He said
> we'll
> do the SAC
> | ILS with vectors, VOR own nav, then LOC own nav. He
> told
> me ahead of
> | time to be sure to make all reports (entering hold,
> etc.)
> if ATC loses
> | radar, which he'll be simulating. He played ATC for the
> cross country
> | portion.
> |
> | I setup all the radios, etc and did the instrument
> check,
> departed MHR
> | and identified the SAC VOR. As we're getting fairly
> close
> to it, he
> | says ATC has lost radar and report reaching 4,500 and
> the
> SAC VOR. I
> | report both fine, and track onto V585.
> |
> | He says he has holding instructions when I'm ready to
> copy. He says
> | hold at WAGER as published, maintain 4,500 (and says
> normally you'd
> | get an EFC). I was correcting to the right and the
> entry
> was on the
> | borderline of being parallel, but I didn't want to do a
> parallel...I
> | said I'd be ...
>
> read more »

Nice going Kevin...sounds like you had a good workout on the ride. Now stay
proficient!

Greg
Norwalk, CT

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
...
> No problem, nobody has every done a "perfect" check-ride and
> that includes me.
>
> Fly as often as you can.
>
>
> "kevmor" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> Oh ok, 50 ft. isn't a set allowable limit? I don't remember
> reading
> 50, but my CFI told me that and the examiner didn't correct
> me on it.
> Thanks for your input!
>
> -Kevin
>
> On Mar 20, 4:57 pm, "Jim Macklin"
> > wrote:
>> DH, you make a decision AT DH while in a descent on GS, so
>> if you decide to go-around you will be below DH before the
>> airplane starts back up. It isn't 50 feet, you just have
>> to
>> decide and either continue or discontinue the approach.
>> You can use the approach light rabbit to continue below
>> DH,
>> but only to 100 feet unless you get more of the required
>> visual cues.
>>
>> Ice is aerodynamic spoiler, not weight.
>>
>> VOR check, to check properly, swing the OBS and make sure
>> you get the proper deflection, 10 ° should be full scale
>> 80° and the TO/FROM flag should be switching, if it
>> doesn't
>> your VOR has low sensitivity and may not should course
>> deviation at 25-50 miles, the needle will just center
>> while
>> you drift off course...
>>
>> Other than that, congratulations.
>>
>> --
>> James H. Macklin
>> ATP,CFI,A&P
>>
>> --
>> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
>> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
>> some supporthttp://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf
>> Seehttp://www.fija.org/more about your rights and duties.
>>
>> US Court on DC gun
>> law...http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf
>>
>> "kevmor" > wrote in message
>>
>> ps.com...
>> |I passed my instrument checkride last Tuesday. I waited
>> 2
>> months to
>> | try and do the checkride from when my CFII told me to
>> schedule it.
>> | Problems with my examiner's medical, scheduling with
>> another examiner,
>> | then going back to the first one, and weather delayed
>> it.
>> |
>> | Here is how my IFR checkride went from what I can
>> remember.
>> |
>> | We went into one of the conference rooms and he asked to
>> see all my
>> | paperwork: pilot certificate, medical, application,
>> picture ID, and
>> | logbook endorsement. He started asking a few questions
>> and my
>> | answers:
>> |
>> | What is required to be current for IFR?
>> | Everything for VFR, plus 6 approaches, holding
>> procedures
>> and
>> | intercepting/tracking courses
>> | (He was looking for more...)
>> | I said you have 6 months to meet this then if you don't,
>> you have
>> | another six months. After that you'll need an IPC.
>> | Who can give an IPC?
>> | A CFII, examiners, FAA...
>> | What instruments are required for IFR? (GRABCARD)
>> | How do you check the VOR?
>> | VOT +/- 4 deg., Air checkpoint +/- 6 deg., Ground
>> checkpoint +/- 4
>> | deg. (dual VOR, but I didn't get to that) I started to
>> explain where
>> | to find these (AF/D), but he went on to the next
>> question:
>> | Using a VOT, must you be in a certain location on the
>> airport?
>> | No, as long as you can receive the frequency.
>> | Does it matter which way your airplane is facing?
>> | No (I hope nobody would get that wrong!)
>> | What should the VOR indicate?
>> | 360 deg. with a FROM when needle is centered, 180 TO.
>> | If the needle is centered and it reads 356 FROM, is that
>> legal?
>> | Yes
>> | Would you apply this error to navigation?
>> | No, this is a tolerance and you shouldn't adjust your
>> courses because
>> | of the error.
>> | He then explained if your VOR was 4 degrees off and you
>> applied that
>> | to tracking a course outbound, how you could get very
>> far
>> off course
>> | the further you got away from the VOR. He said it may
>> be
>> 4 degrees
>> | off on one radial but not on the other. I related this
>> to
>> flying
>> | different headings with a compass using a compass card,
>> and you
>> | shouldn't do this with the VOR errors.
>> | Was my aircraft certified for known icing?
>> | No
>> | How could I determine freezing levels?
>> | I said a freezing levels chart, winds aloft...
>> | He asked how from the winds aloft? (He sort of acted
>> like
>> I gave a
>> | wrong answer at first)
>> | I said from the temperatures you could determine the
>> freezing
>> | altitude
>> | (He was still looking for something else...)
>> | I said a very crude way would be to use the average
>> lapse
>> rate from
>> | the temperature at the ground...
>> | He confirmed it would be very crude, and said not to
>> overcomplicate
>> | this.
>> | I got it right with just saying call the FSS and get the
>> freezing
>> | levels at the airports on the route.
>> | Could I fly if the freezing level was 4,000, the cloud
>> bases at 3,000,
>> | and an MEA in the clouds, legally?
>> | Legally, yes
>> | He asked what was the major problem with ice?
>> | I said the accumulation of the added weight.
>> | I sort of hesitated on the known icing questions, and he
>> stated that
>> | there is no clear definition of known icing in the
>> regulations. He
>> | said he wanted to ask these questions as there has been
