Lionair plane down in Bali.
ENR 1.5, section 2.6.
I would expect to follow the horizontal plan of the missed approach procedure, i.e. "proceed to" at a specified final height, but not continue down to minima - wot's the point ? Why continue to get closer to the ground ?
Except .... at LAX there is a VFR corridor for uncontrolled light aeroplanes that fly directly over the centre of the airport at right angles to the 06/24 runway vectors, 3,500ft Southbound,4,500 Northbound, so if one were to break off the approach and immediately start climbing, then one might find oneself at the same height as a little guy flying at right angles to your path, which might ruin your - and his - day, course, they can only be there VFR so you would see them, wouldn't you ? For this situation aircraft carrying out a missed approach are advised to continue down to and maintain, 2,500 ft and not climb until clear of the VFR corridor.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This tread is getting weirder and weirder. I was flying a Cat III approach a few weeks ago. The GS transmitter failed when we passed 2000. How low do you guys want me to fly in this situation?
My SOP calls for a a go around anytime I get a failure below 1000 ft on a low vis approach. You want me to continue to 50 ft before I go around?
A go around can happen any time during the approach. No way I will continue as close as possible to the ground before I go around!
A missed approach is not an emergency!
My SOP calls for a a go around anytime I get a failure below 1000 ft on a low vis approach. You want me to continue to 50 ft before I go around?
A go around can happen any time during the approach. No way I will continue as close as possible to the ground before I go around!
A missed approach is not an emergency!
Correct. I had a co-pilot ask me why I'd gone around on a Cat III just because the Terrain warning had sounded! He said we must be on the ILS because the needles were crossed - yeah! right ! He's probably a Child ( sorry, Captain ) of the Magenta Line now.
A terrain warning into Zurich, at night, in snow, is not something to be ignored, and yes, it did prove to be false. Tough.
A terrain warning into Zurich, at night, in snow, is not something to be ignored, and yes, it did prove to be false. Tough.
Last edited by ExSp33db1rd; 25th Apr 2013 at 09:39.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ExSP, Bloggs, JP,
ExSP, that is correct. Quite a few airports have a crossing, since you can go missed at any point, in a procedure design, especially a coded one, that must be reflected. There is also the potential conflict with DEP to consider.
Edit: added AUS AIP section (Bloggs, I am not exactly sure what your point was...)
ExSP, that is correct. Quite a few airports have a crossing, since you can go missed at any point, in a procedure design, especially a coded one, that must be reflected. There is also the potential conflict with DEP to consider.
Edit: added AUS AIP section (Bloggs, I am not exactly sure what your point was...)
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 25th Apr 2013 at 19:05.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A terrain warning into Zurich
So, with that in mind...depending on the terrain in that area, you may get a warning on one ac, while not another. There is the precipitous terrain algorithm the FMS looks at as well, with the scan rate and differences between scans.
IF there is a turn to final, the OCS surface is artificially lowered as well, and you may get even more warnings...
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC,
Certainly cannot argue with that!
It helps to understand what the box is thinking sometimes, with the RNP procedures, and baro-vnav, there were frequently calls about the procedures, where just one particular aircraft would have warnings on approach.
Turns after the FAF on a short final were always a challenge...
One needs to keep this in mind when doing the flight val...
Certainly cannot argue with that!
It helps to understand what the box is thinking sometimes, with the RNP procedures, and baro-vnav, there were frequently calls about the procedures, where just one particular aircraft would have warnings on approach.
Turns after the FAF on a short final were always a challenge...
One needs to keep this in mind when doing the flight val...
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 25th Apr 2013 at 19:03.
4.17.4 If a missed approach climb is initiated prior to the specified missed approach point the pilot is required to track to the missed approach point and then follow the missed approach procedure. The missed approach point may be over flown above MDA.
Originally Posted by Fltpathobn
Edit: added AUS AIP section (Bloggs, I am not exactly sure what your point was...)
Originally Posted by Flightpathobn
So, when you go missed, you dont follow the missed approach procedure?
Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 26th Apr 2013 at 03:49.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bloggs, the response was rhetorical....
out of date, tell it to the Aussies, AIP General is not on the AIRAC cycle....
aside from that, perhaps the responses from pilots on what they do when going missed should be of much greater concern...
I would certainly hope that any missed approach is flown above the MDA...
out of date, tell it to the Aussies, AIP General is not on the AIRAC cycle....
aside from that, perhaps the responses from pilots on what they do when going missed should be of much greater concern...
