Question about approach

[spiderweb]

Now, I also rent from Frederick, but to fly IFR you have to get an IFR checkout. I was looking at the ILS there and I had some questions. The approach isn't hard. There are some tricks, though. For example, the IAF is at RICKE, but on the 047 Radial of the FDK VOR, not on the localizer. Also, if you have to fly the LOC approach, it looks as though the only way to ident RICKE is with the 273 Radial off EMI. If you are not vectored, taking off from FDK, how would you get to RICKE? I think you'd have to fly the obstacle DP (there is one), get outbound on the FDK 047 Radial, look for the EMI 273 Radial, and then begin the approach. At some point after that, you have to tune and ident the localizer. It seems like a lot of fuss.

I'm just trying to prepare for this checkout. Any thoughts on this?

 

[spiderweb]

Edit: I know that EMI is an IAF, but I doubt we'll go all the way there.

 

[bbchien]

Edit: I know that EMI is an IAF, but I doubt we'll go all the way there.

OK everyone he's talking about the ILS 23 to FDK which is attached in the JEPP rendition. The 273 radial from EMI is only an identifying radial, not an intermediate leg in this charting.

Departing FDK for the most ECONOMICAL ILS possible, depart 05 the ODP is runway heading to 2000, identify RICKE on EMI 273 and FDK 047, yes it's busy, continue outbound for the PT which must be at 2800, which can just be accomplished at max climb rates within 10 nm.

But I'd like to bet that the IFR checkout consists of departing 23, climbing in the hold, outbound for the VOR approach, the VOR miss, then on the way to FDK at 2300 some unusual attitudes, then, to the VOR, out on the 047 to RICKE and the ILS inbound. It's just more compact and makes more sense; keeps you away from confusing fake "radar vetors" per ATC (e.g, CFI), and out of P40. No more than 0.5 total.

 

[spiderweb]

Thanks, Bruce. Yup, I know the 273 Radial is only for identing RICKE. If I wanted to use EMI as an IAF, I'd be coming off the 295 Radial (and that's how we do it coming from Baltimore).

I sure hope the checkout is that quick! Just don't quite know what to expect.

BTW, I've also requested a few landings, as it has been about half a year since I've flown the 182. Approach speeds are similar to the Zlin, but the flare looks different. The Cessna I flew most recently, a few weeks ago, was the 150, and that is a completely different world than the 182. With about 12 hours in the 182, I'm hoping it will come back quickly. (I have about 40 hours complex/hi-perf time, so that part doesn't bother me.)

 

[EdFred]

Dont you love insurance companies. You JUST passed your IFR test, and you still aren't "qualified." Yeah, that 3 days and all your skills just disappear. What a racket.

 

[Richard]

I appreciate the opportunity to review this approach but haven't you learned your lesson? You were worried up to here about the checkride and now you're wondering about this checkout and a simple approach. Quit borrowing trouble.

Just so you know I know, even though the FAA says you are qualified and you are fairly certain (the "fairly" qualifier only because you seem to have conjured up some doubt) you will do fine on this checkout it's the self doubts with which we do battle. Confidence does not imply complacency. What that means is to not 2nd guess yourself does not mean you have become inattentive or unaware of potential traps.

 

[spiderweb]

LOL! Good points, both of you. The place I rent from in Texas told me that my one checkout was good for VFR, IFR, day, night, etc., as long as I was current. At least I don't need another checkout down there!

 

[Richard]

LOL! Good points, both of you. The place I rent from in Texas told me that my one checkout was good for VFR, IFR, day, night, etc., as long as I was current. At least I don't need another checkout down there!

No, you're not finished with checkouts. When you upgrade into faster, more complex equipment being one reason.

Thanks for being a good sport. I dreaded you'd take my previous comments harshly.