>> those legal
>> | rulings on pilots flying into known icing and whether
>> "conditions
>> | favorable to icing" was "known icing" or not.
>> | The general consensus was (legally) the FAA may question
>> if you fly
>> | your non-icing-certified aircraft in "icing conditions",
>> but it is
>> | legal as long as it is not "known icing" such as an
>> actual
>> PIREP.
>> | He said he flies in an icing certified airplane with his
>> son, which
>> | is equipped with deicing equipment, and it melts it off
>> as
>> fast as it
>> | accumulates. He said the icing area is about 10 degrees
>> either side
>> | of freezing temperatures, and a lot of people don't know
>> that you can
>> | climb above it into below freezing temperatures where it
>> will bounce
>> | off the airplane, which isn't a problem.
>> |
>> | He then asked for me to get out my enroute chart to ask
>> a
>> few
>> | questions. What does the V mean on victor airways?
>> | I couldn't figure out what he wanted, I said it was just
>> an airway.
>> | After a while I finally got it, it would be J on a high
>> enroute chart.
>> | How high is this chart good for?
>> | 18,000 ft.
>> | What is the change over point (pointing to a straight
>> course, no COP
>> | marked)?
>> | The halfway point.
>> | Is it regulatory that you change it there?
>> | Yes
>> | He then explained how you could still have a centered
>> needle past the
>> | halfway point but be drifting to the side because maybe
>> your VOR was a
>> | few degrees off. Where is the COP on this course
>> (pointing to one
>> | marked with DME)?
>> | The mark.
>> | He then explained how this is because one of the VORs
>> doesn't have as
>> | strong a signal. Then he very thoroughly gave me a
>> scenario of flying
>> | out from KRBL (I think), with a MCA fix a few miles
>> after
>> takeoff. He
>> | asked if I lost radios just before reaching it and I was
>> assigned
>> | 3,000, expect 9,000, what should I climb to?
>> | The highest of assigned/expected/minimum altitude, so
>> 9,000.
>> | What if I was 3,000 upon reaching the MCA fix (with a
>> MCA
>> of 5,000)?
>> | Hold at the fix while in a climb to the MCA.
>> | Continuing on, if I arrived at a fix from which an
>> approach begins (he
>> | pointed to an airport near the coast), what would I do
>> if
>> I arrived
>> | early?
>> | Hold at the fix until EFC or ETA expires.
>> | If I arrived late?
>> | Begin approach immediately.
>> | If there are VOR, NDB, GPS, ILS approaches...which one?
>> | Any approach.
>> | He then asked to look at the SMF ILS 16R approach. What
>> are the
>> | minimums?
>> | 1800 RVR visibility, 226 decision height.
>> | What is MDA?
>> | Minimum Decent Altitude
>> | When you get to DH, what do you do?
>> | That is when you make the decision to go missed or
>> continue.
>> | What if you are on the ILS and ATC calls you and says,
>> "the RVR just
>> | went to 900, what are your intentions?" Must you go
>> missed
>> | immediately, continue the approach, or?
>> | I knew you couldn't descend from the DH if it's below
>> minimums, but I
>> | didn't know about before that.
>> | He asked me to sort of guess.
>> | I said because I haven't read anything you couldn't
>> continue to the
>> | DH, I said you can.
>> | He said that was correct, he said part 135 and others
>> must
>> go missed
>> | immediately, but part 91 can descend to the DH. If I
>> descend to DH
>> | and it's 900 RVR, can I land?
>> | No, it's below minimums.
>> | He explained how someone had gone below the DH in this
>> scenario and
>> | went off the runway on landing because the visibility
>> was
>> too poor.
>> | They lost their flying job and had their license
>> suspended. Somehow
>> | we got to talking about being cleared to land, as they
>> can't clear you
>> | to land with the Wx below minimums. He said the tower
>> responded with
>> | "Roger" when the pilot contacted him, never clearing him
>> to land.
>> |
>> | Can you go below DH?
>> | Yes, by 50 ft.
>> | He then explained how a jet is unable to go from a
>> descent
>> in the
>> | landing configuration, start retracting the flaps, gear,
>> and starting
>> | a climb without going below the DH. What about MDA?
>> | You can't descend below MDA at all, and you are level so
>> there's no
>> | reason to go below it.
>> |
>> | He then said he had one more question he forgot to ask,
>> he
>> went to a
>> | white board and drew a runway, was very clear on the
>> altitude I was at
>> | (circling altitude) and where the airplane he was
>> drawing
>> was circling
>> | around to land on the opposite end. As he drew the line
>> he said to
>> | tell him when I could descend to land from circling
>> minimums. I told
>> | him when he just started to turn in on final. He said
>> this was a
>> | little late, but was fine. He said many people thought
>> they could
>> | descend on downwind or base, etc.
>> |
>> |
>> | Flying portion:
>> |
>> | He gave me a clearance while still on the ground.
>> Cleared
>> to
>> | Stockton, SAC V585 ECA Direct, 4,500, 1200. I asked him
>> if he could
>> | tell me in advance before I request the approaches (so
>> I'll know what
>> | to ask for when they ask for what's next). He said
>> we'll
>> do the SAC
>> | ILS with vectors, VOR own nav, then LOC own nav. He
>> told
>> me ahead of
>> | time to be sure to make all reports (entering hold,
>> etc.)
>> if ATC loses
>> | radar, which he'll be simulating. He played ATC for the
>> cross country
>> | portion.
>> |
>> | I setup all the radios, etc and did the instrument
>> check,
>> departed MHR
>> | and identified the SAC VOR. As we're getting fairly
>> close
>> to it, he
>> | says ATC has lost radar and report reaching 4,500 and
>> the
>> SAC VOR. I
>> | report both fine, and track onto V585.
>> |
>> | He says he has holding instructions when I'm ready to
>> copy. He says
>> | hold at WAGER as published, maintain 4,500 (and says
>> normally you'd
>> | get an EFC). I was correcting to the right and the
>> entry
>> was on the
>> | borderline of being parallel, but I didn't want to do a
>> parallel...I
>> | said I'd be ...
>>
>> read more »
>
>
>

