So, am I incompetent, or what...

Aztec Driver

Aztec Driver

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
982
Location
Elizabethtown, PA
Display Name
Display name:
Bryon
Do all high time charter and corporate pilots tend to "go a little beyond" the DH on instrument approaches to places that they fly to constantly? I had a flight to Nantucket today, the field was scheduled to be VFR when I got there, however, it went low IFR and never really lifted much in the time I arrived. The Atis was calling 100 OVC, but since I was empty, I was allowed to "take a look". I slid down the glideslope, keeping the localizer and glideslope as accurate as I could, though not doing the greatest job of it, and at DH there was no trace of land under me, nor runway in front, so off I go on the missed.
The south side of the island, (where the weather is coming from) is starting to lift and break up a little, so I ask for another approach. I did this because I thought that perhaps I wasn't accurate enough, or perhaps it would lift a little. Meanwhile, there is a steady line oif faster, heavier traffic going in and not going missed.
I line up for a second approach, and this time keep everything a whole lot more centered. I still see nothing at all from DH. Up I go again. By this time the controllers are irritated at me and send me to the penalty box. Again, there is a steady stream of incoming airplanes not going missed. My altimeter checks fine, so I can only assume these people are all going slightly below minimums to complete their mission.

Any other thoughts?
 
I flew corporate as a co-pilot once into ACK, and the main guy was flying the ILS....I saw the lights, but he didn't, so we had to go missed. We both caught them the next try.
Maybe those guys with two pairs of eyes are just having better luck getting the lights in sight than you are just flying by yourself?
 
Aztec Driver said:
Do all high time charter and corporate pilots tend to "go a little beyond"
Click to expand...
I can only speak for myself but that would be "no".

Aztec Driver said:
Any other thoughts?
Click to expand...
I'm going to go with the two pilot theory. One person is flying on the instruments and the other one is looking outside. Having flown both single pilot IFR and in a crew I'll tell you that it does make a difference.

I'll also add that these crews were probably doing coupled approaches with good autopilots, which it didn't seem like you were doing from your post.
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
I can only speak for myself but that would be "no".
Click to expand...
I can't speak for charter pilots, but I've flown 121 into ACK/HYA/MVY many times, and for us I'd say absolutely not, too. That's not to say no one pushes their luck and busts mins, but I sure don't. The mins are there for a reason and aren't optional or variable based on how many times you have shot the approach.

I'm going to go with the two pilot theory. One person is flying on the instruments and the other one is looking outside. Having flown both single pilot IFR and in a crew I'll tell you that it does make a difference.

I'll also add that these crews were probably doing coupled approaches with good autopilots, which it didn't seem like you were doing from your post.
Click to expand...

Second. We have something called the "crew coordinated approach." I've only had to use it a couple times, and it was always down around the cape. Essentially, one pilot flies the approach completely heads down on instruments. The other pilot is completely heads up, only looking down to check the altitude (for required callouts) and make sure the flying pilot isn't deviating from the profile. When the outside guy gets the lights/runway in sight, he takes the controls and makes the landing. This alleviates the problems that tend to occur from dividing your attention or transitioning outside, and has made it possible for us to get in on days that are nearly impossible. If the fog is that thick, having the extra set of eyes to do nothing but scan the white abyss for lights makes all the difference in the world.
 
I've heard of this happening. When minimums are called its more lke min-one thousand ni-two thousand mums-three thousand go around. I wouldn't be surprised if there was pressure to bend the rules to save fuel.
 
You never specifically mentioned that you didn't, but did you see the approach lights?

I've met a LOT of pilots over the years who don't know that you can continue the approach to 100 AGL before you see the runway if you spot the approach lights at DH.

They can be awfully tough to pick up in the daytime, too...yet another vote for the two-pilot advantage there.

Fly safe!

David
 
MauleSkinner said:
I've met a LOT of pilots over the years who don't know that you can continue the approach to 100 AGL before you see the runway if you spot the approach lights at DH.

