Descent below MDA -- what would you do?

What would you do in this situation? You're on the GPS-22 into Ellenville,
NY (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0508/09390G22.PDF), planning to land
straight-in. Note the high MDA (1800 AGL). There's no weather reporting
at your destination, but several nearby airports are saying anywhere from
2-1/2 to 4 mile visibility. For the sake of argument, assume it's 2-1/2
miles where you are. There's scattered CU at about 4000, but you're below
that already. It's daytime, winds are light out of the south.

You're 2 miles from YARNN at the MDA and have good ground contact ahead and
to both sides. You can also see the ridgeline east of the final approach
course which is represented by the 1850 elevation marker. What you don't
see is the runway, or any of the other things called out in 91.175(c)(3).
You know from experience that this is a difficult airport to spot even in
good VFR because it blends in with the surrounding terrain.

You were cleared for the approach at Kingston VOR, and are long out of
radar and radio contact with ATC.

If you stay at the MDA (as 91.175(c) requires), it's unlikely you will ever
see the runway, as it will quickly disappear under the nose of the
airplane. Your GPS is providing you VNAV guidance, and you are already
above the synthetic glide slope. You're well above the minimums for a
contact approach, but since you're out of radio contact, you can't ask for
one; your current clearance is for the GPS-22. Continuing your descent
below the MDA, but staying above the VNAV glideslope it technically not
legal, but seems like a "no harm, no foul" kind of violation.

What would you do?

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 20:53:16 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:

If you stay at the MDA (as 91.175(c) requires), it's unlikely you will ever
see the runway, as it will quickly disappear under the nose of the
airplane. Your GPS is providing you VNAV guidance, and you are already
above the synthetic glide slope. You're well above the minimums for a
contact approach, but since you're out of radio contact, you can't ask for
one; your current clearance is for the GPS-22. Continuing your descent
below the MDA, but staying above the VNAV glideslope it technically not
legal, but seems like a "no harm, no foul" kind of violation.

If it was me, I would not descend below MDA.

I would descend to MDA, overfly the runway and join the landing pattern to
land. I looked at airnav.com but it didn't give the pattern altitude.

I am not familiar with the terrain, but the picture at airnav.com made it
seem like it would be a rather easy airport to spot being it's an open spot
in the forest of trees.

Allen

In article , Roy Smith
wrote:

What would you do in this situation? ...
If you stay at the MDA (as 91.175(c) requires), it's unlikely you will ever
see the runway, as it will quickly disappear under the nose of the
airplane. Your GPS is providing you VNAV guidance, and you are already
above the synthetic glide slope. You're well above the minimums for a
contact approach, but since you're out of radio contact, you can't ask for
one; your current clearance is for the GPS-22. Continuing your descent
below the MDA, but staying above the VNAV glideslope it technically not
legal, but seems like a "no harm, no foul" kind of violation.

What would you do?

I wouldn't descent below MDA, no. That seems like a very bad idea. I
WOULD continue the approach to the MAP, though, rather than bailing on
it early.

Yes, the runway will quickly disappear under the nose, but note that
the circling MDA and the straight-in MDA are the same. Level off at
2080, and you'll likely see the runway before the MAP. Descend as you
circle to the right (since it notes no circling east of the runway),
and you should have plenty of room to set yourself up for a nice
landing. Even a normal traffic pattern altitude should keep you well
above the obstacles on the west side.

Nothing says you can't circle right back to the "straight-in" runway;
sometimes, that's the only way you can do it, and this seems like one
of those cases.

Hope that helps.

--
Garner R. Miller
ATP/CFII/MEI
Clifton Park, NY =USA=

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 20:53:16 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:

What would you do in this situation? You're on the GPS-22 into Ellenville,
NY (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0508/09390G22.PDF), planning to land
straight-in. Note the high MDA (1800 AGL). There's no weather reporting
at your destination, but several nearby airports are saying anywhere from
2-1/2 to 4 mile visibility. For the sake of argument, assume it's 2-1/2
miles where you are. There's scattered CU at about 4000, but you're below
that already. It's daytime, winds are light out of the south.

You're 2 miles from YARNN at the MDA and have good ground contact ahead and
to both sides. You can also see the ridgeline east of the final approach
course which is represented by the 1850 elevation marker. What you don't
see is the runway, or any of the other things called out in 91.175(c)(3).
You know from experience that this is a difficult airport to spot even in
good VFR because it blends in with the surrounding terrain.

You were cleared for the approach at Kingston VOR, and are long out of
radar and radio contact with ATC.

If you stay at the MDA (as 91.175(c) requires), it's unlikely you will ever
see the runway, as it will quickly disappear under the nose of the
airplane. Your GPS is providing you VNAV guidance, and you are already
above the synthetic glide slope. You're well above the minimums for a
contact approach, but since you're out of radio contact, you can't ask for
one; your current clearance is for the GPS-22. Continuing your descent
below the MDA, but staying above the VNAV glideslope it technically not
legal, but seems like a "no harm, no foul" kind of violation.

What would you do?

I would not go below MDA.

If I had the airport in sight at YARNN, I would probably do a
circle-to-land on 22 (or possibly 4 depending on the winds).

