Minimas on Non Precision Approaches
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Columbia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimas on Non Precision Approaches
I'm going to be climbing in the left hand seat of a twin shortly and i'm curious to see what the industry is like in terms of the gap between what's legal and what you're faced with in real life.
Obviously every operation is different but interested in individual expereinces.... HOw much pressure is there to get the job done and does this translate into an expectation that you'll bust the minimas on NPAs? How far do people push it? (if at all)
Obviously every operation is different but interested in individual expereinces.... HOw much pressure is there to get the job done and does this translate into an expectation that you'll bust the minimas on NPAs? How far do people push it? (if at all)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a joke right? Barbershop has been registered for a week, based in Columbia and he posts asking us to say if we break the law! Either a joke or a journalist looking for stories.
Do a search on any database of aviation safety and read what happens when you bust the minima on NPAs. Take the advice from Smokey and Fly3, operate safely and legally.
3 Point
Do a search on any database of aviation safety and read what happens when you bust the minima on NPAs. Take the advice from Smokey and Fly3, operate safely and legally.
3 Point
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real question becomes, if you decide to 'bust' minimums on a non-precision approach, just how low are you prepared to go?
100 below?
200 below?
300 maybe?
And, if the Captain does this, is the First Officer equally satisfied that this idea is a good one?
The short answer is...descend to the published minima, and be satisfied with that.
You have done the job for which you have been paid.
Any lower is just asking for trouble.
By the way, it might indeed surprise more than a few here to realise that, in the days of old, when instrument approaches were of the low frequency 4-course radio range variety. minima were much lower than one might expect.
As in 200 agl.
Now, I'm not quite that old, but I did have to descend to 300 agl on one for my original ATPL.
It ain't easy...
Leaving aside range orientation...also not easy.
100 below?
200 below?
300 maybe?
And, if the Captain does this, is the First Officer equally satisfied that this idea is a good one?
The short answer is...descend to the published minima, and be satisfied with that.
You have done the job for which you have been paid.
Any lower is just asking for trouble.
By the way, it might indeed surprise more than a few here to realise that, in the days of old, when instrument approaches were of the low frequency 4-course radio range variety. minima were much lower than one might expect.
As in 200 agl.
Now, I'm not quite that old, but I did have to descend to 300 agl on one for my original ATPL.
It ain't easy...
Leaving aside range orientation...also not easy.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Columbia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not joking, not a journo and just looking to get some answers to some of the questions i've never had the opportunity to ask. I have a few friends who work single pilot multi IFR jobs and from what they've told me this was pretty much the industry standard - maybe not in Airline work but certainly in the smaller cargo / frieght companies that they work with.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I have a few friends who work single pilot multi IFR jobs and from what they've told me this was pretty much the industry standard - . . . "
To put your friend's comments above into perspective, why not take a few minutes to compare the fatal accident rates between the GA and commercial sectors. That says it all.
To put your friend's comments above into perspective, why not take a few minutes to compare the fatal accident rates between the GA and commercial sectors. That says it all.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Afghan caves
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am with your friends here barbershopquartets. Get the job done. I generally bug threshold height and monitor the approach down to the ground (Sometimes into it). Saves time and fuel, and the passengers are usually quite happy they made destination. On occassion they can use the plane again afterwards (Albeit with a bit of work in the hangar).
Happy busting.
Crazy
Happy busting.
Crazy
Last edited by Crazy Fists; 30th Oct 2005 at 11:53.
Perhaps this thread should be moved to the Amateur Pilots Rumour Network....
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Barbershopquartet,
It's idiots like your mates busting MDA/DA's that give a bad name to single pilot GA operations. I'm glad to say I know none of the pilots in my company be it single or multi crew would ever dream of this and I'm sure that applies to every other operator in the UK.
Guys check this out and I think you'll see just how much of an idiot this Columbian chap is!
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=192031
It's idiots like your mates busting MDA/DA's that give a bad name to single pilot GA operations. I'm glad to say I know none of the pilots in my company be it single or multi crew would ever dream of this and I'm sure that applies to every other operator in the UK.
Guys check this out and I think you'll see just how much of an idiot this Columbian chap is!
