how is this ok?

[eman1200]

I didn’t have any problem imagining the picture.

I asked if you were more likely to hit the guy with his landing lights pointed at you and you at him...

Or hit him as you’re turning base to final and he’s going the same way you are (if the ILS or whatever he was flying was aligned with traffic).

And to provide examples from actual accident reports as to how many of each actually happen...

I know which aircraft is harder to see... and it isn’t the one coming at me, unless he didn’t turn on his freaking lights...

I won't be spending any time researching examples I can tell u that fo sho.

more concerned with the overall picture.

 

[denverpilot]

I won't be spending any time researching examples I can tell u that fo sho.

more concerned with the overall picture.

I hear ya. All sorts of online arguments about patterns that don’t mention the easiest things to see though.

Advisory Circulars and the AIM be damned, I can damn well see the guy doing a head on ILS (again assuming lights are on) than nearly anyone else in any pattern, and don’t think I’d have any trouble missing them if I had to do a go-around or they came down too low on their approach.

I think the whole “towers stopped doing opposite direction approaches” thing is crap. They probably had documented cases where separation was small, but probably not that many where the aircraft couldn’t even see each other whatsoever. Especially if lights were on.

Lights off is a different problem, and that’s no bueno. Hard to see anybody with lights off even in daylight.

I light the airplane up like a Christmas tree in heavy traffic areas, even just transitioning.

Anything helps in the “spot the tiny speck in the ground clutter” game.

 

[Kansas Flyer]

I'll toss a hand-grenade and run...

Think practice approaches are more likely to run into someone making a base-to-final turn or descend into someone (the low wing/high-wing thing)...

Rather than collide head-on... when doing opposite-direction approaches...

... if everybody has their lights on?



(p.s. What do the actual accident reports indicate the numbers truly are?)

That's a big if around here.

 

[LongRoadBob]

Student pilot here, I passed ground school, and have some hours flying, but I really don't understand the relationship I see cropping up here between VFR and IFR contentions. What am I missing? Can anyone explain what the rules are ad what the contention, or the reality of the conflict is and how a VFR pilot is supposed to handle at uncontrolled airports the IFR pilot? I find it confusing, do they have any special considerations when flying IFR, or when they are in sight of the airport is it still see and avoid or what?

 

[SkyDog58]

lemme paint the picture for u, @denverpilot

View attachment 64002





by the way, check out that nice stable approach eman is on!

I see the problem now. No wonder you were concerned.


Everyone was flying Arrows.

 

[Bonchie]

that's an excuse? The Crux of this is that a go-around would have made a benign situation go bad quickly...

A go-around is only an issue if no one is talking. The person going around will turn crosswind and be above the guy on the approach long before they merge. IFR guys have to be able to practice approaches against the prevailing wind at times.

This assumes the guy flying the approach is doing things right and only flying a low approach to the edge of the pattern vs. going to ILS minimums or something. Then, sure, it'd be a problem, maybe.

I had to fly an ILS for currency the other day and had this exact issue. Two guys in the pattern but the ILS was on the tailwind runway. I simply let them know where I was often, told them I would break it off early, and the one guy offered to extend his downwind (which obviously has him flying further away from me in this situation) until I turned clear on the missed.

 

[PaulS]

Student pilot here, I passed ground school, and have some hours flying, but I really don't understand the relationship I see cropping up here between VFR and IFR contentions. What am I missing? Can anyone explain what the rules are ad what the contention, or the reality of the conflict is and how a VFR pilot is supposed to handle at uncontrolled airports the IFR pilot? I find it confusing, do they have any special considerations when flying IFR, or when they are in sight of the airport is it still see and avoid or what?

A go-around is only an issue if no one is talking. The person going around will turn crosswind and be above the guy on the approach long before they merge. IFR guys have to be able to practice approaches against the prevailing wind at times.

This assumes the guy flying the approach is doing things right and only flying a low approach to the edge of the pattern vs. going to ILS minimums or something. Then, sure, it'd be a problem, maybe.

I had to fly an ILS for currency the other day and had this exact issue. Two guys in the pattern but the ILS was on the tailwind runway. I simply let them know where I was often, told them I would break it off early, and the one guy offered to extend his downwind (which obviously has him flying further away from me in this situation) until I turned clear on the missed.

