Full procedure versu vectors

[Wyatt Emmerich[_2_]]

With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure GPS
approaches rather than take vectors. Does it complicate life for controllers
when you request the full procedure? I get the feeling that they would
rather vector me on the ILS than have me shoot a GPS full approach.

I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating controllers
and mucking up things by doing so.


Wyatt Emmerich
President, Emmerich Newspapers
601-977-0470

PO Box 16709, Jackson MS 39236
Shipping: 246 Briarwood Drive, Suite 101, Jackson MS 39206

[Newps]

Wyatt Emmerich wrote:
> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure GPS
> approaches rather than take vectors. Does it complicate life for controllers
> when you request the full procedure? I get the feeling that they would
> rather vector me on the ILS than have me shoot a GPS full approach.
>
> I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating controllers
> and mucking up things by doing so.


Vectors are easier to the controller because then I get to control the
proceedings. If you're doing the PT then there's no telling when you
actually start down final. Doesn't work as well with other traffic.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote in
:

> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full
> procedure GPS approaches rather than take vectors. Does it complicate
> life for controllers when you request the full procedure? I get the
> feeling that they would rather vector me on the ILS than have me shoot
> a GPS full approach.
>
> I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating
> controllers and mucking up things by doing so.


Depends. if you are the only one in the sky, they couldn't care less.

Ad some traffic and stir lightly and you have a different story.

Bertie

[Wyatt Emmerich[_2_]]

So what should I say: "Request full GPS 16 approach if you're not too busy?"

--

Wyatt Emmerich
President, Emmerich Newspapers
601-977-0470

PO Box 16709, Jackson MS 39236
Shipping: 246 Briarwood Drive, Suite 101, Jackson MS 39206
"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> "Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote in
> :
>
>> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full
>> procedure GPS approaches rather than take vectors. Does it complicate
>> life for controllers when you request the full procedure? I get the
>> feeling that they would rather vector me on the ILS than have me shoot
>> a GPS full approach.
>>
>> I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating
>> controllers and mucking up things by doing so.
>
>
> Depends. if you are the only one in the sky, they couldn't care less.
>
> Ad some traffic and stir lightly and you have a different story.
>
> Bertie

[Andrew Sarangan]

On Nov 7, 11:58 am, "Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote:
> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure GPS
> approaches rather than take vectors. Does it complicate life for controllers
> when you request the full procedure? I get the feeling that they would
> rather vector me on the ILS than have me shoot a GPS full approach.
>
> I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating controllers
> and mucking up things by doing so.
>

Can you elaborate on why you feel the full precure is easier than
vectors?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote in
:

> So what should I say: "Request full GPS 16 approach if you're not too
> busy?"
>

Pretty much. If you need to do it you need to do it. if it's just for fun
or practice, you're blocking traffic if there is any.

Bertie

[Peter R.]

On 11/7/2007 11:58:50 AM, "Wyatt Emmerich" wrote:

>
> I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating controllers
> and mucking up things by doing so.

If the airport is a low volume airport, perhaps, but add any other inbound or
outbound traffic (if the airport is uncontrolled) to the equation and full
procedure approaches would tie everyone up and even increase controller
workload.

Why are vectored approaches with the GPS a problem? (My Bonanza is equipped
with a GNS430W)

--
Peter

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure
> GPS approaches rather than take vectors.
>

Full procedure GPS approaches? Do you mean proceeding direct to an IAF on a
basic-T approach versus being vectored to join the FAC?


>
> Does it complicate life for
> controllers when you request the full procedure?
>

Not if there's no other traffic.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> So what should I say: "Request full GPS 16 approach if you're not too
> busy?"
>

"Request full GPS 16 approach" should be sufficient.

[Wyatt Emmerich[_2_]]

By full approach, I mean flying it as published. Usually a T approach, but
sometimes there's a hold as part of the approach. Flying the full approach
is easier with the WAAS. You don't have to input headings on the heading
bug. It is more predictable because it's published. No chance of
miscommunication on vectors. No constantly adjusting the heading bug. No
chance of the controller bringing you around to close of an automatic
glideslope couples.

--

Wyatt Emmerich
President, Emmerich Newspapers
601-977-0470

PO Box 16709, Jackson MS 39236
Shipping: 246 Briarwood Drive, Suite 101, Jackson MS 39206
"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure
>> GPS approaches rather than take vectors.
>>
>
> Full procedure GPS approaches? Do you mean proceeding direct to an IAF on
> a basic-T approach versus being vectored to join the FAC?
>
>
>>
>> Does it complicate life for
>> controllers when you request the full procedure?
>>
>
> Not if there's no other traffic.
>

[Wyatt Emmerich[_2_]]

> Can you elaborate on why you feel the full precure is easier than
> vectors

It is more predictable because it's published. No chance of miscommunication
on vectors. No constantly adjusting the heading bug. No chance of the
controller bringing you around too close for an automatic glideslope couple.

Vectors is very easy. But letting the GPS steering do the full approach and
autocouple the WAAS glideslope is even easier.