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=192031
Join Date: May 2005
Location: LGW
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to change the direction of this thread slightly:
what about 'busting the minima' in an emergency situation, e.g. if out of fuel after a leak, and you have to glide down to the runway and cannot get high enough to be within the published safe altitudes?
what about 'busting the minima' in an emergency situation, e.g. if out of fuel after a leak, and you have to glide down to the runway and cannot get high enough to be within the published safe altitudes?
Last edited by davedek; 12th Oct 2005 at 16:23.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Somewhere along UN859
Age: 64
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crazy Fists.... I think perhaps you missed your vocation in life...rounding up cattle out west in america wearing a nice big cowboys hat. Yeehaa!!
When WILL people learn
When WILL people learn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Columbia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I know this guy who has around 4000 hours, most of it mountain time in twins. Does alot of work into remote mountain strips at the bottom of valleys and over the years has designed his own form of GPS letdown.
First he flew the routes in VMC, got exact co-ords for points where the valley turns a corner, worked out what he considered an acceptable alt for terrain clearance at each turning point, and punched them in as GPS waypoints. Can fly from each waypoint to the next in a straight line.
First he radios in and gets info on cloud base at the strip and local baro pressure. (his personal minima is set at 200ft) and if she's a goer he simply tracks the route and flys the predetermined altitudes..... been doing a homemade GPS letdown for years on routes where he's regularly below surrounding terrain and while there's no allowance for missed approaches I feel he's stayed alive long enough to prove it's relatively safe - albeit with no margin for error.
Personally I don't think him an idiot as you all seem so quick to label him. Just incredibly good at what he does - though I am ready to believe his theory that NPA minimas are set to allow for the majority of brainless sheep with pilot licences and an inability to think for themselves.
First he flew the routes in VMC, got exact co-ords for points where the valley turns a corner, worked out what he considered an acceptable alt for terrain clearance at each turning point, and punched them in as GPS waypoints. Can fly from each waypoint to the next in a straight line.
First he radios in and gets info on cloud base at the strip and local baro pressure. (his personal minima is set at 200ft) and if she's a goer he simply tracks the route and flys the predetermined altitudes..... been doing a homemade GPS letdown for years on routes where he's regularly below surrounding terrain and while there's no allowance for missed approaches I feel he's stayed alive long enough to prove it's relatively safe - albeit with no margin for error.
Personally I don't think him an idiot as you all seem so quick to label him. Just incredibly good at what he does - though I am ready to believe his theory that NPA minimas are set to allow for the majority of brainless sheep with pilot licences and an inability to think for themselves.
Judging by the tone of the latest retort to the comments made by a few posters, I suspect that this thread is about to take a dive into the kamode, where it will be flushed into oblivion. Too bad that an opportunity to positively influence an obviously impressionable aviation neophyte has been lost. Also too bad that said neophyte has gotten the impression that pilots who follow prescribed procedures to published minima do so because they are "brainless sheep"! I guess the hundreds of documented examples of "ducking under" CFIT accidents are testament to the superior airmanship and intellectual prowess of individuals who thought of themselves as too good to need such limitations as published procedures and minima placed on their god-like powers. No, these gifted aviators knew better, right up until they augered in. Or, more probably, most just made a dumb error of the sort that any over-confident and under-informed individual might be expected to make. Doctor-in-a-vee-tail-bonanza-syndrome, it used to be called. You can't tell me!
Maybe the bush pilot with the home-brewed instrument approach procedures will get away with it and live a long life and maybe he won't. General James Doolittle, who took so many calculated risks to further the science of flight and to help win a war, titled his autobiography "I could never be so lucky again". Don Sheldon, a noted Alaskan glacier pilot flew rescue missions to save lifes doing instrument letdowns in Denali before GPS was even invented. In an interview, Reeve Aleutian Airways founder and glacier flying pioneer Dan(?) Reeve was quoted as saying "Yeah, this Sheldon kid is going to be real good, if he doesn't get himself killed first." Well, Don lived long enough to die from cancer instead of a crash. Earnest K. Gann, in his great airline career memoir "Fate is the hunter", dedicates the book to the memory of 5 pages of names. All of them pilots killed in airline crashes. About half of the crashes he cites happened during instrument letdowns. EKG got away with some hairy ones himself. It is a recurring theme in his work that he was no better a man or a pilot than these dead men. He wondered if he was just luckier. It should be noted that these men and many others are remembered as pioneers because they lived to tell about it. Many of their contemporaries did not. Few will remember them. Chuck Yeager referred to his training squadron mates that were killed in accidents as "weak sisters". When he got in trouble over Edwards Air Force base, it occured to him that he wouldn't want his friends to drive to work on "Yeager boulevard" The air base and all of it's streets are named after dead test pilots, you see!
