Zero-Zero Below and Out of Options - IFR Past Minimums

Talk about having a bad day
 
A question for those who are doing zero-ceiling zero visibility approaches in a sim: does your sim have realistic errors in the baro altimeter? It seems to me that would make a lot of difference, if you're trying to flare without seeing a runway, without a radar altimeter.

I've got two baro altimeters on my panel, PFD tape and round-dial backup. And despite a recent pito-static calibration, they disagree, by varying amounts, as much as 60' disagreement. So I'm guessing there's no reason to think one could rely on a baro altimeter, to within 60', in choosing how high to flare.
 
NoHeat said:
A question for those who are doing zero-ceiling zero visibility approaches in a sim: does your sim have realistic errors in the baro altimeter? It seems to me that would make a lot of difference, if you're trying to flare without seeing a runway, without a radar altimeter.

I've got two baro altimeters on my panel, PFD tape and round-dial backup. And despite a recent pito-static calibration, they disagree, by varying amounts, as much as 60' disagreement. So I'm guessing there's no reason to think one could rely on a baro altimeter, to within 60', in choosing how high to flare.
Click to expand...

Some thoughts, not trying to answer your question...

Anything lower than Cat I uses radar altimeter not baro. “30, 20, 10, retard, retard”...

Even in 400 rvr you’ll see runway lights as you flare in a small airplane. Flying regularly to one of the foggiest spots anywhere, ACK, 400rvr was the lowest I ever heard...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
NoHeat said:
A question for those who are doing zero-ceiling zero visibility approaches in a sim: does your sim have realistic errors in the baro altimeter? It seems to me that would make a lot of difference, if you're trying to flare without seeing a runway, without a radar altimeter.

I've got two baro altimeters on my panel, PFD tape and round-dial backup. And despite a recent pito-static calibration, they disagree, by varying amounts, as much as 60' disagreement. So I'm guessing there's no reason to think one could rely on a baro altimeter, to within 60', in choosing how high to flare.
Click to expand...
On my sim (X-Plane 11) I can set the field barometric pressure and then set my panel altimeter to something different than that. In the video I had the field set at 29.91" and my aircraft altimeter baro set to 29.96" for the C172 and 1015 hpa (29.97" inHg) for the SR22T.

My strategy for letting the autopilot land (in the sim, of course -- and IRL if it ever came to that :)) is to bring the throttle back slowly from final approach speed toward normal landing speed... the autopilot is thereby lifting the nose a bit to stay on the glideslope/glidepath and this seems to approximate a round out. I do not try to force a flair... figuring that a touchdown at landing speed, in a round out attitude (slightly nose up) is probably survivable... and better than risking a flare.
 
NoHeat said:
A question for those who are doing zero-ceiling zero visibility approaches in a sim: does your sim have realistic errors in the baro altimeter? It seems to me that would make a lot of difference, if you're trying to flare without seeing a runway, without a radar altimeter.

I've got two baro altimeters on my panel, PFD tape and round-dial backup. And despite a recent pito-static calibration, they disagree, by varying amounts, as much as 60' disagreement. So I'm guessing there's no reason to think one could rely on a baro altimeter, to within 60', in choosing how high to flare.
Click to expand...
Please remember, starting at Number 1. Ceiling means NOTHING on an approach. Nothing, nada, zero, zilch.
 
Some years ago, I did practice fly a one engine LOC DME at KASE in the Seneca, in VMC, at 4200 lbs weight. On one blower at Doype (DME 7.1, 10,700 msl) (missed is 10220), I can make LINDZ at 14,000 but not from below. Of course, that is in a clean airframe, not one that has been iced and de-iced.

So for me, 10.8 is pretty much the end of the approach.

I have not experimented with Holding at LINDZ in a climb. Too much tall granite about; I would think holding inbound @ LINDZ on the 303 deg back course would be the emergency procedure if 14,000 is not made. But, too much "ifs".

I just don't chance that situation.
One Blower: RIL here we come.....
The "out" if I'm an idiot, is DOWNY IAF @ 12.2, @ KRIL. THINK ahead.

Two Blowers: GJT. FLAT land. RLG (IAF for EGE) is a long way away in the WRONG direction (toward high county) and requires 15.2.

