JetBlue Pilot Assists Cirrus Pilot on an ILS

Palmpilot

Palmpilot

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
23,096
Location
PUDBY
Display Name
Richard Palm
Home Airfield
Palo Alto (SFO area)

Attachments

Wow. Pretty scary that an IFR pilot doesn't know how to configure his display to show glide path. Nothing the controller can do for altitude advisories on an ILS. "Say altitude" isn't exactly a safety alert but whatever, it worked.

He got down safely and that's all that matters. Kudos to the Jet Blue guys.
 
Earworm.jpg
 
Yes, kudos to the JBU pilot.

It kills me that an IFR pilot keeps saying altitude when what he was trying to convey was his glide slope wasn't coming alive. Too bad all controllers aren't IFR pilots as well in situations like these.

I had a Cirus pilot with the exact same set up (avidyne/430) do the same exact thing a couple months ago. Had to remind him to press the VLOC button as in his case it was still on GPS NAV.

IMC can be a tough world when the plane is 3 steps ahead of the pilot. In this pilot's case maybe he was on VLOC and his GS simply failed but wow. How about effectively communicating this and trying an LPV or simply fly a LOC approach.
 
I understood that most Garmin navigators and others would automatically transition from GPS to VLOC at the FAF. Of course the ILS frequency needs to be loaded and primary for the correct LOC/GS indications. The Garmin may not switch on its own if the frequency is not primary.
 
Radar Contact said:
Yes, kudos to the JBU pilot.

It kills me that an IFR pilot keeps saying altitude when what he was trying to convey was his glide slope wasn't coming alive. Too bad all controllers aren't IFR pilots as well in situations like these.

I had a Cirus pilot with the exact same set up (avidyne/430) do the same exact thing a couple months ago. Had to remind him to press the VLOC button as in his case it was still on GPS NAV.

IMC can be a tough world when the plane is 3 steps ahead of the pilot. In this pilot's case maybe he was on VLOC and his GS simply failed but wow. How about effectively communicating this and trying an LPV or simply fly a LOC approach.
Click to expand...

Yeah his communication with ATC wasn't very clear. He kept asking for help with the altitudes on final. Obviously nothing tower could do except come up with some sort of quasi SA with recommended altitudes on final. That ain't gonna happen. Should've flat out communicationed that he had no glidpath indications.

It was a good call to cancel approach clearance and take the guy back around. Give him some time to work out his equipment issues. 400 ft low and I may have said "say altitude." 900 ft low and I would have been "Low altitude alert, check your altitude immediately..." But, it all worked out.

Like you said, minus a controller being also an IFR pilot, they're not going to be able to troubleshoot the problem for him.
 
BillTIZ said:
I understood that most Garmin navigators and others would automatically transition from GPS to VLOC at the FAF. Of course the ILS frequency needs to be loaded and primary for the correct LOC/GS indications. The Garmin may not switch on its own if the frequency is not primary.
Click to expand...

You have to have that setting set to auto switch. At least on the gtn’s, I’m assuming it’s the same.
 
Well that would explain his inexperience with the equipment. Perhaps he declared an emergency with approach prior to checking in with tower???
 
Some thoughts from the IR student part of my brain.

The guy also said he had low fuel?
Someone said in the audio that there was good weather nearby. Why the heck did he "try one more" instead of diverting?
Also said the plane in front of him on the first try broke out at 400'. That's below the LOC mins. AND the RNAV mins. Divert?
The Jet Blue guy said they broke out at 600'. Now he should have done the LOC approach (dive and drive) since he had the mins and that equipage was working.

There's a reason it's called dumb luck. Hopefully it won't run out on him before he stops relying on it.
 
