Approach for discussion

grattonja

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
944
Location
Pennsylvania
Display Name

Display name:
saratoga driver
There has been some talk in Flight Following about the possibility of posting some approaches here for discussion. These sorts of approach analyses are really useful. Those of us who are lower time learn boatloads, and the "old timers" in the clouds often say they learn a lot as well. The active instrument students are often the best teachers in these discussions.

With that said, let me post an approach here to see how it goes. I will start us off with a known problem approach, the VOR-DME or GPS C into Aspen, KASE.

http://avn.faa.gov/d-tpp/0503/05889VDGC.pdf



Most of us are familiar with the high profile jet crash out there a few years ago.

Obvious issues for discussion include the missed approach procedure, flying out a localizer, and managing terrain. You cannot land at this airport at night, and that is certainly something to think about as well. Another consideration would be what sort of performance aircraft would you want for this approach. I fly 180 HP skyhawk and cannot imagine doing this approach in it.

Has anyone on the board flown this approach, either in a simulator, or, better yet, in actual conditions?

Well, let me see if either of my attempts to create a link here worked. I typed the link and also attached it. Looks like the typed link will work but not sure about the attachment.

Cheers

Jim G

Edit. Looks like both of my urls for this approach worked, ultimately, although I notice that Greebo had to edit at some point. You guys are going to make a web board user out of me yet. :)
 
Last edited:
I have flown it 32 times, 19 in actual, 4 in actual at night. I have not had a missed. When the guy in front of me misses, I don't even try. I go to Eagle.

The descent is hellacious. 14,000 feet to 10,200 in eleven miles. That's 345 feet per mile, usually with a light tailwind. The last 1.4 miles is a fly visual segment. If you continue flying straight in you'll hit a butte about 1200 feet above airport elevation- meaning you need to make a 30 degree left turn close in. The descent here is 1,900 feet per mile. Although there is enough room to do a tight pattern, the wall just at the south end of the airport is very, very real. It's Aspen Highlands Mountain. Land 15 depart 33 almost no matter what. Oh, and the south end is 140 feet LOWER than the north end (7006 feet at ~8000 msl).

In a piston single at 90 kts, it's not too bad until you get to the last fly visual. You can throw the gear out into the ice, keep the engine warm and carry a bit of power down to DME 11. But then you're hosed. Even the most violent full flap slip is just barely enough to get you down....and that's a downsloping runway. 1,900 feet per mile.

In a Piston Twin at 120 kts, it's pretty tough. -700 fpm, gear out, try to keep the engines warm, but the last segment is easier as twins getting slipped drop like stones. Do you like to put the gear out when there's ice out there? Uhhhh....nope. If you have to go around, iced gear may not retract. Your fly away on one is jeopardized by density altitude already, but if you can't get clean, you're SOL.

In reality, the MAP in my twin at 300 undergross is about 10800 at DME 9.5, 3 miles from the airport. This makes your final descent gradient only 1028 feet per mile. Now, I don't have the single engine climb gradient from 11.0 DME (1.4 from the threshold) to fly the miss on IPKN SDA to Lindz and make a decent enough climb gradient to miss the wall. Remember, you have to TURN and pretty smartly to capture IPKN and on a single engine this means losing altitude, esp. if this is a left engine failure (rotsa rudder or too much bank to climb, either way). You have 22 miles to make it to Gleno at 14,000. AT 300 fpm at 105 kts, that's pretty tight from 10800. There's 12.6 minutes to climb 3,200 feet. There's only two minutes left, that with perfect pilot technique and no ice. I make 350 fpm clean at 300 undergross, but it's a squeaker. From 10200, I'm definitely at 10,000 at the end of the turn, and I have no margins at all (OEI operation).

What killed the G3 guys? They made the error of entering the fly visual segment without being certain they would not lose the runway. When there are snow showers, you have clear...then you have nothing...then you hvae clear....then you see the wall. Once you are below and within 1.4 nm, you HAVE to land. 150 kts is the stall speed as they were configured; they apparently lost the runway, yanked and banked and stalled. They were in a land or die situation. Not good.

Lastly, if you review the chart carefully, you will have front course indications on your departure. Many a pilot gets confused- the black part of the SDA marking is on the RIGHT, so fly toward the needle, not away. Or the granite wins. A terrain database is very reassuring in this situation. I flew it in VMC for the first time. I was chicken. BwawK!
 
Last edited:
This. This is why I read these boards.

I bet the collective wisdom- and interaction of ideas- has saved a hide or two over the years.
 