***
To the OP, I say, fly to SNS if you can. Like you say, plan better. SNS is really not far at all.
 
Last edited:
Rgbeard said:
I’m sorry to the person that ignored alternate requirements and illegally put themselves in this pickle.

how about a different approach. Follow the FARs and reduce the likelihood of getting yourself in this mess to begin with.
Click to expand...
Gonna bet any pilot that has actually flown to places has run into weather that didn't meet the forecast. Winds 40 gusting 55 at my destination, and similar at my alternate, really got my anxiety going. Uneventful landing, using about fifty feet of runway.
 
Not saying that it’s certain but paying attention to weather, paying attention to alternate airport requirements as well as required fuel goes a long way towards minimizing the risk of the originally proposed scenario. A no-choices approach in hard IMC to a nearly zero-foot ceiling.
 
bbchien said:
Some years ago, I did practice fly a one engine LOC DME at KASE in the Seneca, in VMC, at 4200 lbs weight. On one blower at Doype (DME 7.1, 10,700 msl) (missed is 10220), I can make LINDZ at 14,000 but not from below. Of course, that is in a clean airframe, not one that has been iced and de-iced.

So for me, 10.8 is pretty much the end of the approach.

I have not experimented with Holding at LINDZ in a climb. Too much tall granite about; I would think holding inbound @ LINDZ on the 303 deg back course would be the emergency procedure if 14,000 is not made. But, too much "ifs".

I just don't chance that situation.
One Blower: RIL here we come.....
The "out" if I'm an idiot, is DOWNY IAF @ 12.2, @ KRIL. THINK ahead.
Click to expand...
Even in a jet I wouldn’t initiate a single engine approach into KASE, but you can actually get to Lindz at well below 14,000.
 
Lance F said:
.... If one is within range, go to the big airport. Class B or maybe C. The one with the 10,000’ long 150’ wide runway and a melt your eyeballs HIRL lighting system. Your odds of a safe landing would be even better.
Click to expand...

That’s what I did one time back around 1973-ish. Destination was KLWM, I was coming back from Detroit at night in an Aztec with a huge tailwind. When the sun came up in the east, I could see everything was socked in, everywhere within fuel range was was essentially zero-zero. I shot the ILS - raw data, no AP or FD - to 4R or 4L (can’t remember which, but a very wide, very long runway) at Boston Logan Airport. The RVR was in actuality no more than about 300 ft (maybe less) but the old PATCO controllers took care of me when they knew - without me specifically saying - that I had nowhere else to go. “Merrimack 645, RVR is coming up, now 600 feet..... now 800 feet..... now it’s 1200 feet..... ok it’s now 1800 feet, fly heading [whatever], intercept the loc, you’re cleared for the approach. Tower says you are cleared to land too, you’re the only one inbound.” And eventually, just before the wheels squeaked on, I was almost blinded by those HIRLS. Nice wide runway too, good thing because I wasn’t quite on the center-line! All those practice approaches under the hood to zero-zero that we did back in the Olden Days finally paid off. But I did need a Follow Me truck to lead me to the old Butler Aviation FBO there at KBOS.
 
mswmsw said:
That’s what I did one time back around 1973-ish. Destination was KLWM, I was coming back from Detroit at night in an Aztec with a huge tailwind. When the sun came up in the east, I could see everything was socked in, everywhere within fuel range was was essentially zero-zero. I shot the ILS - raw data, no AP or FD - to 4R or 4L (can’t remember which, but a very wide, very long runway) at Boston Logan Airport. The RVR was in actuality no more than about 300 ft (maybe less) but the old PATCO controllers took care of me when they knew - without me specifically saying - that I had nowhere else to go. “Merrimack 645, RVR is coming up, now 600 feet..... now 800 feet..... now it’s 1200 feet..... ok it’s now 1800 feet, fly heading [whatever], intercept the loc, you’re cleared for the approach. Tower says you are cleared to land too, you’re the only one inbound.” And eventually, just before the wheels squeaked on, I was almost blinded by those HIRLS. Nice wide runway too, good thing because I wasn’t quite on the center-line! All those practice approaches under the hood to zero-zero that we did back in the Olden Days finally paid off. But I did need a Follow Me truck to lead me to the old Butler Aviation FBO there at KBOS.
Click to expand...
As long as the runway lights weren’t blue. ;)
 