These days, most of the pioneering has been done. For the most part, pilots are not encouraged to engage in excessive risk-taking or acts of dering-do. They are expected to land somewhere safely 100% of the time, usually, but not always at the scheduled destination. Mountain destinations offer unique challenges. Barometric pressure and temperature gradients near the surface can vary a great deal from one valley to the next, creating rapidly changing conditions. One guy I knew of had a reputation for ducking under and getting in when everyone else had to miss. (brainless sheep?) He finally crunched into a hill 1/4 mile from the runway at a certain rocky mountain resort airport. 17 victims dead. Plus him. Classic case that is now examined in aviation classrooms around the world.
Bush flying and ag flying demand somewhat different skills and procedures be used to get the job done than than those used in the everyday commercial kinds of flying. IFR is structured and codified to a high degree. Creativity and innovation may be required more often to get it done in bush flying. The cost is in accepting a higher level of risk in these types of flying. That's just the way it is. You are simply exposed to more risk. Flying in cloud between ridges in the mountains on a home-made approach with no missed approach procedure is perhaps the most risky operation of all. I suspect this friend exagerates somewhat! Even if not, I hope our friend Barbershopquartets does not try to elevate himself to his friend's level of risk too quickly to have the opportunity to learn from some mistakes before biting off too much to chew. It can be a fine line.
By the way BSQ, not everyone who answered your post was trying to ridicule you. Some honestly wished you well. Even if they don't know you. So try to take the advice to avoid busting minimums in the spirit that it was intended by most. Fly procedures accurately as published and respect minimums because that way, you have a better chance at a longer career that makes you more money!
Best regards,
Westhawk
Maybe the bush pilot with the home-brewed instrument approach procedures will get away with it and live a long life and maybe he won't. General James Doolittle, who took so many calculated risks to further the science of flight and to help win a war, titled his autobiography "I could never be so lucky again". Don Sheldon, a noted Alaskan glacier pilot flew rescue missions to save lifes doing instrument letdowns in Denali before GPS was even invented. In an interview, Reeve Aleutian Airways founder and glacier flying pioneer Dan(?) Reeve was quoted as saying "Yeah, this Sheldon kid is going to be real good, if he doesn't get himself killed first." Well, Don lived long enough to die from cancer instead of a crash. Earnest K. Gann, in his great airline career memoir "Fate is the hunter", dedicates the book to the memory of 5 pages of names. All of them pilots killed in airline crashes. About half of the crashes he cites happened during instrument letdowns. EKG got away with some hairy ones himself. It is a recurring theme in his work that he was no better a man or a pilot than these dead men. He wondered if he was just luckier. It should be noted that these men and many others are remembered as pioneers because they lived to tell about it. Many of their contemporaries did not. Few will remember them. Chuck Yeager referred to his training squadron mates that were killed in accidents as "weak sisters". When he got in trouble over Edwards Air Force base, it occured to him that he wouldn't want his friends to drive to work on "Yeager boulevard" The air base and all of it's streets are named after dead test pilots, you see!
These days, most of the pioneering has been done. For the most part, pilots are not encouraged to engage in excessive risk-taking or acts of dering-do. They are expected to land somewhere safely 100% of the time, usually, but not always at the scheduled destination. Mountain destinations offer unique challenges. Barometric pressure and temperature gradients near the surface can vary a great deal from one valley to the next, creating rapidly changing conditions. One guy I knew of had a reputation for ducking under and getting in when everyone else had to miss. (brainless sheep?) He finally crunched into a hill 1/4 mile from the runway at a certain rocky mountain resort airport. 17 victims dead. Plus him. Classic case that is now examined in aviation classrooms around the world.