--

Wyatt Emmerich
President, Emmerich Newspapers
601-977-0470

PO Box 16709, Jackson MS 39236
Shipping: 246 Briarwood Drive, Suite 101, Jackson MS 39206
"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Nov 7, 11:58 am, "Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote:
>> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure
>> GPS
>> approaches rather than take vectors. Does it complicate life for
>> controllers
>> when you request the full procedure? I get the feeling that they would
>> rather vector me on the ILS than have me shoot a GPS full approach.
>>
>> I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating
>> controllers
>> and mucking up things by doing so.
>>
>
> Can you elaborate on why you feel the full precure is easier than
> vectors?
>
>

[Wyatt Emmerich[_2_]]

> Can you elaborate on why you feel the full precure is easier than
> vectors?

Some other points: My S-tec flies a coupled GPSS WAAS approach quite a bit
smoother than a coupled ILS approach. Not sure why. Probably for the same
reason GPSS (GPS steering) is a lot smoother than HSI deviation autopilot
navigation. So I'd rather shoot the GPS. In addition, by shooting the GPS I
can use the ILS localizer and glideslope (if available on the same runway)
as a totally independent backup source of vertical and lateral guidance. So
I am shooting the GPS and monitoring using a second CDI getting the
localizer/glideslope data. (For technical reasons, I cannot do the
reverse--shoot the ILS and use my old CDI linked to the GPS as a backup.)

Wyatt Emmerich
President, Emmerich Newspapers
601-977-0470

PO Box 16709, Jackson MS 39236
Shipping: 246 Briarwood Drive, Suite 101, Jackson MS 39206
"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Nov 7, 11:58 am, "Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote:
>> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure
>> GPS
>> approaches rather than take vectors. Does it complicate life for
>> controllers
>> when you request the full procedure? I get the feeling that they would
>> rather vector me on the ILS than have me shoot a GPS full approach.
>>
>> I like the GPS full approach but I don't want to be irritating
>> controllers
>> and mucking up things by doing so.
>>
>
> Can you elaborate on why you feel the full precure is easier than
> vectors?
>
>

[Denny]

If you are making routine instrument approaches, sitting there
watching the magic box move the little airplane on the screen and
drive the autopilot and your prime job in life is to control the
throttle as you whistle and tap in time to the music, you are not
current (in reality) and will be in a load of crap the day the
autopilot goes off line in real crud...

Far better you accept the vectors for every other flight and hand fly
the airplane on the steam gauges as you drip sweat in time to the
flopping of the indicator needles... Then someday when it actually
becomes life or death you will be ready...

denny

[Brian[_1_]]

On Nov 7, 12:29 pm, "Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote:
> So what should I say: "Request full GPS 16 approach if you're not too busy?"
>

Yes, I use that a lot. The one I use around his " If you can fit me in
I would like the ILS 10 Right with the Procedure turn."

Brian

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Brian > wrote in
oups.com:

> On Nov 7, 12:29 pm, "Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote:
>> So what should I say: "Request full GPS 16 approach if you're not too
>> busy?"
>>
>
> Yes, I use that a lot. The one I use around his " If you can fit me in
> I would like the ILS 10 Right with the Procedure turn."

Xactly.


Bertie

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Wyatt Emmerich" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> By full approach, I mean flying it as published. Usually a T approach, but
> sometimes there's a hold as part of the approach. Flying the full approach
> is easier with the WAAS. You don't have to input headings on the heading
> bug. It is more predictable because it's published. No chance of
> miscommunication on vectors. No constantly adjusting the heading bug. No
> chance of the controller bringing you around to close of an automatic
> glideslope couples.
>

What specific approaches are you referring to?

[Stefan]

Wyatt Emmerich schrieb:

> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure GPS
> approaches rather than take vectors.

If you care about this, you're neither current nor safe.

[Ron Natalie]

Stefan wrote:
> Wyatt Emmerich schrieb:
>
>> With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full
>> procedure GPS approaches rather than take vectors.
>
> If you care about this, you're neither current nor safe.

I was told by an Air Force buddy:

Ask for what you want.
Fly what you get.
Log what you need.

[[email protected]]

On Nov 8, 2:48 pm, Denny > wrote:
> If you are making routine instrument approaches, sitting there
> watching the magic box move the little airplane on the screen and
> drive the autopilot and your prime job in life is to control the
> throttle as you whistle and tap in time to the music, you are not
> current (in reality) and will be in a load of crap the day the
> autopilot goes off line in real crud...
>
> Far better you accept the vectors for every other flight and hand fly
> the airplane on the steam gauges as you drip sweat in time to the
> flopping of the indicator needles... Then someday when it actually
> becomes life or death you will be ready...
>
> denny

I am quite current, thank you, and often hand fly approaches for
precisely that reason. Knowing the ins and outs of the autopilot and
its capabilities is an important part of flying. A pilot needs to be
able to do both. They are not mutually exclusive. When I use the
autopilot, I want to use it to its fullest capability. With the new
Garmin 500W, that means a GPS approach. It is proving to be smoother
and more precise than an ILS.

[[email protected]]

On Nov 8, 5:55 pm, Stefan > wrote:
> Wyatt Emmerich schrieb:
>
> > With my 530 upgraded to WAAS, I think it's easier to fly full procedure GPS
> > approaches rather than take vectors.
>
> If you care about this, you're neither current nor safe.

I am quite current, thank you, and often hand fly approaches for
precisely that reason. Knowing the ins and outs of the autopilot and
its capabilities is an important part of flying. A pilot needs to be
able to do both. They are not mutually exclusive. When I use the
autopilot, I want to use it to its fullest capability. With the new
Garmin 500W, that means a GPS approach. It is proving to be smoother
and more precise than an ILS.