On Mar 20, 3:57 pm, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:
> DH, you make a decision AT DH while in a descent on GS, so
> if you decide to go-around you will be below DH before the
> airplane starts back up. It isn't 50 feet, you just have to
> decide and either continue or discontinue the approach.
> You can use the approach light rabbit to continue below DH,
> but only to 100 feet unless you get more of the required
> visual cues.

Nitpicking here, 91.175(c)(3) does not mention the "rabbit" aka RAIL
or Sequenced Flashers as an acceptable visual reference. You can
descend to 100' using the *approach lights* as a reference. Below 100'
you need either the red side or terminating bars of the approach
lights (if the approach lights have them!) or one of the other
acceptable references, to continue your descent.

91.175(c) was changed to make "the runway environment" explicit.
RAILs or SFs are not on the list.
>
> Ice is aerodynamic spoiler, not weight.
>
> VOR check, to check properly, swing the OBS and make sure
> you get the proper deflection, 10 ° should be full scale
> 80° and the TO/FROM flag should be switching, if it doesn't
> your VOR has low sensitivity and may not should course
> deviation at 25-50 miles, the needle will just center while
> you drift off course...
>
> Other than that, congratulations.
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --

> Nitpicking here, 91.175(c)(3) does not mention the "rabbit" aka RAIL
> or Sequenced Flashers as an acceptable visual reference. You can
> descend to 100' using the *approach lights* as a reference...
> 91.175(c) was changed to make "the runway environment" explicit.
> RAILs or SFs are not on the list.

I disagree, 91.175 (c)(3)(i) says "the approach light system" which certainly
includes the sequenced flashers - see the AIM 2-1-1 which states "Some systems
include sequenced flashing lights".