Bob, I think Bonchie says it well, if everyone is talking there is no issue. If everyone thinks they are right and shuts up, then there is a potential for a problem. The IFR guys need to say they are on an approach, then report positions and intentions in non IFR lingo for VFR pilots and students out there, some of them are not good at that, I think they probably don't know where they are, except on the approach when they do that, you need to watch out for them, you will recognize them when you hear them.

I had a guy report his position as an intersection, on an approach and that he was landing while I was in the pattern, I had no idea where he was. So I reported my position, I think I was downwind abeam the numbers at that point and said "Aircraft reporting XXX intersection, I have no idea where you are." He came back with XX miles SE of the field and he would be looking for me". He wasn't an issue for me and all was good after that. Communication solves most of the issues.

 

[timwinters]

do they have any special considerations when flying IFR,

On a VFR day, no one is flying IFR thus, NO, there is no special consideration. Once in the airport environment everyone is equal.

I had a guy report his position as an intersection, on an approach and that he was landing while I was in the pattern, I had no idea where he was.

That's one of my pet peeves. I've been known to key up and ask "and exactly WHAT does that tell the average VFR pilot?"

 

[bflynn]

That's one of my pet peeves. I've been known to key up and ask "and exactly WHAT does that tell the average VFR pilot?"

Even just saying "5 miles south, practicing approach" doesn't quite tell the whole story. Big difference between a Cirrus doing this and a 152.

 

[denverpilot]

That's one of my pet peeves. I've been known to key up and ask "and exactly WHAT does that tell the average VFR pilot?"

I heard a poor instrument student key up in response to a similar comment to them once saying, "I don't know, I just started doing this too!" LOL...

Then a voice that was obviously the instructor... "We're five southeast straight in Runway XX."

 

[tawood]

lemme paint the picture for u, @denverpilot

View attachment 64002





by the way, check out that nice stable approach eman is on!

Must be no crosswind...and you are really lined up dead center! Good job.

 

[eman1200]

I see the problem now. No wonder you were concerned.


Everyone was flying Arrows.

this is more to scale.

 

[mscard88]

this is more to scale.


View attachment 64007

You're still too fast on final! Pull up pull up!

 

[denverpilot]

this is more to scale.


View attachment 64007

There's some guy asking in another thread what drawing program (out of thousands on the market, of course...) he should use for writing documentation...

You should probably go over there and school him on your awesome drawing thingy here.

 

[eman1200]

There's some guy asking in another thread what drawing program (out of thousands on the market, of course...) he should use for writing documentation...

You should probably go over there and school him on your awesome drawing thingy here.

I do have some mad skillz, don't I?

 

[Cluemeister]

"Mr. No Problem Jackwagon"

Thanks for the good laugh eman!

 

[denverpilot]

 

[trenton]

This is one of the reasons my primary instructor gave for turning crosswind 300' below pattern altitude and finish the climb on crosswind before turning downwind.

The AIM also advises to turn crosswind beyond the departure end of the runway, so it's possible you could be at TPA before turning crosswind. We've got 9000' at KPAE, and it's uncontrolled after 10pm. Depending on conditions, I can be at altitude before the end of the runway even in my lowly 172N.

 

[PPC1052]

I too just want to be accommodating. As a VFR student who knows exactly where I am relative to the airport, I find it frustrating when someone shoots an approach using IFR fixes in radio announcements on CTAF. I’m at “spongebob” on the RNAV to 31 doesn’t help me have any idea where you are. I’d be happy to extend a downwind or something, but no idea if that’s helping or hurting

I think that is totally reasonable, and gets to my point above-- IFR traffic cannot expect VFR pilots know those IFR terms which are not covered in the basic private pilot training.

When I fly an approach to a non-towered airport, the approach could have me coming in to the runway that is opposite of what is being used by traffic in the pattern, and I have no control over that given my limitations in nav equipment, and the available approaches. It's my job to let the VFR traffic where I am in terms they can understand, and it's my job to de-conflict with other traffic. But, because VFR traffic doesn't know what we are doing, they can sometimes think that it is automatically crazy to approach the opposite run way, and write off the IFR traffic as inconsiderate. (I'm not saying that describes Eman in this case.) VFR traffic should be aware that it's ok to be on the approach to the opposite strip, that it's not anything to be necessarily nervous about, and to understand that IFR traffic will likely be breaking off at a safe distance. It's only when they don't that its a problem. I think with a little more experience, you get more of a sense as to what is really a hazard, and what is just a situation to keep your eye on in order to take evasive action if necessary.