The missed approach point may be over flown above MDA.
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 26th Apr 2013 at 03:59.
"I would certainly hope that any missed approach is flown above the MDA..."
Not all of it need be, I once commenced a missed approach in Perth from about 10 feet AGL, 310 feet below MDA for the approach I was flying, after flying into heavy rain in the flare which reduced the vis to zero. Next time around all was good.
Not all of it need be, I once commenced a missed approach in Perth from about 10 feet AGL, 310 feet below MDA for the approach I was flying, after flying into heavy rain in the flare which reduced the vis to zero. Next time around all was good.
G'day ventus45,
It was a night approach to R/W 03 in what were mostly visual conditions. There was a strong north westerly blowing with passing showers. I remember that at 1000 feet AGL there was 60 knots of crosswind with around 15 knots of cross advertised at the threshhold. An interesting night but not unusual for Perth.
The runway was clearly visible until I entered the flare and just before touchdown I flew into extremely heavy rain which reduced the vis to zero. A passing shower and me in the wrong place at the wrong time. I had no warning either visually or from the weather radar.
The missed approach went fine and the next approach was flown in identical conditions but with no rain in the flare. Touchdown and rollout were normal.
It was a night approach to R/W 03 in what were mostly visual conditions. There was a strong north westerly blowing with passing showers. I remember that at 1000 feet AGL there was 60 knots of crosswind with around 15 knots of cross advertised at the threshhold. An interesting night but not unusual for Perth.
The runway was clearly visible until I entered the flare and just before touchdown I flew into extremely heavy rain which reduced the vis to zero. A passing shower and me in the wrong place at the wrong time. I had no warning either visually or from the weather radar.
The missed approach went fine and the next approach was flown in identical conditions but with no rain in the flare. Touchdown and rollout were normal.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This tread is getting weirder and weirder. I was flying a Cat III approach a few weeks ago. The GS transmitter failed when we passed 2000. How low do you guys want me to fly in this situation?
My SOP calls for a a go around anytime I get a failure below 1000 ft on a low vis approach. You want me to continue to 50 ft before I go around?
My SOP calls for a a go around anytime I get a failure below 1000 ft on a low vis approach. You want me to continue to 50 ft before I go around?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
training wheels
Not in my book. I'm not allowed to revert to an approach with higher minima once I've passed 1000 ft, but you are right, it was a rethorical question.
I've been on an IMC ILS approach when we were told there was a small aircraft stuck on the runway. We went around from about 1000 ft, and don't tell me (I don't mean you, t.w) ATC would expect me to continue to Cat 1 minima before I start the manouver.
Maybe Aussie rules flying tells you to, but I don't fly there at the moment, so I can't really be bothered to check, but I would be really surprised if it was the case.
I've been on an IMC ILS approach when we were told there was a small aircraft stuck on the runway. We went around from about 1000 ft, and don't tell me (I don't mean you, t.w) ATC would expect me to continue to Cat 1 minima before I start the manouver.
Maybe Aussie rules flying tells you to, but I don't fly there at the moment, so I can't really be bothered to check, but I would be really surprised if it was the case.
Last edited by ManaAdaSystem; 26th Apr 2013 at 13:43.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Mars
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update on Av Herald suggests no weather phenomenon involved:
Accident: Lionair B738 at Denpasar on Apr 13th 2013, landed short of runway and came to stop in sea
A witness on the ground observing the arrival of the aircraft from the terminal building of Denpasar Airport said, that he could see the aircraft descend towards the aerodrome at a normal rate of descent, but only realised something had gone wrong with the approach when the aircraft hit the waters instead of touching down on the runway. There was no rain or other obstruction of visibility around.
Looking more and more like bufoonery!
Accident: Lionair B738 at Denpasar on Apr 13th 2013, landed short of runway and came to stop in sea
A witness on the ground observing the arrival of the aircraft from the terminal building of Denpasar Airport said, that he could see the aircraft descend towards the aerodrome at a normal rate of descent, but only realised something had gone wrong with the approach when the aircraft hit the waters instead of touching down on the runway. There was no rain or other obstruction of visibility around.
Looking more and more like bufoonery!
Surely all will be revealed when the FDR CVR QAR data is read? It's a new machine so would have hundreds of data channels recording everything including the temperature of the Captains farts.......
Unless they never release the real data, surely Boeing would like it released?
Unless they never release the real data, surely Boeing would like it released?