IMC "pilot interpreted approach"
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: scotland
IMC "pilot interpreted approach"
Could someone please tell me which approach(es) would /not/ be valid for signing off for an IMC revalidation in a PA28.
Does it just mean don't use the autopilot?
Does it just mean don't use the autopilot?
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
From: UK
Just to clarify, and I'm not implying Sir George has the wrong end of the stick.....
The categorisation of approaches as Precision/Non-Precision and Pilot-Interpreted/Ground-Interpreted are completely separate. For example:
ILS is a precision pilot-interpreted approach
PAR is a precision ground-interpreted approach
NDB (and the new GPS approaches) is a non-precision pilot-interpreted approach
SRA (and indeed a QGH for all you old-schoolers) is a non-precision ground-interpreted approach
I can also teach all your grandmothers to suck eggs if you'd like......
The categorisation of approaches as Precision/Non-Precision and Pilot-Interpreted/Ground-Interpreted are completely separate. For example:
ILS is a precision pilot-interpreted approach
PAR is a precision ground-interpreted approach
NDB (and the new GPS approaches) is a non-precision pilot-interpreted approach
SRA (and indeed a QGH for all you old-schoolers) is a non-precision ground-interpreted approach
I can also teach all your grandmothers to suck eggs if you'd like......
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 1
From: Oop North, UK
NDB (and the new GPS approaches) is a non-precision pilot-interpreted approach
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
From: France
It used to be called GCA
A Pilot Interpreted Approach is one where the Pilot is responsible for the safety of the aircraft, The Ground Controlled Approach is one where the safety of the aircraft is in the hands and skill of the ground operator, primary, and the pilot in the secondary role.
.
Tmb
.
Tmb
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
From: UK
A pilot interpreted approach is where the pilot is in receipt of nothing more than “bearing information”. From this information the pilot determines track to the station. No looking at needles and moving maps. 
Last edited by Robin400; 30th October 2009 at 11:16. Reason: typo
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
A pilot interpretated approach??? Which bit? A procedural approach means that the pilot may follow a Star and even follow a procedure to self position onto a landing aid ie ILS, VOR, NDB or even GPS.
This is rather than being picked up by radar and given headings to fly as far as PAR or SRA are concerned these can almost be seen as a continuation of the radar facility. In the case of a PAR then yes the aircraft is given directions to remain on the centreline and correct glideslope.
With a SRA this is technically still a pilot interpretated approach as while the aircraft maybe directed on the centreline it is still up to the pilot to be at the correct hights and to control his glidepath.
Pace
This is rather than being picked up by radar and given headings to fly as far as PAR or SRA are concerned these can almost be seen as a continuation of the radar facility. In the case of a PAR then yes the aircraft is given directions to remain on the centreline and correct glideslope.
Approaches that are not pilot interpreted are SRA and PRA for example.
With a SRA this is technically still a pilot interpretated approach as while the aircraft maybe directed on the centreline it is still up to the pilot to be at the correct hights and to control his glidepath.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 30th October 2009 at 17:43.
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 554
Likes: 0
From: a galaxy far, far,away...
No, SRA is not pilot-interpreted. Yes, the pilot has to control his RoD but ATC provide hdgs & heights for the appropriate angle. The basic difference is "could you do it without ATC" (talking feasibility, not legalities!), ie by interpreting your approach from an instrument in your cockpit.
ap
ap
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
ATC provide hdgs & heights for the appropriate angle.
Aluminium
I maybe pedantic ATC provide headings as they can see where you are laterally but the CANNOT see where you are vertically.
They do advise that at X distance you should be passing through a particular altitude but they have no way in determining whether you are at 500 feet or 5000 feet if for instance your transponder had packed up.
In that sense you are controlling your descent profile and could just as easely take the distance/altitude points off a chart.
With a PAR they control and can see you in the vertical profile too so TECHNICALLY a PAR is not pilot interpreted while an SRA has a ?
I am being pedantic
Pace
Aluminium
I maybe pedantic ATC provide headings as they can see where you are laterally but the CANNOT see where you are vertically.
They do advise that at X distance you should be passing through a particular altitude but they have no way in determining whether you are at 500 feet or 5000 feet if for instance your transponder had packed up.
In that sense you are controlling your descent profile and could just as easely take the distance/altitude points off a chart.
With a PAR they control and can see you in the vertical profile too so TECHNICALLY a PAR is not pilot interpreted while an SRA has a ?
I am being pedantic
Pace
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
From: Oxford
I'm surprised no-one's mentioned VDF approaches (pilot-interpreted, as opposed to QGH which is ground-interpreted.)
Are there any left, in fact? I did overhear a QGH approach at Wyton a couple of years ago, so they at least are not defunct entirely.
Interesting questions though because my examiner on my last IMC renewal seemed a bit vague about it and was quite happy to accept a PAR until I pointed out it wasn't allowed...
Tim
Are there any left, in fact? I did overhear a QGH approach at Wyton a couple of years ago, so they at least are not defunct entirely.
Interesting questions though because my examiner on my last IMC renewal seemed a bit vague about it and was quite happy to accept a PAR until I pointed out it wasn't allowed...
Tim
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 28
Likes: 3
From: .
QGH
Apologies for the thread drift...
I flew a QGH approach at Wyton a couple of weeks ago, so they're certainly not defunct there at least - does anywhere else offer them?
I did overhear a QGH approach at Wyton a couple of years ago, so they at least are not defunct entirely.
