Anyone Request Contact Approaches Anymore

luvflyin said:
Yeah, relying on him to just continue straight in, in the hole he was already in, could have gone wrong. How did things work out at the runway intersection? That could have been an adventure.
Click to expand...
That part worked perfectly. He pretty much paralleled the F-18 in front of him (4 miles) on 23 and was going sneak in front of the flight of two now on final for the PAR.

Unfortunately there was a young Lt student working TC that didn’t copy my inbound update. I mean I was fast because I didn’t have time for games. “3 miles east Nickle 35 is now a contact approach runway 32!” All I hear from her is “whaaaaat?” I just hung up expecting her monitor to handle it. Nope, the update didn’t get relayed to local and he had an H-46 doing taxi work on 32. Maybe two miles out I switch Nickle to tower and he goes “ah, there’s an H-46 on the runway.” I switched him again just hoping tower gets it cleared in time. Nope, tower sent Nickle around on rwy 32, he declared emergency fuel, tower then issued “abandon approach” to the flight of 2 on a 3 mile final…and then they declared emergency fuel. :mad:
 
Last edited:
Add me to the "used one once in anger" list. I did feel like Billy Badass IFR pilot when I used it though. :D Was an ILS? into Moffett field, contact to San Carlos to cheat some minimums as a /A plane.

I think we have so many RNAV approaches now, everywhere, into every podunk municipal, that these sorta "lifehacks" aren't as necessary. I can see contact approach going the way of PAR and light-gun proficiencies.
 
Clip4 said:
I am just saying I don’t think I would ask for a contact approach when terrain is a factor.
Click to expand...
You mean like not hit ****? What a revolutionary thought! I doubt that anybody in the entire history of aviation has ever thought of that! Patent it, and you’d make a fortune! Is the Nobel Prize committee monitoring this thread? You’re a shoo-in! Wow! I’m just amazed!

:rolleyes:
 
MauleSkinner said:
You mean like not hit ****? What a revolutionary thought! I doubt that anybody in the entire history of aviation has ever thought of that! Patent it, and you’d make a fortune! Is the Nobel Prize committee monitoring this thread? You’re a shoo-in! Wow! I’m just amazed!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Difficult to patent poor decisions.
 
Last time I did it (maybe the only time), was trying to get into W29. ATC wouldn't give me the RNAV 11 approach because it interfered with the BWI arrival. I asked for the lowest they could get me over the bay and then requested the contact approach once I saw I could get down over the water.
 
luvflyin said:
When was that? That Grumman had the Tower there?
Click to expand...
Yes it was when they overhauled the Army Mohawk aircraft. They would come in on trucks shot up and they rebuilt and test flew them there. Word was the Army required a control tower for operations. When finished Army pilots would come and fly them back to the Army airfield. Lot of the tower crew were ex military. They worked for Grumman.
 
bonefishpete said:
Yes it was when they overhauled the Army Mohawk aircraft. They would come in on trucks shot up and they rebuilt and test flew them there. Word was the Army required a control tower for operations. When finished Army pilots would come and fly them back to the Army airfield. Lot of the tower crew were ex military. They worked for Grumman.
Click to expand...
Kinda like Greenville, TX (KGVT) - L3 has a simply masive facility there doing military work of all kinds technical on aircraft from around the world; I've been there when the tower was closed and, suddenly, they popped on and cleared ne to land - thought I'd been breaking the law, but they assured me that they had *just* opened. I landed and was taxiing to the FBO (far south end) and, while I taxied, a KC135 came up with a military call sign, was cleared to land, and the very instant he cleared the runway and was cleared to taxi to the ramp, the tower closed. Were open, maybe, five minutes?
 
SCCutler said:
I've used it once, and it was a lifesaver.

Flying into Pensacola from the west, being vectored for the approach, I'm something like number 5 or 6 for the approach (behind a buynch of Navy Texan 2s). Vectoring is going to take me way out over the gulf and into some pretty vigorous clouds with embedded nastiness.

Meanwhile, airport has about a 1500' ceiling and I'm flying over Escambia Bay at 3,500 or so, looking down at (1) the bay (in clear view), and (2) the edge of the clouds that are covering the airport, and looking ahead at the wall of doom into which I'm being expected to fly.

I asked for the Contact Approach and was instantly cleared for it and handed off to Tower. Gear down, right 180, descend under the clouds to see the airport clearly and easily, landed without incident or risk. The T6 pilots and their IPs were taxiing in one by one to the FBO, and they were plenty sweaty from flying through all that crap.

I was *very* happy to have the Contact Approach as an option; it was safer and faster. I would never use a contact approach in lieu of an IAP where the IAP is needed to safely navigate to the field, but in this instance, it was the right tool for the job.
Click to expand...
I used the contact approach in a similar way getting into KACK from time to time in the early to mid '80s. Just another tool in the tool box.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top