interesting moment yesterday on final

"Crash Lander" wrote in message
...

Reporting points should be done in miles at uncontrolled airports.

It seems a lot of people have differing views on the interpretation of
this scenario. Maybe they should change the wording, and ruling to state
that an a/c cannot announce that they are on finals, until they are at
circuit height. That would just about rule out straight ins, and at least
if someone does come in on a straight in approach, all the traffic already
in the pattern is at the same altitude, and will spot him easier, rather
than looking to a higher altitude for an a/c that may be hidden by
sunglare or cloud.

I'm not sure I'm following you.

I think most instrument approaches are about a 3 degree glide slope. This
means an aircraft on approach will descend through a pattern altitude of
1000 feet more than 3.5 miles from the airport. And this is just seconds
before they drop into the ground clutter, as viewed by other aircraft at
pattern altitude.

"Maxwell" wrote in message
...
I'm not sure I'm following you.

I think most instrument approaches are about a 3 degree glide slope. This
means an aircraft on approach will descend through a pattern altitude of
1000 feet more than 3.5 miles from the airport. And this is just seconds
before they drop into the ground clutter, as viewed by other aircraft at
pattern altitude.

Ah! My bad. I was thinking VFR a/c only. I did not know ILS approaches got
that low so close to the airfield.
Crash Lander
--
http://straightandlevel1973.spaces.live.com/
I'm not always right,
But I'm never wrong!

I did not know ILS approaches got
that low so close to the airfield.

They get down to two hundred feet (or lower for cat II and III) and
pretty close to the threshold.

Jose
--
There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that just want to
know what button to push, and those that want to know what happens when
they push the button.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
t...

The object of conveying position is to let others know where to look for
you, so that they can =see= where you are. Otherwise we'd all be happy
with UAVs flying around. And no that's not a non-sequitor.


The object of conveying position is to let others know where you are. If
others know where you are it may be unnecessary for them to =see= where you
are.



They have to know where RIKKI is with respect to where they are. That's
subtlely (but importantly) different from simply knowing where RIKKI is.
They also need to know where you are =actually= going, and where they are
headed. They need to =maintain= separation. Once you are past RIKKI,
nobody knows where you are. That is where visual acquisition comes in
handy.


If they know where RIKKI is and they know where they are they know where
RIKKI is with respect to where they are.



You are unusual.


Not really, many pilots make an effort to be aware of what's around them.



No.

All information has bearing on a flight. Most information's impact is
marginal, and safely ignored. It can reasonably be argued that the
location of the last IFR stepdown fix on a newly commissioned NDB approach
whose location is only revealed on the latest IFR plates would constitute
such marginal information as it concerns a VFR flight in CAVU conditions.
It could also be reasonably argued that the location of "the playground"
is equally marginal. Until, after an accident, it turns out that one of
the aircraft reported "over the playground", and the other aircraft should
of course know exactly where he is, and his failure to do so consitituted
failure to "be familiar with all relevant information...". (Change "the
playground" to "the lady" for a more compelling but equally valid
example).


The relevant information is the information that concerns that flight.
That's what relevant means.



In what case? On what sectional is RIKKI?


The case we're talking about is GALEY, near Houghton County airport. It's
on the Green Bay sectional.



And yes, typical VFR pilots use sectionals, and have them in the cockpit.
However, they don't memorize all the intersections, and trying to find one
on the chart one while approaching a busy pattern is not good piloting
procedure.


They don't examine them during flight planning to familiarize themselves
with their destination?

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
et...

You've both argued this one to death, and both keep overlooking the
obvious. Pilots *and* controllers use colloquial jargon to communicate
position.


Obvious or not, since that's not part of this discussion it hasn't been
overlooked.

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 02:02:03 GMT, "Crash Lander"
wrote:

"Maxwell" wrote in message
...
I'm not sure I'm following you.

I think most instrument approaches are about a 3 degree glide slope. This
means an aircraft on approach will descend through a pattern altitude of
1000 feet more than 3.5 miles from the airport. And this is just seconds
before they drop into the ground clutter, as viewed by other aircraft at
pattern altitude.

And a GPS approach (with vertical guidance) will have roughly the same
profile but with the low end 300 to 500 feet above the threshold.


Ah! My bad. I was thinking VFR a/c only. I did not know ILS approaches got
that low so close to the airfield.
Crash Lander

Then you take non precision approaches (VOR step down) out here in the
flat lands. We step dwon from around 1800 AGL to 500 AGL a tad over 5
miles out.with a cirlce to land at 500 which is half the pattern
altitude.

"Jose" wrote in message
et...

You mean to say that a newly minted VFR pilot is supposed to study all the
approach plates at all the airports he might be flying past or need to fly
into?


I don't see a reason to study those which he'd be flying past, but examining
the plates of the airports where he intends to land would be a good idea.



How many newly minted VFR pilots even know how to read an approach
plate?


Every newly minted VFR pilot should be able to identify the fixes in the
plan view of an IAP.

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..

Of course not, that is an assinine statement. An IFR pilot who reports a
navaid or especially an intersection inbound is just fouling the air. It
is irrelevant that it is on the sectional. Nobody with two brain cells
left whips out a sectional while in the pattern to locate the idiot IFR
pilot.


So VFR pilots don't use sectionals in preflight planning or while in flight.
Why do they carry them at all?

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news

Because it screws up everyone else in the pattern! I absolutely HATE it
when some dolt in a C152 insists on flying a B-52 pattern!


Me too, but we're talking about a straight-in approach.

"Maxwell" wrote in message
...

Sure it does. You can easily have two aircraft on final after their turn
from base leg.


How does FAR 91.113(g) apply in that case?