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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
The weather, via ATIS and NEXRAD was above minimums. So, putting the gear
down earlier to help the descent probably would have been an option. I would say on recollection that the layer was around 4,000 feet thick, and week broke out during the approach. However, I was concerned that lowering the gear and having all of the drag plus possibly getting it covered in ice and maybe not be able to retract would significantly rob climb performance if needed. I didn't want to add a gear problem or get stuck with a lack of power just in case. You do have a good point that I should have considered. "vincent norris" wrote in message ... Even though it's the capitol (is it capital?) of the state, The building is a capitol, the town is the capital. Finally, before the last fix we broke out into VMC, with the valley below and the airport in sight, still several thousand feet high. We circled once, and then landed without difficulty. If you had obtained WX and knew you would break out into VMC, then I'd say you handled it prudently; otoh, if you knew the ceiling was well above minimums, why were you concerned about having to do a missed approach with the gear down? vince norris |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
Viperdoc wrote: Recently, on a long cross country from Portland, OR to Wisconsin, we stopped at Helena, MT for a gas and pit stop. snip Once on the loc BC, there are several step down fixes, but since we were given the approach clearance several thousand feet high, I had a hard time reaching the DME fixes at a low enough altitude. snip It was a great learning experience, but I'm not sure what to have done differently. I already had the approach flaps out, and contemplated putting down the gear to help the descent, but hesitated doing this in icing conditions (what if I needed to pull up the gear again for some reason during the approach covered in ice?) snip I think one of the approaches to this airport was discussed in IFR Magazine (maybe it was IFR Refresher) some time ago. As I recall, the article discussed a pilot who decided to do a 360 to lose some altitude and hit some granite. Because of the terrain, the slam dunk is all you've got there, I believe. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 20:50:31 -0500, "Viperdoc"
wrote: There is no radar, and the final approach course is surrounded by mountains, so I would think circling would have been outside of the protected area of the localizer. Also, circling in turbulence and icing is not a very appealing option. I was told by center to intercept the DME arc, but was not given final approach clearance until established on the localizer BC. Once you were established on the arc could you ask to descend to the published altitudes for the arc itself? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
rps writes:
Viperdoc wrote: Recently, on a long cross country from Portland, OR to Wisconsin, we stopped at Helena, MT for a gas and pit stop. snip Once on the loc BC, there are several step down fixes, but since we were given the approach clearance several thousand feet high, I had a hard time reaching the DME fixes at a low enough altitude. snip It was a great learning experience, but I'm not sure what to have done differently. I already had the approach flaps out, and contemplated putting down the gear to help the descent, but hesitated doing this in icing conditions (what if I needed to pull up the gear again for some reason during the approach covered in ice?) snip I think one of the approaches to this airport was discussed in IFR Magazine (maybe it was IFR Refresher) some time ago. As I recall, the article discussed a pilot who decided to do a 360 to lose some altitude and hit some granite. Because of the terrain, the slam dunk is all you've got there, I believe. Having no experience with or data about the Helena IFR procedures, but having experience with the high Sierras and Rockies, I would find it hard to believe the someone would "hit some granite" without being way out of bounds. I'd describe the terrain around Helena as gently rolling, not mountainous. Even the mountains to the west are little more than big hills. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
Everett M. Greene wrote: Having no experience with or data about the Helena IFR procedures, but having experience with the high Sierras and Rockies, I would find it hard to believe the someone would "hit some granite" without being way out of bounds. I'd describe the terrain around Helena as gently rolling, not mountainous. Even the mountains to the west are little more than big hills. The article I recall was in the pre-GPS days and the pilot became disoriented/distracted by ice in addition to inability to lose altitude sufficiently quickly, so it's possible that he was out of bounds. (It's also possible that this occurred at a different airport altogether or not at all -- the article was written and read by me many years ago.) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
Viperdoc wrote:
Recently, on a long cross country from Portland, OR to Wisconsin, we stopped at Helena, MT for a gas and pit stop. Just flew that approach from a few different IAFs in the sim with wx set for 200 above minimums and 2 miles vis and I have to agree -- it's a tough approach. Not as ridiculous as Aspen, but it still makes you question the sanity of the TERPS guys. Tried it from 12K on the southern arc and 10 on the northern arc at 120KIAS. 750FPM seemed to get me where I was going through the transition to final, but the final approach segment itself required around 1000FPM just to reach minimums at the MDA. Not exactly the kind of approach I'd care to shoot in hard IMC and in icing at the end of a long day, but aviation is all about the challenge, right? :-) Oh, and speaking of mountains, if you think the terrain is bad on this approach, check out the southern arc landing on 27. They have you inbound at 10900 then drop you down to 9100 only a few miles from a peak at 8499. Yikes. -Doug -- -------------------- Doug Vetter, ATP/CFI http://www.dvatp.com -------------------- |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:43:13 -0400, Doug Vetter
wrote: Tried it from 12K on the southern arc and 10 on the northern arc at 120KIAS. 750FPM seemed to get me where I was going through the transition to final, but the final approach segment itself required around 1000FPM just to reach minimums at the MDA. Not exactly the kind of approach I'd care to shoot in hard IMC and in icing at the end of a long day, but aviation is all about the challenge, right? :-) Terps allows the final approach segment up to a maximum of 400 feet per nm. Check out the altitudes and distances, do they meet this? I think the idea is that you should be able to fly this without difficulty. ..Oh, and speaking of mountains, if you think the terrain is bad on this approach, check out the southern arc landing on 27. They have you inbound at 10900 then drop you down to 9100 only a few miles from a peak at 8499. Yikes. Terps allow a minimum of 500 feet above all obstacles in the intermediate segment. Sounds normal to me, and probably the same in multiple places across the US. Can't say I remember if there is any addition to terps minimums for segments that are in mountainous regions, perhaps someone else knows. -Doug Stan |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
You don't really provide enough specifics about exact route, center
handling while still in radar contact, handoff, etc. Having said that, at a terrain-laden airport like HLN, a piston aircraft is often up against the limits (shock cooling, icing limitations, etc.) compared to turbine aircraft. Viperdoc wrote: Recently, on a long cross country from Portland, OR to Wisconsin, we stopped at Helena, MT for a gas and pit stop. Coming from the West with the winds calm, I chose the loc DME BC approach to runway 9. Even though it's the capitol (is it capital?) of the state, there is no radar coverage. First, I had to descend and intercept the DME arc. Once on the arc, we were in turbulence and IMC, and started picking up ice (my Baron had KI certification). Once on the loc BC, there are several step down fixes, but since we were given the approach clearance several thousand feet high, I had a hard time reaching the DME fixes at a low enough altitude. Of course, without radar, the tower was asking us to report position, and I had to keep telling him I was unable to reach the desired altitudes due to the excessive descent rate required. Finally, before the last fix we broke out into VMC, with the valley below and the airport in sight, still several thousand feet high. We circled once, and then landed without difficulty. It was a great learning experience, but I'm not sure what to have done differently. I already had the approach flaps out, and contemplated putting down the gear to help the descent, but hesitated doing this in icing conditions (what if I needed to pull up the gear again for some reason during the approach covered in ice?) I could have chopped the power (was already at 15 inches) and descending at over 1,000 fpm near Va, but I felt a stabilized approach in ice and in mountainous terrain was safer than making even more radical pitch and power changes. I felt like I was behind the eight ball from the start. Is there a better way to have handled the approach? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Hardest approach flown so far
Doug Vetter wrote:
Viperdoc wrote: Oh, and speaking of mountains, if you think the terrain is bad on this approach, check out the southern arc landing on 27. They have you inbound at 10900 then drop you down to 9100 only a few miles from a peak at 8499. Yikes. -Doug If you look at the Jeppesen chart the same obstacle is 8,875. Quite a difference, heh? ;-) Having said that, you are still at 10,900 when you fly over that terrain. You don't start down to 9,100 until another 3.7 miles or so. That is a lot more vertical and horizontal clearance than required by TERPS. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Easiest and Hardest | [email protected] | Piloting | 13 | July 4th 06 02:39 PM |
Has anyone flown in here? | john smith | Piloting | 2 | October 2nd 05 11:36 AM |
Approach Question- Published Missed Can't be flown? | Brad Z | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | May 6th 04 04:19 AM |
has anyone flown with these ? | Damian John Paul Brown | General Aviation | 0 | April 15th 04 04:26 AM |
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 45 | November 20th 03 05:20 AM |