Bush flying and ag flying demand somewhat different skills and procedures be used to get the job done than than those used in the everyday commercial kinds of flying. IFR is structured and codified to a high degree. Creativity and innovation may be required more often to get it done in bush flying. The cost is in accepting a higher level of risk in these types of flying. That's just the way it is. You are simply exposed to more risk. Flying in cloud between ridges in the mountains on a home-made approach with no missed approach procedure is perhaps the most risky operation of all. I suspect this friend exagerates somewhat! Even if not, I hope our friend Barbershopquartets does not try to elevate himself to his friend's level of risk too quickly to have the opportunity to learn from some mistakes before biting off too much to chew. It can be a fine line.
By the way BSQ, not everyone who answered your post was trying to ridicule you. Some honestly wished you well. Even if they don't know you. So try to take the advice to avoid busting minimums in the spirit that it was intended by most. Fly procedures accurately as published and respect minimums because that way, you have a better chance at a longer career that makes you more money!
Best regards,
Westhawk
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: here and there but mostly lgw
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West hawk well said.
I have operated for 8000hrs in areas where a home made gps and mapping radar were the only way in, on a good day. Prior to that watch and bearings off a public broadcast station. I wouldnt do it again, ive used up all my nine lives. Its not unprofessional if its become the norm. Its the norm that has to change. These bush enviroments exist on a large scale. If one has the right karma its fun, but many do die, regularly, and they were always "good pilots".
Personally very little of my bush life (other than the handling skills) has migrated to the 7378 i fly now mainly due to the new apprenticeship i did on return to europe. But i do know of large cargo operator who crew their 747 freigthers with people straight out of that enviroment. EG bush otter/ag pilot to 747 in one foul swoop.Alot of the bush philosophy is prevelant in their hierarchy. Any wonder their track record is what it is.
Horses for courses but dont mix the tracks.
I have operated for 8000hrs in areas where a home made gps and mapping radar were the only way in, on a good day. Prior to that watch and bearings off a public broadcast station. I wouldnt do it again, ive used up all my nine lives. Its not unprofessional if its become the norm. Its the norm that has to change. These bush enviroments exist on a large scale. If one has the right karma its fun, but many do die, regularly, and they were always "good pilots".
Personally very little of my bush life (other than the handling skills) has migrated to the 7378 i fly now mainly due to the new apprenticeship i did on return to europe. But i do know of large cargo operator who crew their 747 freigthers with people straight out of that enviroment. EG bush otter/ag pilot to 747 in one foul swoop.Alot of the bush philosophy is prevelant in their hierarchy. Any wonder their track record is what it is.
Horses for courses but dont mix the tracks.
PPRuNeaholic
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cairns FNQ
Posts: 3,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I couldn't agree more westhawk. There are many places outside the USA where people have tried to use GPS beyond either :-
(a) the scope of the system, or
(b) the pilot's own ability.
Some survive to learn from the experience but others do not. I know a few people who tried these tactics once to often. I also know one or two who were undone because they hadn't believed that anything outside their "norm" could possibly happen.
I think it's very sad that the high quality of prang investigation in the civilised world doesn't always have an equal in other parts of the world, where this sort of thing goes on more often. In this respect I have to agree with Farty Flaps too because, "Its the norm that has to change".
Regulation doesn't seem to be helping to make that change happen. Perhaps a forum such as this can make a difference... but only if threads like this one can go the distance.
(a) the scope of the system, or
(b) the pilot's own ability.
Some survive to learn from the experience but others do not. I know a few people who tried these tactics once to often. I also know one or two who were undone because they hadn't believed that anything outside their "norm" could possibly happen.
I think it's very sad that the high quality of prang investigation in the civilised world doesn't always have an equal in other parts of the world, where this sort of thing goes on more often. In this respect I have to agree with Farty Flaps too because, "Its the norm that has to change".
Regulation doesn't seem to be helping to make that change happen. Perhaps a forum such as this can make a difference... but only if threads like this one can go the distance.