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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Ray Andraka" wrote in message ... THat's how I do it, although I've had instructors doing my IPC ding me for not starting the timer on an ILS. As politely as I can, I remind them that the times are for a localizer only approach and that if the glideslope screws the pooch, I'm going missed. Don't Time That ILS Approach! - http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182042-1.html |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Kerflooey?
Yes. If the glide slope goes kerflooey, you look down for the new numbers. You only need one - the MDA. If you have a series of stepdown fixes and you aren't set up to know when you've passed them, then maybe it's better to go missed than to scramble. But if what's ahead of you is simple, just grab the MDA and keep going. If you were on the glide slope, then everything ahead of you is still clear at that altitude, stepdown or no. Jose -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Barry wrote: When doing an ILS approach, with the glideslope, is it a requirement to be able to identify the outer marker or a substitute? FAR 91.175(k) lists the outer marker as one of the "basic ground components" and gives the acceptable substitutes, but doesn't explicitly say that it's required. The AIM 1-1-9(j) on "Inoperative Components" mentions the localizer and glideslope, but says nothing about the outer marker. If you answer, please give a specific FAA reference that says whether or not the OM or a substitute is required. Whenever someone makes a post requesting specific FAA references, you are in effect asking for someone else to do your research for you an challenging them in the process. When I see I post like that I recommend you hire a Washington DC top end aviation law firm and pay for the precision you expect. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
I was commenting on the word - which I now have added to my vocabulary...
Thanks, Michael "Teacherjh" wrote in message ... Kerflooey? Yes. If the glide slope goes kerflooey, you look down for the new numbers. You only need one - the MDA. If you have a series of stepdown fixes and you aren't set up to know when you've passed them, then maybe it's better to go missed than to scramble. But if what's ahead of you is simple, just grab the MDA and keep going. If you were on the glide slope, then everything ahead of you is still clear at that altitude, stepdown or no. Jose -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Is that the actual sound that the glideslope makes when it goes out?
"dit-dit-dit-dah...kerflouey" "Michael 182" wrote in news:rhm1c.170139$jk2.618747@attbi_s53: I was commenting on the word - which I now have added to my vocabulary... Thanks, Michael "Teacherjh" wrote in message ... Kerflooey? Yes. If the glide slope goes kerflooey, you look down for the new numbers. You only need one - the MDA. If you have a series of stepdown fixes and you aren't set up to know when you've passed them, then maybe it's better to go missed than to scramble. But if what's ahead of you is simple, just grab the MDA and keep going. If you were on the glide slope, then everything ahead of you is still clear at that altitude, stepdown or no. Jose -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Is that the actual sound that the glideslope makes when it goes out? "dit-dit-dit-dah...Kerflouey" No, actually it's "Erflooey". I'm using the ICAO convention. Jose -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Only on the Toronto side. In French Canada, it's "Querphlouis".
Roy Smith wrote in : In article , (Teacherjh) wrote: Is that the actual sound that the glideslope makes when it goes out? "dit-dit-dit-dah...Kerflouey" No, actually it's "Erflooey". I'm using the ICAO convention. Jose Except in Canada, where it's "Kerflouey, eh?" |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:S281c.165778$jk2.607247@attbi_s53... Seems to me that there was an article in either IFR or Aviation Safety on the subject of timing ILS approaches, and the consensus of the instructors quoted seemed to be "don't bother." Rationale was that the miss is based on an altitude, not a time, and if the glideslope goes kaflooey the pilot should wave off, brief the localizer approach or whatever, and start over again. I don't have a problem with that. Hm, I'm not sure I follow. Going missed and starting over sounds good, but to go missed you may need to identify the MAP (if there's a turn there). And I thought the MAP is based on a *position* which--if the GS is working and you're following it--is indeed identifiable by an altitude. But if the GS fails, you might have no means other than your timer to identify the MAP. --Gary Bob Gardner "Ray Andraka" wrote in message ... No, I got criticized heavily, even after the explanation. For a split approach, it isn't jsut the timer, you've also got a different set of altitudes to commit to short term memory. I can only remember a few things at once in short term memory. Put too much in, and it is all gone. Michael wrote: -- --Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 http://www.andraka.com "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 17:54:52 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller" wrote:
"Ray Andraka" wrote in message ... THat's how I do it, although I've had instructors doing my IPC ding me for not starting the timer on an ILS. As politely as I can, I remind them that the times are for a localizer only approach and that if the glideslope screws the pooch, I'm going missed. Don't Time That ILS Approach! - http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182042-1.html I have no problem with the article as far as not continung the approach as a LOC-only one, just vecause you are timing it. The whole reason to tinme the ILS is in case of GS failure, you can still locate the MAP. An immediate climb is safe, but any turns on the missed approach segment assume that you initiated the miss at the MAP. If the GS flags, the only way you can begin to determine where the MAP is, is by the time. So, time all ILS approaches, and use the time ONLY to identify the MAP on a missed approach. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
TKM MB75 Marker Beacon Receiver | Darrel Toepfer | Home Built | 0 | August 18th 04 10:31 PM |
KR-21 marker beacon pinout? | JFLEISC | Home Built | 0 | March 17th 04 10:46 PM |
Canard planes swept wing outer VG's? | Paul Lee | Home Built | 8 | January 4th 04 08:10 PM |
Marker Beacon Antenna - Paging Jim Weir. | Bart D. Hull | Home Built | 1 | November 27th 03 10:31 PM |
marker beacon | Gary Gunn | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | November 3rd 03 05:20 PM |