 

[mryan75]

most Pilots would break off a practice approach,long before the runway environment if everyone is using a different runway. The pilot on the approach ,felt confident he could avoid all the other traffic,I guess.

I was the IFR dude in this situation last weekend. We were on with approach but listening to the CTAF as well. We were waiting to see if the pattern would clear, but it didn't, so when approach gave us the nod to switch frequencies, we announced our position and that we were going to make an extended left downwind for the other runway. We broke off the approach and landed in the direction everyone else was using.

Robbed me of a chance to get a new approach in my book (IR student), but we're mindful of our fellow aviators.

 

[Ghery]

On a VFR day, no one is flying IFR thus, NO, there is no special consideration. Once in the airport environment everyone is equal.



That's one of my pet peeves. I've been known to key up and ask "and exactly WHAT does that tell the average VFR pilot?"

Heck, I've got my IR and unless I have the appropriate approach chart out, I probably don't know where that pilot is, either. Especially if we're talking about some place other than KOLM. Say where you are in plain English so everyone has an idea where to look.

 

[PPC1052]

Student pilot here, I passed ground school, and have some hours flying, but I really don't understand the relationship I see cropping up here between VFR and IFR contentions. What am I missing? Can anyone explain what the rules are ad what the contention, or the reality of the conflict is and how a VFR pilot is supposed to handle at uncontrolled airports the IFR pilot? I find it confusing, do they have any special considerations when flying IFR, or when they are in sight of the airport is it still see and avoid or what?

So, VFR traffic is trying to enter on the 45 to downwind for the runway that the prevailing winds favor. Let's just assume a wind from due south at KTYQ. So, you, being VFR, want to approach from the south east, and then follow the traffic pattern to land on runway 18. I, on the other hand, being IFR with limited navigational equipment (i.e., no IFR certified GPS) am flying the only ILS approach they have at that airport, which is the ILS 36. You can see that approach here: https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/TYQ/IAP/ILS+OR+LOC+RWY+36/pdf So, that means that I am going to be flying straight in toward runway 36 from at least 10 miles out as I am following the localizer radio signal (which is sort of like a VOR, but only has one radial which is aligned directly with the runway). I am going to initially be at least at 3000 feet, then down to 2700 feet, (because that is what the approach requires to avoid hitting objects protruding from the ground) at which time I am going to intercept the glideslope, which will have me descending on a constant vertical descent path. That means that I have no choice but to do a straight in descending approach to the opposite runway as you. And, to make it worse, I have to be talking with ATC until about five miles out, which means I can't really talk to you in the traffic pattern. Now, if you look at the approach, you will see some intersections that are given arbitrary five letter names. In this case, there is YABUD, and PIPTE. When ATC gives me the clearance to switch to the local advisory frequency, I need to tell traffic in the pattern where I am. If I were to come on CTAF and merely announce that I am at PIPTE, then most VFR only traffic would not understand what that means at all because they don't have the approach plate, and they haven't been taught how to read it anyway. I need to say something like, "I am five miles south straight in for 36," rather than "I'm at PIPTE." Now, if this is a practice approach, I am going to be under the hood, and I am going to want to practice keeping the plane directly on the localizer course (to keep that VOR/LOC needle centered), and keeping right on the glide path (to keep the glide slope centered). That's a skill that requires a fair amount of practice in order to be able to do well enough to fly safely under actual IFR conditions, and is kind of the biggest point of flying the practice approaches. That causes me to keep flying the approach from five miles straight in, descending down below the normal traffic pattern, and thereby putting me head on with the VFR folks landing on 18. It's my job then to side step, or take some other maneuver as I get close to avoid any conflict. But, what is safe is often in the eye of the beholder. So, the IFR guy could get closer than the VFR guy thinks is safe. Add in a lack of understanding of what the IFR guy is up to, and you can further exacerbate this tension. Hope this helps.