They can be awfully tough to pick up in the daytime, too...yet another vote for the two-pilot advantage there.
Click to expand...
I think this is a large part of the reason. Experience helps you see little nuances in shading and light that you know is "runway environment" when you go repeatedly into the same hole.
 
MauleSkinner said:
You never specifically mentioned that you didn't, but did you see the approach lights?

I've met a LOT of pilots over the years who don't know that you can continue the approach to 100 AGL before you see the runway if you spot the approach lights at DH.

They can be awfully tough to pick up in the daytime, too...yet another vote for the two-pilot advantage there.

Fly safe!

David
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I saw nothing at all, either out the side and down, or straight ahead. And it was morning, so the lights were difficult to pick up.
 
Perhaps I am reading this wrong, and probably most of the operators are under part 121, which may have different rules, but under part 135.225(a)(1) and (2), it states that they aren't allowed to even start the approach unless the weather is broadcast as above minimums. The ATIS was broadcasting 100 OVC the entire time. Were many of them even legal to commence the approach?
 
Aztec Driver said:
Perhaps I am reading this wrong, and probably most of the operators are under part 121, which may have different rules, but under part 135.225(a)(1) and (2), it states that they aren't allowed to even start the approach unless the weather is broadcast as above minimums. The ATIS was broadcasting 100 OVC the entire time. Were many of them even legal to commence the approach?
Click to expand...

Minimums are based on visibility, not cloud height.
 
10-21, Instrument Flying Handbook​


IAP Minimums
Pilots may not operate an aircraft at any airport below the
authorized MDA or continue an approach below the
authorized DA/DH unless:
1. The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a
descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made
at a normal descent rate using normal maneuvers;
2. The flight visibility is not less than that prescribed for
the approach procedure being used; and
3. At least one of the following visual references for the
intended runway is visible and identifiable to the pilot:
a. Approach light system
b. Threshold
c. Threshold markings
d. Threshold lights
e. Runway end identifier lights (REIL)

f. Visual approach slope indicator (VASI)
g. Touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings
h. Touchdown zone lights
i. Runway or runway markings
j. Runway lights​








So you don't have to see the runway at DH, but if you can see any of (a)-(j) you may continue.
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
10-21, Instrument Flying Handbook​



IAP Minimums
Pilots may not operate an aircraft at any airport below the
authorized MDA or continue an approach below the
authorized DA/DH unless:
1. The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a
descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made
at a normal descent rate using normal maneuvers;
2. The flight visibility is not less than that prescribed for
the approach procedure being used; and
3. At least one of the following visual references for the
intended runway is visible and identifiable to the pilot:
a. Approach light system
b. Threshold
c. Threshold markings
d. Threshold lights
e. Runway end identifier lights (REIL)​

f. Visual approach slope indicator (VASI)

g. Touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings
h. Touchdown zone lights
i. Runway or runway markings
j. Runway lights​










So you don't have to see the runway at DH, but if you can see any of (a)-(j) you may continue.
Click to expand...
I understand that, but at DH I was still well inside the soup, both below me and laterally around me. That only answers the question of what you need to land, not what you need to have in the weather broadcast to be allowed to commence the approach.
 
Sometimes the pilot not flying is looking directly DOWN. But I do agree that some profession crews desecend below. I do not.

The Citation that got into Mineral Wells Texas just before me radioed for me to relay that they were down, and that they were ....long pause..."just" at minimums.
 
Aztec Driver said:
Perhaps I am reading this wrong, and probably most of the operators are under part 121, which may have different rules, but under part 135.225(a)(1) and (2), it states that they aren't allowed to even start the approach unless the weather is broadcast as above minimums. The ATIS was broadcasting 100 OVC the entire time. Were many of them even legal to commence the approach?
Click to expand...