HAH! I posted this one about five months ago on the old AOPA board. Man, that analysis by Bruce is great. I don't think he's chicken--I wouldn't fly this in IMC to anywhere near minimums! One extremely minor nit with this:

grattonja said:
You cannot land at this airport at night, and that is certainly something to think about as well.

Are you sure you can't land at the airport at night, or is it just that this particular procedure is NA at night?
 
Hawk:

Sorry about the attachment mixup. I've removed the filesize limitation on PDF files and manually attached the PDF to your original post.

From now on, attaching these procedures should work ok. :)
 
The airport closed by municpal ordinance at 11:00 p.m. The procedure NA at night was added after NTSB recommended, post the G3 accident, that this procedure be not authorized at night. IMO it's another restriction to protect pilots from their own lousy judgement.

As it turns out, the charter-er of the G3 really wanted to get in for a dinner party and did NOT want to divert to RIL. Lousy judgement.
 
Last edited:
Greebo said:
Hawk:

Sorry about the attachment mixup. I've removed the filesize limitation on PDF files and manually attached the PDF to your original post.

From now on, attaching these procedures should work ok. :)

You mean the attachment mixup was NOT on my part? I was just assuming personal stupidity when it didn't come up last night. :)

I was just glad that one access to the approach made it. Otherwise I am posting a discussion about nothing. Wait, wasn't that a tv show back a few years ago? :cheerio:

Jim G
 
grattonja said:
You mean the attachment mixup was NOT on my part? I was just assuming personal stupidity when it didn't come up last night. :)
Nope! This is still a relatively new setup of this forum, and there are more toggles and levers and other controls for its behavior than there are in a late model Airbus. We're still sorting through them and finding controls which are in the wrong position. Just ask Ken - aka - Birthday Boy.
 
wangmyers said:
HAH! I posted this one about five months ago on the old AOPA board. Man, that analysis by Bruce is great. I don't think he's chicken--I wouldn't fly this in IMC to anywhere near minimums! One extremely minor nit with this:



Are you sure you can't land at the airport at night, or is it just that this particular procedure is NA at night?


I figured this one had been posted in the not too distant past somewhere. It has been the subject of much scrutiny and discussion all over the place, with several AOPA Pilot articles on it. But it seemed like a good, juicy approach to start with.

I should have known that Dr. Bruce has flown this. Is there anything that you have NOT done yet in a plane, Bruce? I guess we don't want to know, probably. :eek: You are the wonder of all of us low time pilots. We aspire to your experience, for sure. Your analysis is really neat. Having spent a little time in the Rockies VFR, I know that I would not have dry pants flying this thing in actual. Out east, you fly to minimums and fly the missed, particularly where I am, and don't worry too much about "cumulus granitus", as there is nothing that solid to run into. On this approach, even if you are following procedure, there is rising terrain basically all around you. Fly through the localizer on the missed and you are potentially done for. Make that likely.

So the localizer is not reverse sensing? And you can tell this because the darker stripe for the localizer is on the right? It says "back course" on the localizer? Are we flying "out" an "inbound" BC, thus making it not reverse sensing? I am a bit confused on that. Two other questions on that front, for anyone to answer. Why a BC localizer that is off on a hill somewhere? Why not a VOR instead? Is the localizer better for this procedure because it is more accurate or did they simply use it because it was what they could get a hold of? And why is crows int on here? It does not appear to have any particular value to the approach that I can see. It appears to be irrelevant to the missed approach. If we used the BC loc inbound for anything, it would basically be an intercept point for the loc, but we don't.

Also, I looked at the TO mins and the DP. The DP is pretty similar to the missed procedure. Very similar actually. And it requires a climb rate of 460 feet per NM to 14000. That certainly puts the planes I fly at home base out of contention for this approach. No way I could meet that. What would be a minimum type plane that could make that performance above 10000 feet? Something like a turbo arrow?

Many of the Colorado mountain airports are not available for landing at night without prior permission. This is according to some mountain flight training materials that I have read and seen. I knew that KASE was about to close for the night when these G3 pilots were trying to get in, and that was part of the time press that their client put them in. So, on that score, Ben, I am pretty sure I am correct about the airport closing.

Other assessments? Bruce, have you ever flown the approach in something single engine?

Jim G
 
Greebo said:
Nope! This is still a relatively new setup of this forum, and there are more toggles and levers and other controls for its behavior than there are in a late model Airbus.

