Helicopter Non-Precision Approaches
(a) The decision height (DH) to be used for a non-precision approach (NPA) flown with:
-the continuous descent final approach (CDFA) technique,
-approach procedure with vertical guidance (APV),
-or CAT I operation
-the continuous descent final approach (CDFA) technique,
-approach procedure with vertical guidance (APV),
-or CAT I operation
You can fly a CDFA (using the DA/H) technique with or without vertical guidance.
If you choose not fly the cdfa (I'd suggest not to use charts with cdfa only profiles then), I guess you can always use the DA as MDA.
Take a look to this side by side charts:
http://www.terps.com/EHAM/EHAM%20Side%20by%20Side.pdf
Regards
Aser
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Aser,
Thats useful - the DA and the MDA are shown as the same for the 2 styles of approach. Hopefully what I have been teaching has been correct as luck would have it! Unfortunately at the airport where we practise most IFR approaches in simulator training, there are only CDFA approaches to go on, yet some operators want to use the traditional style.
Thats useful - the DA and the MDA are shown as the same for the 2 styles of approach. Hopefully what I have been teaching has been correct as luck would have it! Unfortunately at the airport where we practise most IFR approaches in simulator training, there are only CDFA approaches to go on, yet some operators want to use the traditional style.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC Plod
IMHO the best solution when teaching how to manage the FMS you have to take account of the CUSTOMERS own day-to-day operations. This teaching process is very context sensitive. The way you use the FMS/AP/FD to manage the altitude will be different according to the requirements of the CUSTOMER'S jurisdiction and you don't have much time to get more than one solution across given the parlous IFR skill levels we encounter.
If it's possible to do the IFR section at the customer's local airport then this option should be considered if the outcome would be more favourable. The problem with this solution is that the simulator and it's software are so flakey that 50% of the time moving away from the tried and tested Rome runways ends in a disastrous capitulation to the Lord of the Windows (thank you Bill!!!)
Irrelevant training is almost a total waste of time - even though it may facilitate the ticking of a box - so the more relevant we can make a lesson the greater value it creates. If the customer works in an environment where 'dive and drive' is 'de rigour' there seems little point in teaching him an alien procedure he may never use. Notice that I used the word 'teach' rather than 'deliver'. There's a little too much 'delivering' going on out there and not enough 'teaching. I think you will agree that teaching requires the SFI to be able to recognise, understand and deal with the customer's faults and shortcomings rather than just tick-boxing your way through a list of manoeuvres.
G.
If it's possible to do the IFR section at the customer's local airport then this option should be considered if the outcome would be more favourable. The problem with this solution is that the simulator and it's software are so flakey that 50% of the time moving away from the tried and tested Rome runways ends in a disastrous capitulation to the Lord of the Windows (thank you Bill!!!)
Irrelevant training is almost a total waste of time - even though it may facilitate the ticking of a box - so the more relevant we can make a lesson the greater value it creates. If the customer works in an environment where 'dive and drive' is 'de rigour' there seems little point in teaching him an alien procedure he may never use. Notice that I used the word 'teach' rather than 'deliver'. There's a little too much 'delivering' going on out there and not enough 'teaching. I think you will agree that teaching requires the SFI to be able to recognise, understand and deal with the customer's faults and shortcomings rather than just tick-boxing your way through a list of manoeuvres.
G.
Last edited by Geoffersincornwall; 17th Oct 2013 at 07:38.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: LOS
Age: 67
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Transport Canada has just published this document:
Advisory Circular (AC) No. 700-023 - Transport Canada
Have a look at the note in 4.3 (2)
Advisory Circular (AC) No. 700-023 - Transport Canada
Have a look at the note in 4.3 (2)