 

[Kansas Flyer]

So, VFR traffic is trying to enter on the 45 to downwind for the runway that the prevailing winds favor. Let's just assume a wind from due south at KTYQ. So, you, being VFR, want to approach from the south east, and then follow the traffic pattern to land on runway 18. I, on the other hand, being IFR with limited navigational equipment (i.e., no IFR certified GPS) am flying the only ILS approach they have at that airport, which is the ILS 36. You can see that approach here: https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/TYQ/IAP/ILS+OR+LOC+RWY+36/pdf So, that means that I am going to be flying in toward runway 36 from at least 10 miles out as I am following the localizer radio signal (which is sort of like a VOR, but only has one radial which is aligned directly with the runway). I am going to initially be at least at 3000 feet, then down to 2700 feet, (because that is what the approach requires to avoid hitting objects protruding from the ground) at which time I am going to intercept the glideslope, which will have me descending on a constant vertical descent path. That means that I have no choice but to do a straight in descending approach to the opposite runway as you. And, to make it worse, I have to be talking with ATC until about five miles out, which means I can't really talk to you in the traffic pattern. Now, if you look at the approach, you will see some intersections that are given arbitrary five letter names. In this case, there is YABUD, and PIPTE. When ATC gives me the clearance to switch to the local advisory frequency, I need to tell traffic in the pattern where I am. If I were to come on CTAF and merely announce that I am at PIPTE, then most VFR only traffic would not understand what that means at all because they don't have the approach plate, and they haven't been taught how to read it anyway. I need to say something like, "I am five miles south straight in for 36," rather than "I'm at PIPTE." Now, if this is a practice approach, I am going to be under the hood, and I am going to want to practice keeping the plane directly on the localizer course (to keep that VOR/LOC needle centered), and keeping right on the glide path (to keep the glide slope centered). That's a skill that requires a fair amount of practice in order to be able to do well enough to fly safely under actual IFR conditions, and is kind of the biggest point of flying the practice approaches. That causes me to keep flying the approach from five miles straight in, descending down below the normal traffic pattern, and thereby putting me head on with the VFR folks landing on 18. It's my job then to side step, or take some other maneuver as I get close to avoid any conflict. But, what is safe is often in the eye of the beholder. So, the IFR guy could get closer than the VFR guy thinks is safe. Add in a lack of understanding of what the IFR guy is up to, and you can further exacerbate this tension. Hope this helps.

How far into a practice approach do you have to get for it to count for currency or as training towards your rating?

 

[eman1200]

How far into a practice approach do you have to get for it to count for currency or as training towards your rating?

"When conducted in an aircraft, flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device, the pilot must be established on each required segment of the IAP to the minimum descent altitude (MDA) or decision altitude/decision height (DA/DH);"

 

[PPC1052]

How far into a practice approach do you have to get for it to count for currency or as training towards your rating?

Per the following, you must keep descending until the minimum descent height (for a localizer only or VOR approach, for example), or to decision altitude for an ILS.

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...afety/info/all_infos/media/2015/InFO15012.pdf

Going back to the ILS 36 into KTYQ, the decision altitude is only 200 AGL. When at 200 AGL on the glide path, you are really close to the end of the runway (maybe 500-1000 feet? I'm sure I should know, but maybe someone can do the math), and 800 feet below the VFR traffic pattern.

 

[EdFred]

How far into a practice approach do you have to get for it to count for currency or as training towards your rating?

Supposed to take it down to minimums if under the hood from what I last read - or what PPC posted.

Which makes it tough when going "backwards" and the VFR pilots are "in the way."

 

[wilkersk]

It hasn't been a big deal for me. There are always guys out doing practice approaches, and always people in the pattern at my home drome. And, its just "see-and-avoid". In fact, just yesterday was the first time, as a VFR pilot in the pattern, I've ever had an instrument approach directly conflict with my turn to final, causing me to continue on my base leg heading beyond the centerline. By the time I made a lazy 270 and called the final, he had gone "missed" and climbed above the pattern - easy peasy. I have more problems with the guy ahead of me flying a 2 mile wide patterns at 60kts, while the guy behind me flying 120kt down winds close abeam.

 

[TRocket]

3 planes in the pattern, all using rwy 23 as the winds dictate. 2 more inbound setting up for 23. along comes Mr. IFR stating inbound for low approach to rwy 5. everyone is making radio calls, all stating 23. Mr. IFR continues his calls for rwy 5 low approach. I'm on short final and state I'm landing 23 and I guess I'll be on the lookout for the guy using the wrong rwy. he states "it's fine, I'm just doing a low approach". fk you it's fine. it ended up being fine, but if I had to do a go around it would immediately be far from fine.

any of you's guys run into this? pretty annoying.

