"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
:

On Jan 15, 5:28*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
news:5fdc8536-11f5-4348-993f-

:

Today I was shooting approaches at MHR. Wx was 001OVC 1/8SM. When I
got handed off to tower they would say "Mooney 1234, not in site,
landing own risk, landing runway 22L". That doesn't sound like a
landing clearance to me. What does "landing runway 22L" mean in the
tower ATC phrase book? Why would he tell me that landing was own
risk if he wasn't going to clear me to land?

BTW: It always struck me as odd that a Mooney and a 747 have the
same vis requirements on an ILS. A 1/2 mile is probably like 2
seconds in a 747 but an 1/8 mile is like 10 seconds in a Mooney.

No, usually it's classified by category. On some runways the vis
requirement is the smae, but on some it would be higher for a C or D
airplane. It's mostly down to the OCL.

Bertie

I understand that. On a standard ILS if a cat C is 1/2 mile vis I
believe a cat A should be 1/8 mile vis. The vis requirements should be
based on how many seconds the pilot can see down the runway.

Nope, it's how reasonable it might be to expect to see he runway and
munuever the airplane to a landing form the MAP or DH.
You're nto going to be able to do that safely with 1/8 from 200' or
thereabouts.
1/8 mile is pretty ****ing small! That's Cat 3a minima.

I can't
think of any reason why this would not be. A typical GA plane may be
stopped on the runway before a 747 touches down. I think vis
requirements, in general, for GA planes are a bit bogus, at least with
regard to precision approaches.


Hand flown, you would have a lot of airplanes crashed into the approach
lights.
An excepetional pilot would be able to do it most of the time, though.
most of the time.

And I've done a LOT of instruments in singles and light twins. 1/4 is
reasonablem but 1/8. no.

Bertie