Great outcome. He kept his cool, I was impressed with his "I want to keep it simple, I'll just handfly it" and sticking with the ILS 8 instead of accepting the offer for the ILS 14 even though it would have been closer. The Delta guy was cool and gave him the 'numbers' he needed to make a good descent profile, the power settings and FPM decsent to shoot for. It's an item of note the pilot never used the word glideslope. My critique of this, purely constructive. He could have just continued the first approach. The MDA is 480, there was no need to abandon the approach so early. When he was asking the controller for altitude help, the controller could have responded with "the minimum descent altitude is 480." That may have put the pilot in a frame of mind to continue and get the airport in sight. It would have been no different than a 'chop and drop' or 'dive and drive' or what ever you want to call it. A little after 10:00 into the recording he says 'if you can give me uh help me by telling me what altitude I should be at.' If the pilot was a little more knowledgable he could have done that himself. It's a 3 degree glideslope, TDZE is 29. Simply adding 320 feet per mile to that gives you a recommended altitude. Just keeping it very simple and starting at 0 (close enough to 29) and adding 300 per mile would have been fine. 1800, 1500, 1200, 900, 600, 300 at 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 miles from the runway. The controller could have done this for him each mile, giving him what he was asking for "....help me with altitude I should be at." Once again, I'm not saying they should have done that. I'm just offering it up as food for thought should anyone get in a similar situation.
 
Not the controller's job to do that though, and they have no knowledge of the 300' rule you're quoting. And all the controller has available is the same approach plate. Majority of controllers are not pilots let alone one with an instrument rating. The pilot was cleared for an ILS, and if he knew what he doing (doesn't sound like it) he could have continued using LOC minimums. If this guy isn't instrument rated I hope the FAA takes action against him. If it had been an emergency situation would have been one thing, but it wasn't.
 
Interesting. I could be wrong, but I doubt think I heard the words "glide slope" one. Not from the pilot, controller, or JB pilot.
Perhaps I just couldn't make out the words.
 
Kritchlow said:
Interesting. I could be wrong, but I doubt think I heard the words "glide slope" one. Not from the pilot, controller, or JB pilot.
Perhaps I just couldn't make out the words.
Click to expand...

Listening one could tell the pilot thought he, perhaps, could couple the ILS and the plane would do it's magic and fly it down for him. The controller and the airline pilot obviously assumed the guy was instrument rated, and I think that's why neither queried him on it or mentioned it. I never heard GS mentioned either.
 
mscard88 said:
Not the controller's job to do that though, and they have no knowledge of the 300' rule you're quoting. And all the controller has available is the same approach plate. Majority of controllers are not pilots let alone one with an instrument rating. The pilot was cleared for an ILS, and if he knew what he doing (doesn't sound like it) he could have continued using LOC minimums. If this guy isn't instrument rated I hope the FAA takes action against him. If it had been an emergency situation would have been one thing, but it wasn't.
Click to expand...

I agree. Outside of an emergency, I wouldn't be calculating up altitudes to issue for each mile on final. While I'm sure JAX tower has a video map with miles on final, it's no surveillance approach and probably get in hot water to treat it as one.

I would have issued him the DA if he said he had glidpath, if not, I'd issue him the MDA. That's about all you could do for this guy.
 
Since @Velocity173 mentioned surveillance approach... that was one of my questions but I checked Airnav for KJAX and they don't appear to have that option.
 
luvflyin said:
...A little after 10:00 into the recording he says 'if you can give me uh help me by telling me what altitude I should be at.' If the pilot was a little more knowledgable he could have done that himself. It's a 3 degree glideslope, TDZE is 29. Simply adding 320 feet per mile to that gives you a recommended altitude. Just keeping it very simple and starting at 0 (close enough to 29) and adding 300 per mile would have been fine. 1800, 1500, 1200, 900, 600, 300 at 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 miles from the runway....
Click to expand...
For me, that much mental math would be too much distraction while trying to fly an approach.
 
To me (not IR) it sounded like he didn’t even have the approach plate to reference anything.
 
Palmpilot said:
For me, that much mental math would be too much distraction while trying to fly an approach.
Click to expand...
Yeah. It could be hard to do on the fly. And if the airport isn't sea level it gets more complicated. If there is time to get the altitudes calculated and 'jotted down' before commencing the approach it could be useful. If you prefer 'constant angle, stabilized' approaches over 'dive n drives' it's a great way to check your progress on the way down.
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah. It could be hard to do on the fly. And if the airport isn't sea level it gets more complicated. If there is time to get the altitudes calculated and 'jotted down' before commencing the approach it could be useful. If you prefer 'constant angle, stabilized' approaches over 'dive n drives' it's a great way to check your progress on the way down.
Click to expand...
It was an ILS approach so there’s no need to dive and drive.
 
Radar Contact said:
Except when a normal competent IFR pilot doesn't get the glide slope they will then either conduct a LOC approach using those mins or ask to be vectored out for the RNAV.
Click to expand...
The approach that the Cirrus pilot was flying an ILS, no? Or was the GS out?
 
