Drone flying within LAX restricted airspace
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drone flying within LAX restricted airspace
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks, when I saw this and the idea of 10 miles east at 4000feet. I thought...hmm, pretty close to the ILS glideslope altitude.
We all know about 300' per nm for glideslope.
But to be sure, I looked up the ILS apch and here it is:
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1409/00237IL24L.PDF
One of many as you all know. And while not exactly on the glideslope, it is close enough to be of great concern to landing traffic.
Now, some of you will point out that 300 per nm would make the glide at 3000'. but it is really closer to 316 per nm. And , while not the best way, most plane intercept from above the glideslope.
This should be considered a serious incident. I just hope ISIS doesn't get a drone.
We all know about 300' per nm for glideslope.
But to be sure, I looked up the ILS apch and here it is:
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1409/00237IL24L.PDF
One of many as you all know. And while not exactly on the glideslope, it is close enough to be of great concern to landing traffic.
Now, some of you will point out that 300 per nm would make the glide at 3000'. but it is really closer to 316 per nm. And , while not the best way, most plane intercept from above the glideslope.
This should be considered a serious incident. I just hope ISIS doesn't get a drone.
Prompted by a comment on that news page, for balance, until laws are put in place to require them to be operated to very widely avoid any remotely possible interference with aviation then they should be a legitimate target for a shotgun.
And , while not the best way, most plane intercept from above the glideslope.
Why would you say that?
I can think of only a couple of occasions in the last 5-6 years when we did that. Usually it is because someone cocked up (ATC or Crew). It is not a comfortable experience and can lead to an unstabilised approach.
From below is standard.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
globally challenged
Oh, I know intercepting glideslope from beneath is the right way to do things, but reality is different than that. ATC, Wake turbulence, so many reasons.
Just checked your age. I've been a pilot 3 years longer than you have been alive.
But stuff happens. You cope. Now we cope with drones.
Oh, I know intercepting glideslope from beneath is the right way to do things, but reality is different than that. ATC, Wake turbulence, so many reasons.
Just checked your age. I've been a pilot 3 years longer than you have been alive.
But stuff happens. You cope. Now we cope with drones.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comment earlier in thread about ISIS obtaining a drone...........
Not to worry, they can disassemble their drones and bring them with them as they are welcomed with open arms at the U.S. Southern "border", and then transported to wherever thruout the country :-)
Not to worry, they can disassemble their drones and bring them with them as they are welcomed with open arms at the U.S. Southern "border", and then transported to wherever thruout the country :-)
Stuff does happen - but not so often that it can be said that 'most plane intercept from above'.
Perhaps it may occur more regularly in the US that Europe although this has not been my experience - particularly when coming in to LAX when we are typically cleared the approach some 40 miles out meaning the correct GS would be a good 3000' above you, especially with the new 'descend via' clearances.
Perhaps it may occur more regularly in the US that Europe although this has not been my experience - particularly when coming in to LAX when we are typically cleared the approach some 40 miles out meaning the correct GS would be a good 3000' above you, especially with the new 'descend via' clearances.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guess we don't fly to the same airports. intercepting from above does take a bit more skill, understanding of auto systems and the like.
how wonderful to intercept from below, or even from 40 miles out, but not every US airport does that.
how wonderful to intercept from below, or even from 40 miles out, but not every US airport does that.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check this out.
Sorry to continue with the thread drift, but maybe this will end it:
Glendalegoon, it 's so wonderful to intercept the GS from below that the FAA made it a rule.
Here's the Guidance:
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publi...c/atc0509.html
Glendalegoon, it 's so wonderful to intercept the GS from below that the FAA made it a rule.
Here's the Guidance:
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publi...c/atc0509.html
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gee, an FAA advisory that has said what has been said for 30 plus years.
YET it doesn't always happen.
And it even makes exceptions for visual approaches. LAX doing visuals? it can't be.
Yes, I'm being sarcastic.
YET it doesn't always happen.
And it even makes exceptions for visual approaches. LAX doing visuals? it can't be.
Yes, I'm being sarcastic.
guess we don't fly to the same airports. intercepting from above does take a bit more skill, understanding of auto systems and the like.
(If all three, then I sincerely hope you aren't on a route check
)
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me put it this way:
You are vectored to intercept the localizer/glideslope and end up high on the glideslope.
DO YOU:
1. Request a vector back on to the localizer below the glideslope.
2. Increase rate of descent and intercept glideslope from above>
You get to choose. You make the choice. ATC may even apologize and give you number 1, but it is your airline's fuel, money, schedule. ATC doesn't refund fuel cost do they?
