IFR Currency for Levi - KMRY KWVI (Part 1)

wayneda40

wayneda40

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jul 31, 2017
Messages
577
Display Name
Display name:
waynemcc
A nice IFR currency outing with my good friend Levi in his C182/G. We shoot the RNAV 28L with LP minimums at Monterey and an LPV (breaking off for a circle-to-land) at Watsonville. In-flight discussions of Load vs Activate Approach, vertical guidance vs advisory-only vertical guidance, and legacy GPSS autopilots. Have you ever been on an IFR flight plan, informed ATC of your intent to “go missed”, and gotten “unable”? What are your experiences flying an LP or LPV approach with a legacy GPSS autopilot when there are major lateral course changes in the approach? Do you enjoy being safety pilot (I do)?
Wayne, GeezerGeek Pilot
 
LP = Localizer Performance. In the case of KMRY, it functions like an LDA to 28L. You are correct that it can't be an LPV because it is so far offset. There is a straight in LOC to 28L at KMRY, but the minimums are even worse (thanks to the terrain that doesn't allow for an ILS to that runway). The only times I see LP approaches are in situations where there is either an offset (like KMRY or the 2 RNAV approaches to Runway 3 at KSMO) or where there are TERPS issues like at KSAN to 27 or KBUR to 8 (I'm still waiting for @aterpster to find out why KBUR can't have an LPV to 8).

A WAAS GPS can create advisory vertical guidance to any GPS approach that doesn't have LPV. You'll see that LP+V or LNAV+V annunciation come up, which is what the 650 was giving you here. I believe they calculate the GP needed to hit the step downs, but it is still your responsibility to comply with them.

As I mentioned to you elsewhere, the STEC30 with GPSS in my Tiger will fly the lateral segment of any GPS approach just fine, and will take turns as well. The issue will be if ATC gives a very sharp base and base to final turn - then it may have a hard time picking up the final approach course and I'll disconnect and either hand fly the whole way or hand fly onto the FAC and reengage. Of course, the GFC500 in the Bonanza will click off if ATC gives you a poor vector and you'll have to reengage or hand fly anyway.
 
N1120, very solid information... and yes, the GTN650 did provide the LP+V on this RNAV 28L at KMRY. Thank you for contributing to the conversation!
Wayne
 
wayneda40 said:
.... Have you ever been on an IFR flight plan, informed ATC of your intent to “go missed”, and gotten “unable”? ....
Click to expand...

No, but I’ve heard controllers do it. They aren’t supposed to. What’s going on is they aren’t supposed to let practice approaches disrupt the flow of other traffic. Doing it by denying the missed approach is illegal on their part though.
 
Is there a Letter to Airmen or other policy saying "no practice approaches"? Or, as said, it could be a temporary traffic issue. I've seen airports with that. Perhaps obviously, they can't prohibit a real missed approach.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Is there a Letter to Airmen or other policy saying "no practice approaches"? Or, as said, it could be a temporary traffic issue. I've seen airports with that. Perhaps obviously, they can't prohibit a real missed approach.
Click to expand...
Mark, I could not find (before or after the flight) any letters or NOTAMs at KMRY to limit approaches going missed. Of course there might be some letters-of-agreement between NorCal and the airport.
What I'm still unclear on... if on an active IFR flight plan and cleared for the approach, is there such a thing as a "practice approach"?
 
wayneda40 said:
Mark, I could not find (before or after the flight) any letters or NOTAMs at KMRY to limit approaches going missed. Of course there might be some letters-of-agreement between NorCal and the airport.
What I'm still unclear on... if on an active IFR flight plan and cleared for the approach, is there such a thing as a "practice approach"?
Click to expand...

Yes. People practice when IFR. Getting actual IFR time is very common while still in training. Here’s the controllers rule about it.
4−8−11. PRACTICE APPROACHES
Except for military aircraft operating at military airfields, ensure that neither VFR nor IFR practice approaches disrupt the flow of other arriving and departing IFR or VFR aircraft. Authorize, withdraw authorization, or refuse to authorize practice approaches as traffic conditions require. Normally, approaches in progress should not be terminated.
 
wayneda40 said:
Mark, I could not find (before or after the flight) any letters or NOTAMs at KMRY to limit approaches going missed. Of course there might be some letters-of-agreement between NorCal and the airport.
What I'm still unclear on... if on an active IFR flight plan and cleared for the approach, is there such a thing as a "practice approach"?
Click to expand...
BA78775F-5DC1-47F7-848F-2C5954BAD88A.jpeg
it wasn't going missed under IFR which was the issue. It was the announcement of the plan to do so regardless of whether it was needed which told ATC that you were doing it for practice and not for operational safety.

@luvflyin took care of the "formal" use of the term "practice approach." It's not a regulatory term. Just English.
 
Last edited:
Mark, luvflyin and you found both the ATC and Chart Supplement answers, that latter of which I had totally missed! Nicely done.
Thanks!
Wayne
 
wayneda40 said:
Mark, luvflyin and you found both the ATC and Chart Supplement answers, that latter of which I had totally missed! Nicely done.
Thanks!
Wayne
Click to expand...
It may be one of the common downsides to EFBs. We expect to see anything of importance on the EFB airport information page and don't often look at the AFD. I'm no better, but I have gotten caught by it. Nothing more than self-embarrassment but its led me to check when going somewhere outside the usual suspects.
 
Mark, agreed. Lesson learned by this humble forever-student pilot :).
 
midlifeflyer said:
View attachment 87643
it wasn't going missed under IFR which was the issue. It was the announcement of the plan to do so regardless of whether it was needed which told ATC that you were doing it for practice and not for operational safety.

@luvflyin took care of the "formal" use of the term "practice approach." It's not a regulatory term. Just English.
Click to expand...

Wonder why not the LOC Rwy 28L also
 
midlifeflyer said:
It may be one of the common downsides to EFBs. We expect to see anything of importance on the EFB airport information page and don't often look at the AFD. I'm no better, but I have gotten caught by it. Nothing more than self-embarrassment but its led me to check when going somewhere outside the usual suspects.
Click to expand...

Avare also has a copy of the green book pages when you click on the Csup tab. :)
 
EdFred said:
Avare also has a copy of the green book pages when you click on the Csup tab. :)
Click to expand...
ForeFlight also has the text of the Chart Supplement (AFD) on the Airport, Info tab, Comments.
 
wayneda40 said:
ForeFlight also has the text of the Chart Supplement (AFD) on the Airport, Info tab, Comments.
Click to expand...
Avare is free. :D

I don't use my tablet for flight planning, just for radar and traffic pretty much, so I don't need all the bloatware (for me) that comes with Apple.
 
EdFred said:
Avare also has a copy of the green book pages when you click on the Csup tab. :)
Click to expand...
Since I am familiar with a dozen EFBs split between iOS and Android, my comment was EFB and OS neutral.
 
Practice instrument approaches may be accomplished under VFR or IFR. The AIM has a long writeup on Practice Instrument Approaches, section 4-3-21. Sub paragraph b. and e. contain these statements:

b. Before practicing an instrument approach, pilots should inform the approach control facility or the tower of the type of practice approach they desire to make and how they intend to terminate it,
i.e., full−stop landing, touch−and−go, or missed or low approach maneuver.
Click to expand...

e. VFR aircraft practicing instrument approaches are not automatically authorized to execute the missed approach procedure. This authorization must be specifically requested by the pilot and approved by the controller.
Click to expand...

5−4−21. deals with missed Approaches and contains
h. A clearance for an instrument approach procedure includes a clearance to fly the published missed approach procedure, unless otherwise instructed by ATC.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top