Ravioli said:
Some thoughts from the IR student part of my brain.

The guy also said he had low fuel?
Someone said in the audio that there was good weather nearby. Why the heck did he "try one more" instead of diverting?
Also said the plane in front of him on the first try broke out at 400'. That's below the LOC mins. AND the RNAV mins. Divert?
The Jet Blue guy said they broke out at 600'. Now he should have done the LOC approach (dive and drive) since he had the mins and that equipage was working.

There's a reason it's called dumb luck. Hopefully it won't run out on him before he stops relying on it.
Click to expand...

I believe the pilot said he had 9 gallons left. It sounded like the report of better wx nearby was at Orlando. With that amount of gas left I would have wanted to get it on the ground the next approach. Even if that meant going 80 feet below the LOC mins on a LOC approach. Ultimately I would have not been in his position to begin with.
 
jordane93 said:
The approach that the Cirrus pilot was flying an ILS, no? Or was the GS out?
Click to expand...
He was attempting the ILS and that was what he was cleared for. He was never getting the GS. The plane ahead of him and behind him was. Either his GS on the plane wasn't working or he never switched from GPS NAV to VLOC.
 
Velocity173 said:
I agree. Outside of an emergency, I wouldn't be calculating up altitudes to issue for each mile on final. While I'm sure JAX tower has a video map with miles on final, it's no surveillance approach and probably get in hot water to treat it as one.

I would have issued him the DA if he said he had glidpath, if not, I'd issue him the MDA. That's about all you could do for this guy.
Click to expand...
Yeah. For a controller to just start whipping out faux Surveillance Approach altitudes matter of factly would probably not be good. But if the controller was knowledgable about what he was doing and gave the explanation to the pilot what he was doing it could be a good idea. It would be something like "I'll tell you each mile on final what your altitude would be on a 3 degree glidepath." Granted, most controllers aren't and I'm not saying they should be. But if they were, I'd say it would be negligent not to. This was an Emergency whether the pilot himself declared it or not. Behind the airplane, unable to navigate vertically, in the goo and only enough gas left for one more approach is an emergency. Emergencies can be declared by the pilot, the aircraft operator or ATC. Pilot didn't 'say it,' there isn't going to be an 'operator' in this case so it's declared by ATC. If the controller was thinking this was not an emergency because the pilot didn't 'declare it' that's an issue that needs to be addressed. The pilot requested "help me by telling me what altitude I should be at."
 
jordane93 said:
The approach that the Cirrus pilot was flying an ILS, no? Or was the GS out?
Click to expand...

Ravioli, again Jordan, in a previous post mentioned the LOC, and that's where the dive and drive comment came from Jordan. Scroll back to post 12....

As to what the Cirrus pilot was flying, we haven't figured that one out yet. ;)
 
Lots of arm waving. I’m thinkin’ the pilot should get a 709 and the JetBlue guy and controllers should get an attaboy. Moving on.
 
Clark1961 said:
Lots of arm waving. I’m thinkin’ the pilot should get a 709 and the JetBlue guy and controllers should get an attaboy. Moving on.
Click to expand...

709 for what? What if he didn't have an instrument rating at all? If he did, and the equipment malfunctioned, why would he need one?
 
Radar Contact said:
He was attempting the ILS and that was what he was cleared for. He was never getting the GS. The plane ahead of him and behind him was. Either his GS on the plane wasn't working or he never switched from GPS NAV to VLOC.
Click to expand...

mscard88 said:
Ravioli, again Jordan, in a previous post mentioned the LOC, and that's where the dive and drive comment came from Jordan. Scroll back to post 12....

As to what the Cirrus pilot was flying, we haven't figured that one out yet. ;)
Click to expand...

luvflyin said:
It's an ILS Approach with S-LOC-8 minimums. There is no need for a Glideslope. Dive n drive or constant angle stabilized is the pilots choice.
Click to expand...
I get it now. Slow Saturday for me...
 
mscard88 said:
709 for what? What if he didn't have an instrument rating at all? If he did, and the equipment malfunctioned, why would he need one?
Click to expand...
Really? In IMC without a rating and no ride required? If he had a rating and was below minimum altitudes and he doesn’t need a ride? Okay then. Let’s just say I disagree with your baseless opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top