One important point that people often miss is that in addition to seeing the
lights, the pilot must have the required flight visibility in order to
continue the descent below DH. Since 100 feet above TDZE on glideslope is
only about 1000 feet from the threshold, if you can't see the runway well
before then, you probably don't have landing minimums, and are not authorized
to go below DH.

On Mar 21, 10:57 am, "Barry" > wrote:
> > Nitpicking here, 91.175(c)(3) does not mention the "rabbit" aka RAIL
> > or Sequenced Flashers as an acceptable visual reference. You can
> > descend to 100' using the *approach lights* as a reference...
> > 91.175(c) was changed to make "the runway environment" explicit.
> > RAILs or SFs are not on the list.
>
> I disagree, 91.175 (c)(3)(i) says "the approach light system" which certainly
> includes the sequenced flashers - see the AIM 2-1-1 which states "Some systems
> include sequenced flashing lights".

So you don't have the "system" in sight if you only have the RAIL/
SF, but not the approach lights themselves, and the next clause refers
to descending with the approach lights in sight.

If "approach light system" is to be parsed as lights plus RAIL, you
need both. If you parse it as the lights, you need the lights. It
doesn't say "any part of the approach light system".

From a practical point of view, in my experience, having *only* the
RAIL as a visual reference is more of a distraction than a help.

>
> One important point that people often miss is that in addition to seeing the
> lights, the pilot must have the required flight visibility in order to
> continue the descent below DH. Since 100 feet above TDZE on glideslope is
> only about 1000 feet from the threshold, if you can't see the runway well
> before then, you probably don't have landing minimums, and are not authorized
> to go below DH.

When you get to a 200' DH, you are 4000' from the fixed distance
marker, 3500' from the beginning of the TDZ and 3000' feet from the
threshold. So with a minimum 2400/1800 foot visibility, you won't be
able to see the threshold yet. That's why you are allowed to descend
to 100AGL with only the approach lights as a reference - you should be
able to see *them* if you have the required visibility.
(Parenthetically, if you can't, and can only see the RAIL, I find it
not credible that you do have the required visibility) At 200AGL (DH),
you get to decide whether to continue the approach on the basis of the
visibility at that instant and the presence of at least one the visual
references listed in 91.175. If at some time thereafter, eg at 100AGL
you still can't see the threshold, or for that matter the beginning of
the TDZ which is now 1500 feet away (the fixed distance marker is
still 2000 feet away, so with a 1800RVR minimum, you maybe can't see
it yet) *then* you have to miss the approach.

So you haven't thought through the logic here. It's true you'll need
to be able to see the runway before 100AGL, but you won't necessarily
be able to see it before DH. So you can't say you shouldn't have gone
below DH on the basis of not being able to see the runway at DH! You
also can't say retroactively that you shouldn't have gone below DH on
the basis of what you didn't see later. The required visibility is a
requirement that applies continuously below DH. In addition, there
are *specific* required visual references that apply at DH and
100AGL.

Congratulations on your checkride! Now when you have your head in the
clouds, you can bring the airplane too!

> He asked what was the major problem with ice?
> I said the accumulation of the added weight.

He was happy with this? Weight is an issue, but the bigger one is the
change in shape of the airfoil, leading to loss of lift and/or tail
effectiveness. Ice also tends to stay with you even after you exit
icing conditions (unless it gets warm enough for long enough).

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

If it is really low weather, all you'll see is the RAIL/SF
at 200 feet. But you're more correct about what words
exactly are used.

and "should" should have been show.



> wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 20, 3:57 pm, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:
> DH, you make a decision AT DH while in a descent on GS, so
> if you decide to go-around you will be below DH before the
> airplane starts back up. It isn't 50 feet, you just have
> to
> decide and either continue or discontinue the approach.
> You can use the approach light rabbit to continue below
> DH,
> but only to 100 feet unless you get more of the required
> visual cues.

Nitpicking here, 91.175(c)(3) does not mention the "rabbit"
aka RAIL
or Sequenced Flashers as an acceptable visual reference. You
can
descend to 100' using the *approach lights* as a reference.
Below 100'
you need either the red side or terminating bars of the
approach
lights (if the approach lights have them!) or one of the
other
acceptable references, to continue your descent.

