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
|
|||
|
|||
Hilton wrote:
Could you control the aircraft using outside references (only)? I could see the cloud layer and I could see the lights through the haze so for the most yes. could I see a defined horizon, definitely not as there are many black hills, the San francisco bay that was black and it was night time. And the airport was obscurred until turning onto the FA Course as the initial approach course was over the black clouds. So overall, really this is a grey area. I'm definitely leaning towards that I can't count it even though I highly depended on it. Part of the issue was that I was not free to fly anywhere due to the SFO Bravo pushing down onto the cloud layer. It shouldn't matter all that much as I did 5 partial panel with failed GPS approach a couple of weeks earlier under the hood. Being new to the game, I don't plan on letting my skills deteriorate from lack of use. thanks everyone. Gerald |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Gerald wrote:
So overall, really this is a grey area. Sure sounds like it. BTW: Wasn't that SQL GPS marked N/A for a really long time, or am I thinking of another approach? Hilton |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Hilton wrote:
BTW: Wasn't that SQL GPS marked N/A for a really long time, or am I thinking of another approach? correct it was but they opened it up about a year ago. Gerald |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Gerald,
Hilton wrote: BTW: Wasn't that SQL GPS marked N/A for a really long time, or am I thinking of another approach? correct it was but they opened it up about a year ago. Thanks, I never knew they opened it up. I seem to remember that the missed went over SFO and they didn't want a 'missed' to hold up operations at SFO. Now I see the missed is a left turn away from SFO - perhaps they changed the missed and that allowed them to remove it from the NA list? Someone correct me if my memory of the 'old' missed is incorrect. Thanks, Hilton |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Hilton" wrote in
. net: Gerald, Hilton wrote: BTW: Wasn't that SQL GPS marked N/A for a really long time, or am I thinking of another approach? correct it was but they opened it up about a year ago. Thanks, I never knew they opened it up. I seem to remember that the missed went over SFO and they didn't want a 'missed' to hold up operations at SFO. Now I see the missed is a left turn away from SFO - perhaps they changed the missed and that allowed them to remove it from the NA list? Someone correct me if my memory of the 'old' missed is incorrect. Thanks, Hilton Your memory of the old missed is indeed correct! From the chart dated 15 JUL 1999, "MISSED APPROACH - Climb to 4000 via 302 course to SFO VOR/DME and hold." -- Marty Shapiro Silicon Rallye Inc. (remove SPAMNOT to email me) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Marty wrote:
Your memory of the old missed is indeed correct! From the chart dated 15 JUL 1999, "MISSED APPROACH - Climb to 4000 via 302 course to SFO VOR/DME and hold." Marty, thanks for the post. I remember being amazed that given an infinite number of points to choose from (since it is a GPS approach), they chose the SFO VOR! Hilton |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
You did not have to fly soley by reference to instruments, so it was a
visual approach even though it was below VFR minimiums. If you didn't even have to look at the instruments, I don't see how it could be considered an actual instrument approach. Mike MU-2 "Gerald Sylvester" wrote in message . .. Mike Rapoport wrote: I wojuld say no. You made a vistual approach in VMC. It was not a 'visual approach.' I required a GPS approach but the approach kept me in VMC that was below VFR.... (500 below, 1000 feet above, etc. for each airspace). Gerald |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Gerald Sylvester" wrote in message m... Tonight I was flying back to SQL GPS 30. There was a dense, 100' thick ceiling covering half the airport at 800' AGL/MSL. It's not a ceiling if it only covers half the airport. I was in VMC the whole time yet it probably would have been illegal to fly in VFR as I would have been close to the clouds (see note below about this). So even though visibility was 10nm below the clouds, only have the airport had the ceiling and I never passed through any clouds, I presume I can still log this as an approach in "actual." How could it have been illegal to fly in VFR if you were able to remain VMC the whole time? So can you actually log an approach in actual and never go through IMC? Sounds strange but I guess you are able to do this. Same goes passing through a broken layer. I log an approach whenever it's necessary to fly an SIAP in order to get in to the field. You say you could have gotten in VFR, thus an SIAP was not necessary. Note: my passenger picked out a plane probably at about 600' flying from PAO to SQL while I was on final. I called out on CTAF (tower was closed) and didn't hear anything. I wouldn't be surprised they kept hush knowing they were breaking the regulations. I had not cancelled IFR and was on the approach and ended up doing a 360 and climbing. I contacted approach immediately telling him what I was doing but it could have caused a go around for a heavy if there was an inbound a/c going into SFO. Fortunately no one was around. Fortunately my passenger saw the traffic as they were below me, I was in a low wing, night, with clouds around and I wasn't expecting him. What regulation do you think he was breaking? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Gerald Sylvester" wrote in message ... SQL was not VFR (despite the moron flying at tree top levels with no radio). Your observation made it 800' scattered and 10 miles visibility. Sounds like VFR to me. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Gerald Sylvester" wrote in message . .. It was not a 'visual approach.' I required a GPS approach but the approach kept me in VMC that was below VFR.... (500 below, 1000 feet above, etc. for each airspace). You described VFR conditions. Why did you require the GPS approach? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GPS approach question | Matt Whiting | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | August 29th 08 03:54 AM |
Contact approach question | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 114 | January 31st 05 06:40 PM |
Logging Flight Time Question | Phoenix Pilot | Piloting | 1 | June 13th 04 06:23 PM |
Where is the FAF on the GPS 23 approach to KUCP? | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 36 | April 16th 04 12:41 PM |
Study pilot workload during approach and landing | Freshfighter | Piloting | 5 | December 7th 03 04:06 PM |