Ah, comparing it to an Airbus would mean that it's cheap and uncomfortable. ;) I trust you don't really mean that. ;)
 
I'm only referring to the cockpit controls. :) I don't care about the pilot's uniform. :)
 
Greebo said:
I'm only referring to the cockpit controls. :) I don't care about the pilot's uniform. :)

I was referring to the passenger cabin. Most uncomfortable international flights I had were on Airbus planes....
 
grattonja said:
So the localizer is not reverse sensing? And you can tell this because the darker stripe for the localizer is on the right? It says "back course" on the localizer? Are we flying "out" an "inbound" BC, thus making it not reverse sensing? I am a bit confused on that.

The "back course" means that if, for some stupid reason, one were to fly that localizer inbound, you would be flying with backcourse indications. What you are doing here is flying outbound on the backcourse, so you have normal indications.
grattonja said:
Two other questions on that front, for anyone to answer. Why a BC localizer that is off on a hill somewhere? Why not a VOR instead? Is the localizer better for this procedure because it is more accurate or did they simply use it because it was what they could get a hold of? And why is crows int on here? It does not appear to have any particular value to the approach that I can see. It appears to be irrelevant to the missed approach. If we used the BC loc inbound for anything, it would basically be an intercept point for the loc, but we don't.

My guess is the same as yours--the localizer provides more accuracy, and accuracy is definitely what you want, here.

My guess with CROWS is that the fix just helps with SA.
 
Re: Approach for discussion--a Flight Simulator Flight

As an experiment I've created a Flight for those who have Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 and want to try the VOR/DME-C approach to Aspen-Pitkin County (KASE).

This flight begins in the Baron 58 on V134 southwest of Red Table (DBL) VOR near SLOLM intersection at 14000. The autopilot is ON in HDG and ALT hold mode and the simulation is paused. The VOR/DME-C approach is loaded into the Garmin GNS 500 with the transition from DBL active. To begin flying, press the P key. To turn off the autopilot, press the Z key or use the controls on the autopilot control panel in the avionics stack. For more information about using Flight Simulator, see www.bruceair.com/flight_simulator_links.htm and www.bruceair.com/IFR%20Practice.htm


You'll find the two required files (a .FLT file that sets the initial conditions for the aircraft--type, position, altitude, airspeed, initial avionics configuration, etc.--and a .WX file that specifies the weather) attached as a .ZIP file. I've also attached a screen shot showing the cockpit as the Flight begins. If you prefer to fly another aircraft, select the Flight and then use the Aircraft menu to choose the aircraft you want to fly.

Unzip these files and copy them to the C:\\...My Documents\Flight Simulator Files folder (if you're using Windows XP and installed Flight Simulator on your C drive). If you're using an earlier version of Windows, copy the two files to the Flights folder in the directory where you installed Flight Simulator. For more information about using Flights, see the topic "All About Flights" in the Learning Center in Flight Simulator 2004.
 
Re: Approach for discussion--a Flight Simulator Flight

BruceAir said:
As an experiment I've created a Flight for those who have Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 and want to try the VOR/DME-C approach to Aspen-Pitkin County (KASE).

This flight begins in the Baron 58 on V134 southwest of Red Table (DBL) VOR near SLOLM intersection at 14000. The autopilot is ON in HDG and ALT hold mode and the simulation is paused. The VOR/DME-C approach is loaded into the Garmin GNS 500 with the transition from DBL active. To begin flying, press the P key. To turn off the autopilot, press the Z key or use the controls on the autopilot control panel in the avionics stack. For more information about using Flight Simulator, see www.bruceair.com/flight_simulator_links.htm and www.bruceair.com/IFR%20Practice.htm


You'll find the two required files (a .FLT file that sets the initial conditions for the aircraft--type, position, altitude, airspeed, initial avionics configuration, etc.--and a .WX file that specifies the weather) attached as a .ZIP file. I've also attached a screen shot showing the cockpit as the Flight begins. If you prefer to fly another aircraft, select the Flight and then use the Aircraft menu to choose the aircraft you want to fly.

Unzip these files and copy them to the C:\\...My Documents\Flight Simulator Files folder (if you're using Windows XP and installed Flight Simulator on your C drive). If you're using an earlier version of Windows, copy the two files to the Flights folder in the directory where you installed Flight Simulator. For more information about using Flights, see the topic "All About Flights" in the Learning Center in Flight Simulator 2004.


Wish I could, Bruce. Unfortunately, I am still doing my approaches the hard way. Would love to try this in a Baron on a sim. It would be more interesting than the streaming ATC that I am presently listening to.

