On 07/23/07 17:51, Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jul 23, 9:39 am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
The other day I shot the VOR approach into SMO for the first time in
low actual. I've often looked at that approach as one of the most
difficult I've seen published so it was interesting to actually try
it. The weather was 008OVC with something like 3sm HZ. I touched down
about 3/4 down the runway and was able to stop without a problem.
However, while taxiing back, I noticed a Gulf Stream land right on the
numbers. There is no way you can tell me he properly flew the approach
and was able to touch on the numbers.
The approach is published as a circle to land (I assume because of the
extreme nature of the decent) but they certainly were not offering to
allow anyone to circle. In fact there was a steady line of jets coming
in, it would probably have been unlikely to get a circle approved.

Last night I departed. AWOS was reporting 005OVC. I took off right
around 21:10. There was a large Citation right behind me picking up
his clearance. I didn't ever hear him depart on approach frequency so
I'm assuming he missed his curfew and his execs got stranded.

-Robert

So, in the end it sounds like if everyone on this list had just
grabbed the chart and flown the approach, about 3/4 of the people
would have died (gone down to 680 before CULVE). Wow, does it seem
like the FAA should make this chart a bit more clear?

-Robert


After reading many of the responses, it seemed Karl (and some others) felt
that the lower "Minima" as a result of identifying CULVE meant a lower
crossing altitude at CULVE.

Of course, this is wrong. The crossing altitude at CULVE is 1120, and doesn't
change whether or not you can identify CULVE.

It's been an interesting discussion.


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