Sounds to me like you are guilty of being in the pattern on a nice VFR day at Monroe. I rarely shoot approaches there for that reason, unless it is early in the AM.

 

[FlySince9]

"When conducted in an aircraft, flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device, the pilot must be established on each required segment of the IAP to the minimum descent altitude (MDA) or decision altitude/decision height (DA/DH);"

Whoa! someone's been studying for their IR, me thinx!

 

[eman1200]

Whoa! someone's been studying for their IR, me thinx!

it's true. but that was pure google-fu.

 

[Clip4]

jackasses definitely do. sort of.

And then their are jackasses doing the same thing for big money.

 

[Clip4]

We do simultaneous instrument approaches to opposite runway all the time. If its even marginal VFR, instrument traffic is REQUIRED to "see and avoid". And, IFR traffic is required to not conflict with VFR aircraft established in the pattern. That being said, instrument traffic can still safely fly the final approach segment and then manuever to avoid the traffic pattern. At my home airport, the "localizer" approach minimums are 840' MSL and 3/4 mile. Under those conditions, I will fly the approach down to minimums and then execute the missed. If my timing sucks and I've got an airplane climbing toward me, I'll go missed a few seconds early and sidestep to the opposite side of the crosswind turn. This is perfectly safe and legal. "No Problem!"

CFIs, DPEs conducting practical tests, and the FAA conducting flight checks of the approaches do the same thing, but it does tend to upset the students and low time pilots who do not understand what is occurring.

 

[Clip4]

Student pilot here, I passed ground school, and have some hours flying, but I really don't understand the relationship I see cropping up here between VFR and IFR contentions. What am I missing? Can anyone explain what the rules are ad what the contention, or the reality of the conflict is and how a VFR pilot is supposed to handle at uncontrolled airports the IFR pilot? I find it confusing, do they have any special considerations when flying IFR, or when they are in sight of the airport is it still see and avoid or what?

IFR aircraft are required to see and avoid whenever are is visual conditions just like the VFR traffic. Their radar service and traffic advisories end as they begin the approach to an uncontrolled airport because the enter uncontrolled airspace below 700 ft AGL.

Practice or actual IFR arrivals are typically aligned with the final leg of the traffic pattern to a runway beginning the approach and will make a radio call 4-7 miles out. When this is occurring, it requires extra vigilance by all the pilots using the airport.

The pilot may broadcast they are over the name their final approach fix landing runway ##, an annouce they are # miles out for landing ##, or direction (N,S,E,W) and distance landing runway ##.

A pilot conducting an approach to an airport that has aircraft in traffic pattern is expected not to disrupt the flow of the traffic pattern and join the traffic in the pattern if they cannot land straight in safely.

Most times the traffic in the pattern can flex by extending the down wind leg to allow for the straight in traffic to land or complete a practice instrument approach.

If there are a lot of planes in the pattern, that may not be possible and the straight in arrival is expected to join the traffic pattern. Note that fast airplanes are not flying in the pattern at 80 KTS and have a substantially wider pattern than you fly.


For the purposes of training or efficiency, many times the approaches are to the opposite runway being used at an uncontrolled airport. The approach again starts 7 miles from the runway end opposite the runway you are using.

The aircraft may announce low approach. In this event the pilot is telling you he is going not going land or enter to pattern. He is going to pass over the airport above the landing traffic.

The pilot may also announce he is circle to land. He is going to alter course from straight in to a downwind to the runway in use. He may be downwind at an altitude below pattern altitude to practice a circle to land procedure.

Any time you believe an unsafe situation exists, remove yourself from that situation. If the risk of a mid air collision exists, why do you want to be in the pattern so you can be a participant? Breakout of the pattern and rejoin when safe to do so. This includes when another aircraft is announcing he is on the same pattern leg as you and you are not uncertain as to the chance of a mid air collision.

An aircraft announcimg a practice approach to the opposite runway is not an unsafe situation when performed properly. 95% of the time a CFI is onboard conducting training. It is an additional aircraft you have to account for while in the pattern.

A lot of time for a student or low time pilot this is an unwanted distraction. If so, you can leave the pattern and come back in a few minutes. Same thing if there are a lot of planes in the pattern that are distracting you. Be PIC.

 

[PPC1052]

Their radar service and traffic advisories end as they begin the approach to an uncontrolled airport because the enter uncontrolled airspace below 700 ft AGL.