mswmsw said:
That’s what I did one time back around 1973-ish. Destination was KLWM, I was coming back from Detroit at night in an Aztec with a huge tailwind. When the sun came up in the east, I could see everything was socked in, everywhere within fuel range was was essentially zero-zero. I shot the ILS - raw data, no AP or FD - to 4R or 4L (can’t remember which, but a very wide, very long runway) at Boston Logan Airport. The RVR was in actuality no more than about 300 ft (maybe less) but the old PATCO controllers took care of me when they knew - without me specifically saying - that I had nowhere else to go. “Merrimack 645, RVR is coming up, now 600 feet..... now 800 feet..... now it’s 1200 feet..... ok it’s now 1800 feet, fly heading [whatever], intercept the loc, you’re cleared for the approach. Tower says you are cleared to land too, you’re the only one inbound.” And eventually, just before the wheels squeaked on, I was almost blinded by those HIRLS. Nice wide runway too, good thing because I wasn’t quite on the center-line! All those practice approaches under the hood to zero-zero that we did back in the Olden Days finally paid off. But I did need a Follow Me truck to lead me to the old Butler Aviation FBO there at KBOS.
Click to expand...
Cool story, I got my license back at LWM, was a short bike ride from my dad's house
 
mswmsw said:
That’s what I did one time back around 1973-ish. Destination was KLWM, I was coming back from Detroit at night in an Aztec with a huge tailwind. When the sun came up in the east, I could see everything was socked in, everywhere within fuel range was was essentially zero-zero. I shot the ILS - raw data, no AP or FD - to 4R or 4L (can’t remember which, but a very wide, very long runway) at Boston Logan Airport. The RVR was in actuality no more than about 300 ft (maybe less) but the old PATCO controllers took care of me when they knew - without me specifically saying - that I had nowhere else to go. “Merrimack 645, RVR is coming up, now 600 feet..... now 800 feet..... now it’s 1200 feet..... ok it’s now 1800 feet, fly heading [whatever], intercept the loc, you’re cleared for the approach. Tower says you are cleared to land too, you’re the only one inbound.” And eventually, just before the wheels squeaked on, I was almost blinded by those HIRLS. Nice wide runway too, good thing because I wasn’t quite on the center-line! All those practice approaches under the hood to zero-zero that we did back in the Olden Days finally paid off. But I did need a Follow Me truck to lead me to the old Butler Aviation FBO there at KBOS.
Click to expand...

In my freight dog days I had similar experiences with controllers and weather. I'm sure all the old freight dogs have. My morning newspaper run (after flying checks all night) was Hyannis (HYA), Nantucket (ACK), Martha's Vineyard (MVY) and then to Plymouth (PYM). HYA had a control tower, ACK had a control tower, MVY did not and PYM did not but that leg was part 91, not 135 like the others. Anyway, when you put airports on rocks in the North Atlantic Ocean the weather sometimes gets low, okay often gets low. Even when the RVR was 600 ACK tower would give 1/4 variable 3/4 - if they knew your tail number/call sign you received this accommodation. Got so used to it I did not even sit up straight in my seat until I entered the fog layer at 200'. ACK had ALSF II approach lights and even through 200' of fog I could see the furthest out strobe light and would continue the approach to land. MVY had Bar Harbor airlines doing the weather reporting. They always said 3/4 mile when the weather was low as that was the min. vis for the approach. When the first DC-3 of the day missed the approach they would give actual (lower) weather - no airlines never cheat. The trick for me was to beat the first DC-3 of the day to the airport so the weather was still legal. Return was to PYM where the only useful approach was an NDB so I'd always shoot the approach. If I could not get in HYA, BOS, BED and if all else failed BDL were available. The loads were light and most of the papers were dropped in ACK so I could get full fuel there.
 
I
N1120A said:
Not legally, but autoland is certified in various light GA planes.
Click to expand...
I’m apparently uninformed about small airplanes certified for autoland, but... certified for cat 3 I’m guessing is a bit different. Perhaps, I’m just not aware.
Which small airplanes are 300 rvr certified? I’m just curious.