So far as a contact approach, I thought you had to have reported visibility
at the destination airport of 1+miles in order to be cleared. I don't see
that N89 has weather reporting.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

What would you do in this situation? You're on the GPS-22 into
Ellenville,
NY (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0508/09390G22.PDF), planning to land
straight-in. Note the high MDA (1800 AGL). There's no weather reporting
at your destination, but several nearby airports are saying anywhere from
2-1/2 to 4 mile visibility. For the sake of argument, assume it's 2-1/2
miles where you are. There's scattered CU at about 4000, but you're below
that already. It's daytime, winds are light out of the south.

You're 2 miles from YARNN at the MDA and have good ground contact ahead
and
to both sides. You can also see the ridgeline east of the final approach
course which is represented by the 1850 elevation marker. What you don't
see is the runway, or any of the other things called out in 91.175(c)(3).
You know from experience that this is a difficult airport to spot even in
good VFR because it blends in with the surrounding terrain.

You were cleared for the approach at Kingston VOR, and are long out of
radar and radio contact with ATC.

If you stay at the MDA (as 91.175(c) requires), it's unlikely you will
ever
see the runway, as it will quickly disappear under the nose of the
airplane. Your GPS is providing you VNAV guidance, and you are already
above the synthetic glide slope. You're well above the minimums for a
contact approach, but since you're out of radio contact, you can't ask for
one; your current clearance is for the GPS-22. Continuing your descent
below the MDA, but staying above the VNAV glideslope it technically not
legal, but seems like a "no harm, no foul" kind of violation.


A contact approach isn't available anyway as there is no weather reporting.

Nope. Not going below MDA. Go to the MAP, look for the runway. If I'm
concerned that it would go under the nose, I might fly a hair right to
put it to my left so I could see it. Then circle to land as appropriate.

I don't know why the MDA is what it is, and on approach is not the place
to bet your life on speculation.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Roy Smith wrote:

What would you do?

Go missed. Climb and re-establish radio contact. Re-do the approach and
while still in contact with approach, request a contact approach.. or
cancel IFR and request a special VFR clearance.

Dave

"Dave S" wrote in message
nk.net...

Go missed. Climb and re-establish radio contact. Re-do the approach and
while still in contact with approach, request a contact approach.. or
cancel IFR and request a special VFR clearance.


Roy said there's no weather reporting at this location. That rules out a
contact approach and SVFR.

In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Dave S" wrote in message
nk.net...

Go missed. Climb and re-establish radio contact. Re-do the approach and
while still in contact with approach, request a contact approach.. or
cancel IFR and request a special VFR clearance.


Roy said there's no weather reporting at this location. That rules out a
contact approach and SVFR.

Yes, I know both the Contact and SVFR were unavailable. On the other hand,
people were flying around VFR. I know my original statement of "assume
it's 2-1/2 miles where you are" eliminated VFR from the list of legal
alternatives, but for all I know, it really was 3 or 4 miles.

I could have gone missed, gotten back in contact with ATC, cancelled IFR,
and then proceeded back to the airport VFR. But that seems totally
pointless.

What if I hadn't asked you to assume it was 2-1/2 miles? The rest stays
the same, ATIS at several airports in the area reporting variously 2-1/2,
3, and 4 miles. Lacking an official report, the best I can say is "an
honest evaluation of flight visibility by the pilot could have reasonably
been said to be 3 miles".

You failed to tell us the method for closing your IFR flight plan once on the
ground. Do they give you a phone number? Do you have cell phone service on
the approach?

First, a bit of history: 91.175's predecessor section (91.116) permitted,
until 1981 as I recall, descent based on landmarks familiar to the pilot. It
was fraught with hazards although it had its origins from the "DC-3" days.
Some of the more jaded folks called it the "Farmer Jone's Barn Sighting Rule."

It's important to know that history, because the revocation of that rule is a
very handy cite for a sharp FAA attorney to rebutt a pilot claim of defense
that he saw Jone's barn and knows the area well, so he knows that leads to the
runway...and so forth.

Thus, what others advise about remaining at MDA and going to the airport then
circling to land is not only good safety advice, it is very good legal advice.

The reason I ask about the phone is because you could have opted to cancel IFR
and then do whatever you wanted to do to get in and land.

Roy Smith wrote:

What would you do in this situation? You're on the GPS-22 into Ellenville,
NY (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0508/09390G22.PDF), planning to land
straight-in. Note the high MDA (1800 AGL). There's no weather reporting
at your destination, but several nearby airports are saying anywhere from
2-1/2 to 4 mile visibility. For the sake of argument, assume it's 2-1/2
miles where you are. There's scattered CU at about 4000, but you're below
that already. It's daytime, winds are light out of the south.

You're 2 miles from YARNN at the MDA and have good ground contact ahead and
to both sides. You can also see the ridgeline east of the final approach
course which is represented by the 1850 elevation marker. What you don't
see is the runway, or any of the other things called out in 91.175(c)(3).
You know from experience that this is a difficult airport to spot even in
good VFR because it blends in with the surrounding terrain.

You were cleared for the approach at Kingston VOR, and are long out of
radar and radio contact with ATC.

If you stay at the MDA (as 91.175(c) requires), it's unlikely you will ever
see the runway, as it will quickly disappear under the nose of the
airplane. Your GPS is providing you VNAV guidance, and you are already
above the synthetic glide slope. You're well above the minimums for a
contact approach, but since you're out of radio contact, you can't ask for
one; your current clearance is for the GPS-22. Continuing your descent
below the MDA, but staying above the VNAV glideslope it technically not
legal, but seems like a "no harm, no foul" kind of violation.

What would you do?