![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Cirrus" wrote in message
oups.com... I just took my commercial checkride a few feeks ago. I was taught by my instructor to overly a non-towered airport by tpa+500ft (or more), proceed away from the airport WITHOUT descending and then enter the pattern( i.e. enter 45 and descent to TPA). Not a bad procedure, as a general concept. I agree that for you to not have heard about this until your Commercial certificate training is very odd. This is basic Private stuff. On my checkride the Examiner also expected this. I was taught that the key is to not descent to or below TPA unless you are commiting to landing, How do you fly an instrument procedure then? Most instrument procedures, even non-precision, may often involve flight below TPA prior to being committed to landing. For that matter, ANY approach to landing involves flight below TPA prior to being committed to landing (you should not be committed to the landing until you have touched down and have slowed sufficiently to ensure no need for a go-around). which means adhering to FARS and AIM procedures. AIM, perhaps. The FARs say nothing about descent below TPA. They don't even discuss TPA. Flying over the Field at or below TPA just to take a look may be considered famously "careless and reckless". True enough. The FAA invokes 91.13 in most actions, including those for which they can find no other rule to use. I can't find it at the moment, but my instructor showed me the TPA+500 rule in the AIM or FARs. I believe that the AIM mentions that. There's no place in the FARs that does. In all of my instrument and private training somehow the overly the airport rule was missed. The Examiner explained that just because YOU might know what you are doing, every other pilot will be expecting everone to be following standard procedures. This is where you start to head off into the weeds. Standard procedure or not, no other pilot should be significantly inconvenienced, or otherwise surprised by an airplane flying down the runway. While there may be good reasons to avoid a low-approach over the runway in certain situations, I don't see how "every other pilot will be expecting everone [sic] to be following standard procedures" applies here. When pilots deviate, not matter how well they think they are communicating their intentions, accidents frequently happen. Who expects someone to be cutting across the field a few hundred feet below them while on downwind? "Cutting across the field"? The thread is about flight over and parallel to the runway. No one is suggesting low-level flight perpendicular to the runway. If your whole response was directed at that operation, it's irrelevant to this thread. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Our runway is being bulldozed! | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 28 | July 23rd 06 03:02 AM |
"Cleared Straight-In Runway X; Report Y Miles Final" | Jim Cummiskey | Piloting | 86 | August 16th 04 06:23 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Owning | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Piloting | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
FA: WEATHER FLYING: A PRACTICAL BOOK ON FLYING | The Ink Company | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 5th 03 12:07 AM |