On a side note, if I were a small plane GA pilot I would not know where to go for cat certification. Heck, I don’t even know if part 91 pilots need authorization or if it’s airplane only.
 
Pretty sure cat 3 is plane, pilot and airfield. And probably also an operating certificate stating how pilots are trained and kept current.
 
Tools said:
Pretty sure cat 3 is plane, pilot and airfield. And probably also an operating certificate stating how pilots are trained and kept current.
Click to expand...
Totally agree for part 121, probably 135. No clue about 91.
 
Kritchlow said:
I

I’m apparently uninformed about small airplanes certified for autoland, but... certified for cat 3 I’m guessing is a bit different. Perhaps, I’m just not aware.
Which small airplanes are 300 rvr certified? I’m just curious.

On a side note, if I were a small plane GA pilot I would not know where to go for cat certification. Heck, I don’t even know if part 91 pilots need authorization or if it’s airplane only.
Click to expand...

I said autoland, not CAT III. I guess you don't even pay attention to avionics technology. Garmin has certified autoland on, at least, 3 light aircraft
 
N1120A said:
I said autoland, not CAT III. I guess you don't even pay attention to avionics technology. Garmin has certified autoland on, at least, 3 light aircraft
Click to expand...

As an emergency feature. Not for normal landings...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
As an emergency feature. Not for normal landings...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That wasn't a qualification. The fact remains that airliners can't fly LPV approaches and many don't even have VNAV

But hey! That 767 that can't even fly an RNAV SID can land itself at some airports!
 
N1120A said:
That wasn't a qualification. The fact remains that airliners can't fly LPV approaches and many don't even have VNAV
Click to expand...

Wrong. I fly one that can.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
N1120A said:
That wasn't a qualification. The fact remains that airliners can't fly LPV approaches and many don't even have VNAV

But hey! That 767 that can't even fly an RNAV SID can land itself at some airports!
Click to expand...
We can do more than you know.
As said earlier, our avionics do not have the pretty displays, but we are certified for much more than (most?) ga aircraft.
 
N1120A said:
That wasn't a qualification. The fact remains that airliners can't fly LPV approaches and many don't even have VNAV

But hey! That 767 that can't even fly an RNAV SID can land itself at some airports!
Click to expand...
But we can (I can) fly to 300 rvr. That, to the best of my knowledge, is way better than your pretty display allows you to do.
 
N1120A said:
That wasn't a qualification. The fact remains that airliners can't fly LPV approaches and many don't even have VNAV

But hey! That 767 that can't even fly an RNAV SID can land itself at some airports!
Click to expand...
You really are living under a rock.
I promise you at any major airport with cat approaches, we can land lower than any LPV. Remember, ceiling means nothing. Nada. Zero.
 
Kritchlow said:
But we can (I can) fly to 300 rvr. That, to the best of my knowledge, is way better than your pretty display allows you to do.
Click to expand...

At an airport that has an approach that allows it. And I can fly to much lower minimums at many more airports.
 
There is no “decision height” on a cat 3. And, at least for us, no visual references required to land.
 
N1120A said:
Oh yeah, totally. You got it dude.
Click to expand...

I mean clearly a little insecure if you’re feeling like ****ing all over others experience and knowledge.

Last I checked there isn’t an airliner commonly flying that can’t be outfitted for RNP. Every one I hear taking off at any busy us airport is accepting the rnav sid.

So I’m out, you’re not impressing anyone with your knowledge here... and yes I fly GA airplanes too. And I’ve flown airline passengers on an rnav approach to lpv mins.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think you are in over your head on this one.
 
N1120A said:
At an airport that has an approach that allows it. And I can fly to much lower minimums at many more airports.
Click to expand...
What are minimums? Ceiling means nothing. Cat 3 has no decision height. So what minimums are you talking about?
 
[QUOTE="N1120A, post: 3024528, member: But hey! That 767 that can't even fly an RNAV SID can land itself at some airports![/QUOTE]
Which 767 can't fly RNAV? RNAV has been around since the 1970s and all 121 airliners can fly them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top