ADD in wake turbulence. Do you fly on the glideslope or do you fly a little above and land past the landing point of larger plane ahead of you?
I am certainly aware of the way things OUGHT to be. But I know how things really are.
You are vectored to intercept the localizer/glideslope and end up high on the glideslope.
DO YOU:
1. Request a vector back on to the localizer below the glideslope.
2. Increase rate of descent and intercept glideslope from above>
You get to choose. You make the choice. ATC may even apologize and give you number 1, but it is your airline's fuel, money, schedule. ATC doesn't refund fuel cost do they?
ADD in wake turbulence. Do you fly on the glideslope or do you fly a little above and land past the landing point of larger plane ahead of you?
I am certainly aware of the way things OUGHT to be. But I know how things really are.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 73
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Gemini Twin
What airliners are the Canadians using these days?
Avro Canada VZ-9 Avrocar
glendalegoon
In over 40 years in the business i have never heard of anyone suggesting to deliberately fly above the glideslope and land long to avoid wake turbulence. Separation rules exist to take care of that. If it does get screwed up then go around rather than destabilizing your approach.
In over 40 years in the business i have never heard of anyone suggesting to deliberately fly above the glideslope and land long to avoid wake turbulence. Separation rules exist to take care of that. If it does get screwed up then go around rather than destabilizing your approach.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North of Antartica
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The menace of drones is exaggerated
Inadvertent infractions into controlled airspace by quadcopters/tricopters/hexacopters etc is incredibly rare. I was looking at various examples of these devices recently and came to the conclusion they are all very fragile, and usually quite small. The vast majority weigh well under 2kg. In my career I have had various gulls and pigeons re-arrange their organs on my windscreen, radome and even the tips of my skids. Any self propelled meat-bomb or toy is a hazard, but since man took to the skies part of our lot as pilots.
Personally, I have come to the conclusion that the proliferation of geese, buzzards and gulls represent a much greater and much much more likely menace to me on ARR/DEP than the rogue idiot and his expensive RC toy. (ASK SULLY
)
..and finally as for glide-slopes... I look very dimly on any controller who leaves me high and joining the ILS from above!
Personally, I have come to the conclusion that the proliferation of geese, buzzards and gulls represent a much greater and much much more likely menace to me on ARR/DEP than the rogue idiot and his expensive RC toy. (ASK SULLY
)..and finally as for glide-slopes... I look very dimly on any controller who leaves me high and joining the ILS from above!
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aterpster
airline pilot.
FLY3, you might want to read up on the subject: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...m/aim0703.html
A DC9 was lost following too closely to a DC10 about 42 years ago. You might want to read up on it.
Flying a dot high is no sin, in fact in some situations it is the thing to do (assuming wx above mins)
I am really shocked that you seem to be taking wake turbulence so haphazardly . Part of the triggering event to an airbus crash near JFK was a wake turbulence encounter on climbout.
Are you guys pilots? Aterpster, I thought you flew for TWA. Certainly you avoided wake? I just have to ask. Ever get cleared for a visual approach? Do you know who has responsibility for wake avoidance during a visual approach?
Landing long? Why not? Certainly remain inside the touchdown zone. You do realize what the touchdown zone is, and I'm not talking about football.
FLY3, it amazes me what you said, really. And since the FAA suggests what I said, I must assume you are not a pilot. Read that URL it even says to fly on or above the glideslope. How you couldn't have heard about this amazes me! It gets even more complex if a slight tailwind or crosswind on parallel runways is present.
airline pilot.
FLY3, you might want to read up on the subject: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...m/aim0703.html
A DC9 was lost following too closely to a DC10 about 42 years ago. You might want to read up on it.
Flying a dot high is no sin, in fact in some situations it is the thing to do (assuming wx above mins)
I am really shocked that you seem to be taking wake turbulence so haphazardly . Part of the triggering event to an airbus crash near JFK was a wake turbulence encounter on climbout.
Are you guys pilots? Aterpster, I thought you flew for TWA. Certainly you avoided wake? I just have to ask. Ever get cleared for a visual approach? Do you know who has responsibility for wake avoidance during a visual approach?
Landing long? Why not? Certainly remain inside the touchdown zone. You do realize what the touchdown zone is, and I'm not talking about football.
FLY3, it amazes me what you said, really. And since the FAA suggests what I said, I must assume you are not a pilot. Read that URL it even says to fly on or above the glideslope. How you couldn't have heard about this amazes me! It gets even more complex if a slight tailwind or crosswind on parallel runways is present.