91.175(c) was changed to make "the runway environment"
explicit.
RAILs or SFs are not on the list.
>
> Ice is aerodynamic spoiler, not weight.
>
> VOR check, to check properly, swing the OBS and make sure
> you get the proper deflection, 10 ° should be full scale
> 80° and the TO/FROM flag should be switching, if it
> doesn't
> your VOR has low sensitivity and may not should course
> deviation at 25-50 miles, the needle will just center
> while
> you drift off course...
>
> Other than that, congratulations.
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --

That's why the lengths of lights, TDZ markings and such are
given, so you have a known standard with which to compare.


"Barry" > wrote in message
. ..
|> Nitpicking here, 91.175(c)(3) does not mention the
"rabbit" aka RAIL
| > or Sequenced Flashers as an acceptable visual reference.
You can
| > descend to 100' using the *approach lights* as a
reference...
| > 91.175(c) was changed to make "the runway environment"
explicit.
| > RAILs or SFs are not on the list.
|
| I disagree, 91.175 (c)(3)(i) says "the approach light
system" which certainly
| includes the sequenced flashers - see the AIM 2-1-1 which
states "Some systems
| include sequenced flashing lights".
|
| One important point that people often miss is that in
addition to seeing the
| lights, the pilot must have the required flight visibility
in order to
| continue the descent below DH. Since 100 feet above TDZE
on glideslope is
| only about 1000 feet from the threshold, if you can't see
the runway well
| before then, you probably don't have landing minimums, and
are not authorized
| to go below DH.
|
|

I think so, he sort of does the oral exam in a conversational way, and
I think I threw that out there while we were talking about it. One of
us might've mentioned the changing of the airfoil's shape, but it's
getting sketchy now...


On Mar 21, 12:27 pm, Jose > wrote:
> > He asked what was the major problem with ice?
> > I said the accumulation of the added weight.
>
> He was happy with this? Weight is an issue, but the bigger one is the
> change in shape of the airfoil, leading to loss of lift and/or tail
> effectiveness. Ice also tends to stay with you even after you exit
> icing conditions (unless it gets warm enough for long enough).
>
> Jose

> I think so, he sort of does the oral exam in a conversational way, and
> I think I threw that out there while we were talking about it. One of
> us might've mentioned the changing of the airfoil's shape, but it's
> getting sketchy now...

Hmmm. Then maybe he wasn't really listening? Or he really =does= think
that the weight of ice is the main factor?

I had a flight instructor (from Florida) giving me instrument lessons
(in the Northeast); after I had spent an hour unsuccessfully removing
ice from the wings, I decided I didn't want to fly in that aircraft. He
acted as if he was ready to go flying in it and was put out that we had
to get another one. This wasn't too long after the airline crash in DC
with a Florida pilot who didn't respect ice.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
> Congratulations on your checkride! Now when you have your head in the
> clouds, you can bring the airplane too!
>
>> He asked what was the major problem with ice?
>> I said the accumulation of the added weight.
>
>
> He was happy with this? Weight is an issue, but the bigger one is the
> change in shape of the airfoil, leading to loss of lift and/or tail
> effectiveness. Ice also tends to stay with you even after you exit
> icing conditions (unless it gets warm enough for long enough).
>
> Jose


He obviously didn;t really care about doing a real test - no partial
panel? WTF? I think I read that in the original post.

No wonder people plow into mountains all the time - anyone can pass the
practical. Instructors send their students to the "easiest" DE and the
rest is history (or statistics)

No offense to the OP - I am sure you were prepared and can fly well, but
the local examiner(s) here scare the **** out of me.

The examiner here does all the radio work and the flight is probably
about 40 minutes max. No way you can do three approaches, holds,
partial panel, attitude recovery, takeoff and landing in that amount of
time.

Then there are the DEs who won't do the test in actual. That is just
nuts.

I was surprised also on having no partial panel during the test. I'm
guessing he thinks that the instructor has signed me off, so therefore
I must know it, and he doesn't need to test on all tasks. For talking
on the radio, my examiner didn't want to contact approach for the
cross country portion because he wanted to control where we went.
After the cross country portion, he had me do the talking for the
approaches.

On Mar 21, 8:00 pm, Tim > wrote:
> He obviously didn;t really care about doing a real test - no partial
> panel? WTF? I think I read that in the original post.
>
> No wonder people plow into mountains all the time - anyone can pass the
> practical. Instructors send their students to the "easiest" DE and the
> rest is history (or statistics)
>
> No offense to the OP - I am sure you were prepared and can fly well, but
> the local examiner(s) here scare the **** out of me.
>
> The examiner here does all the radio work and the flight is probably
> about 40 minutes max. No way you can do three approaches, holds,
> partial panel, attitude recovery, takeoff and landing in that amount of
> time.
>
> Then there are the DEs who won't do the test in actual. That is just
> nuts.