lsza
18th Nov 2005, 16:31
Hi everyone.
I hope someone can answer this.
I am doing some research for the company I work for. We fly quite a lot of visual approaches in tricky areas. Initially we fly a non precision and as soon as we have contact we fly visual app. I was wondering if we lose ground contact (enter clouds) during a visual approach (as a consequence we go around) is this considered a failure, or is only losing an engine considered a failure? Our MAP contingency is based on engine failure at the minima with a climb gradiant of aprox 5-7% but below the minima (visual) we are more or less comitted to land.
If losing contact is considered a failure then to my understanding we don't have to take into consideration an engine failure once on a visual as both together would mean a double failure (never taken into consideration).
Can anyone shed some light?
Thanks
I hope someone can answer this.
I am doing some research for the company I work for. We fly quite a lot of visual approaches in tricky areas. Initially we fly a non precision and as soon as we have contact we fly visual app. I was wondering if we lose ground contact (enter clouds) during a visual approach (as a consequence we go around) is this considered a failure, or is only losing an engine considered a failure? Our MAP contingency is based on engine failure at the minima with a climb gradiant of aprox 5-7% but below the minima (visual) we are more or less comitted to land.
If losing contact is considered a failure then to my understanding we don't have to take into consideration an engine failure once on a visual as both together would mean a double failure (never taken into consideration).
Can anyone shed some light?
Thanks