Jim G
 
Attached is a screen capture of the Flight Analysis of my attempt to fly the VOR/DME-C approach at KASE using the Microsoft Flight Simulator Flight that I posted earlier.

If you're curious about features like Flight Analysis in Microsoft Flight Simulator that you can use to complement your flight training, see: Flight Simulator as a Training Aid.

Pilots may also want to check out A Real-World Pilot's Guide to Flight Simulator.
 
I used to fly it in my nondeiced turbo bullet Mooney. Silly Boy! Silly Boy! One good thing, though, if you know where the butte is off the end of 33, and you lose the engine, at that gradient you can just glide on it. You're going in anyway....900 fpm at 82 kts....

My Brother in law and I made the error of sharing a ski condo in Snowmass together for many years. We made lotsa trips there. Why, a ski condo is even a worse investment than an airplane!
 
I like the little circling at the end!
 
bbchien said:
I used to fly it in my nondeiced turbo bullet Mooney. Silly Boy! Silly Boy! . . .

Bruce, I've been to Aspen a few times, but I wonder if you know how common it is to see single engine GA aircraft there?
 
There are plenty there for the Summer Aspen Music Festival. But in the winter, a C500 looks small next to all the G-IIIs. The ladies at Aspen Base Operation remember me as the "guy with the Seneca". I'm remarkably TINY. Every G3 in the American Registry has been into ASE. In the shade hangars along rt. 92 the singles have it over the multis by about 2:1. The occasional Malibu looks ridiculous. I mean, it's comical.
 
The Aspen Music Festival. That's why I was there!
 
Ah, sitting out at the Mother Lode, listening to an average age 19 string quartet, of exquisite young musicians.... :)
 
bbchien said:
Ah, sitting out at the Mother Lode, listening to an average age 19 string quartet, of exquisite young musicians.... :)

Yep, there's some amazing stuff going on out there. I saw a six year-old Sarah Chang walk out on stage with a little cute bowtie in her hair . . . and then she set the violin on fire playing the Paganini Conterto #3. Here I was thinking I was hot stuff because I was principal cello of the orchestra, and now I was making the sign of the cross witnessing this act of genius . . . .
 
bbchien said:
The airport closed by municpal ordinance at 11:00 p.m. The procedure NA at night was added after NTSB recommended, post the G3 accident, that this procedure be not authorized at night. IMO it's another restriction to protect pilots from their own lousy judgement.

As it turns out, the charter-er of the G3 really wanted to get in for a dinner party and did NOT want to divert to RIL. Lousy judgement.

Non-Stage 3 aircraft end at 30 minutes after sunset. NTSB report said the planned ETA was -12 minutes from curfew. I think the approach was NOTAMed circling NA at night but the tower didn't have the NOTAM. The pilot did from his FSS briefing and knew he was pushing the limit.

Yep, some asked to sit in the jump seat as the approach started. Any bets it wasn't the party boy?
 
wangmyers said:
Bruce, I've been to Aspen a few times, but I wonder if you know how common it is to see single engine GA aircraft there?

Almost all winter and sometimes in the summer the ATIS says 'Parking not available for piston engine aircraft'

Eric
 
wangmyers said:
My guess is the same as yours--the localizer provides more accuracy, and accuracy is definitely what you want, here.

Here are couple of pictures I took yesterday on the way home from Tucson. I'm just flying by the 12953' peak indicated on the approach about 6 west of CROWS. I'm at 11,500 and my course is about perpendicular to the missed course. In the first pic note the green ridge in the background. Red Table VOR sits on that ridge. My route went right under the holding pattern.

Eric
 
Of course it has to Paganini. Blazing technical skill is a prerequisite. Sigh.

And man, you are low. Sometimes in the lee of Sopris are some of the WORST rotors in the world. Hope it was quiet as well as clear... :)
 
bbchien said:
And man, you are low. Sometimes in the lee of Sopris are some of the WORST rotors in the world. Hope it was quiet as well as clear... :)

I was upwind, don't do lee side that close. It was fairly quiet, 15 out of the NNW. Kind of unstable though. Lots of updraft turbulance. It was 2000Z so heat was rising out of the valleys.

Eric
 
ejensen said:
Almost all winter and sometimes in the summer the ATIS says 'Parking not available for piston engine aircraft'

Eric

It's available. But they just don't want you there. Someday they'' put up a gate on Colorado 82 which will say, "members only". Sigh.
 
Back
Top