Byron, I wouldnt call missing an approach incompetent. There is not much difference between 135 and 121 as far as approach mins and visability are concerned. You never did mention what the RVR was during your attempted approaches. You can have two planes flying the same approach with different minimums. If you can find the lowest RVR for that runway you will probably have your answer.
Best
FB
 
Aztec Driver said:
I had thought that, but I am searching for a reference on that.
Click to expand...
It isn't clearly stated anywhere in the regs, but it is true. 135.225(e)(2) refers to the "authorized IFR landing minimums." If you then go to 91.175(d)(2), you'll see that the landing minimums for 135 operators are strictly visibility.
 
I'm pretty sure that pt 121 has to have minimums or better reported to start the approach, but if you are pt 91 no matter how bad things are being reported you can shoot the approach just to "take a look". This is what I have heard from some of the old heads around the club. Now I'll bow out and let the experts here tell it how it is. (wink)
 
AWACSEng said:
I'm pretty sure that pt 121 has to have minimums or better reported to start the approach, but if you are pt 91 no matter how bad things are being reported you can shoot the approach just to "take a look". This is what I have heard from some of the old heads around the club. Now I'll bow out and let the experts here tell it how it is. (wink)
Click to expand...
Legally, you are correct on all counts. However, whether it would be a wise move for a Part 91 pilot to start an approach with below mins weather reported would depend on a great number of factors, including pilot proficiency, fuel state, exact weather, other airports/approaches available (and how far away they are), equipment in the aircraft, etc.
 
Ron, I figured as much. The only reason I would see to commence the approach with conditions reported below mins would be if the hourly wx information was about 45 mins. old. Shoot the approach, take a look, then go missed if it still sucks. Good reason to have holding gas above what is legally required and also hold an alternate.
 
AWACSEng said:
I'm pretty sure that pt 121 has to have minimums or better reported to start the approach, but if you are pt 91 no matter how bad things are being reported you can shoot the approach just to "take a look". This is what I have heard from some of the old heads around the club. Now I'll bow out and let the experts here tell it how it is. (wink)
Click to expand...

To clarify, part 135 or 121 must have the required RVR reported to procede past the FAF. For CAT II the approach can continue if the reported RVR goes below mins. For CATIII the crew would have to go missed if the reported RVR went below mins. At the MAP part 91, 135, and 121 are all the same; you need to have the required inflight visability to continue .
Ceiling is not a requirement in the US.
Frank
 
MauleSkinner said:
You never specifically mentioned that you didn't, but did you see the approach lights?

I've met a LOT of pilots over the years who don't know that you can continue the approach to 100 AGL before you see the runway if you spot the approach lights at DH.


Fly safe!

David
Click to expand...

That's not exactly true. In order to descend to 100ft above touchdown zone elevation, you must have the red siderow bars or red terminating bars in sight. This is only possible if you are shooting an approach to a runway which has an ALSF I or ALSF II approach lighting system. If the runway only has a MALSR or less you're out of luck and can NOT use this particular regulation to descend below the published DH
 
Correction said:
In order to descend to 100ft above touchdown zone elevation, you must have the red siderow bars or red terminating bars in sight.
Click to expand...
While Part 121 or your company FOM may have additional restrictions, we're talking Part 91 here, and 91.175(c)(3)(i) says otherwise. You don't need the red siderow bars or red terminating bars in sight to descend from DH to 100 AGL, but if you do have them, you can continue below 100 AGL even without any of the other nine items in sight.
 
Ron Levy said:
While Part 121 or your company FOM may have additional restrictions, we're talking Part 91 here, and 91.175(c)(3)(i) says otherwise. You don't need the red siderow bars or red terminating bars in sight to descend from DH to 100 AGL, but if you do have them, you can continue below 100 AGL even without any of the other nine items in sight.
Click to expand...

You're correct, my wording was incorrect, "below" and "to" were mixed up. If you get to 100ft above TDZ elevation with ONLY the approach lights in sight, you can not descend below the 100ft unless the siderow/terminating bars are visible(which then assumes an ALSFI/II approach lighting system is available)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top