Actually, they end near the end of the approach-- typically at the final approach fix, at about only about five miles straight in to the runway.

 

[Clip4]

Actually, they end near the end of the approach-- typically at the final approach fix, at about only about five miles straight in to the runway.

Typically ATC end radar service and advises to change freq. before the FAF. at 6-7 miles and a pilot in the pattern has no idea where an approach procedure actually begins, which can be 20 miles from an airport.

But I have edited to make it clearer.

 

[hankrausch]

So, VFR traffic is trying to enter on the 45 to downwind for the runway that the prevailing winds favor. Let's just assume a wind from due south at KTYQ. So, you, being VFR, want to approach from the south east, and then follow the traffic pattern to land on runway 18. I, on the other hand, being IFR with limited navigational equipment (i.e., no IFR certified GPS) am flying the only ILS approach they have at that airport, which is the ILS 36. You can see that approach here: https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/TYQ/IAP/ILS+OR+LOC+RWY+36/pdf So, that means that I am going to be flying straight in toward runway 36 from at least 10 miles out as I am following the localizer radio signal (which is sort of like a VOR, but only has one radial which is aligned directly with the runway). I am going to initially be at least at 3000 feet, then down to 2700 feet, (because that is what the approach requires to avoid hitting objects protruding from the ground) at which time I am going to intercept the glideslope, which will have me descending on a constant vertical descent path. That means that I have no choice but to do a straight in descending approach to the opposite runway as you. And, to make it worse, I have to be talking with ATC until about five miles out, which means I can't really talk to you in the traffic pattern. Now, if you look at the approach, you will see some intersections that are given arbitrary five letter names. In this case, there is YABUD, and PIPTE. When ATC gives me the clearance to switch to the local advisory frequency, I need to tell traffic in the pattern where I am. If I were to come on CTAF and merely announce that I am at PIPTE, then most VFR only traffic would not understand what that means at all because they don't have the approach plate, and they haven't been taught how to read it anyway. I need to say something like, "I am five miles south straight in for 36," rather than "I'm at PIPTE." Now, if this is a practice approach, I am going to be under the hood, and I am going to want to practice keeping the plane directly on the localizer course (to keep that VOR/LOC needle centered), and keeping right on the glide path (to keep the glide slope centered). That's a skill that requires a fair amount of practice in order to be able to do well enough to fly safely under actual IFR conditions, and is kind of the biggest point of flying the practice approaches. That causes me to keep flying the approach from five miles straight in, descending down below the normal traffic pattern, and thereby putting me head on with the VFR folks landing on 18. It's my job then to side step, or take some other maneuver as I get close to avoid any conflict. But, what is safe is often in the eye of the beholder. So, the IFR guy could get closer than the VFR guy thinks is safe. Add in a lack of understanding of what the IFR guy is up to, and you can further exacerbate this tension. Hope this helps.

Wow what a useful description! Thank you for posting this.

 

[PPC1052]

Wow what a useful description! Thank you for posting this.

I am glad that helped. Very happy to assist.

 

[PPC1052]

Typically ATC end radar service and advises to change freq. before the FAF. at 6-7 miles and a pilot in the pattern has no idea where an approach procedure actually begins, which can be 20 miles from an airport.

But I have edited to make it clearer.

Understood. There is some variability when they drop you, and where the FAF is, but you and I are in agreement about that ball park.

 

[Clip4]

Understood. There is some variability when they drop you, and where the FAF is, but you and I are in agreement about that ball park.

Getting the folks to drop the fix and give a distance and direction is going to take several years. Not really certain if “6 mile straight in instrument approach to runway ##” isn’t easiest thing to understand.

 

[luvflyin]

Per the following, you must keep descending until the minimum descent height (for a localizer only or VOR approach, for example), or to decision altitude for an ILS.

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...afety/info/all_infos/media/2015/InFO15012.pdf

Going back to the ILS 36 into KTYQ, the decision altitude is only 200 AGL. When at 200 AGL on the glide path, you are really close to the end of the runway (maybe 500-1000 feet? I'm sure I should know, but maybe someone can do the math), and 800 feet below the VFR traffic pattern.

A 3 degrees glideslope is 319 feet per mile. I think. It’s very close to that I know. The glideslope starts at a ‘touchdown’ point. That varies a little depending on the length of the runway. 200 AGL is going to have you about a half a mile or so from the threshold.