Circling Minima
Pugachev Cobra:
not necessarily for safety
VFR minimums are not published to help VFR pilots at all that's why you can fly 'VFR' on moonless nights or in heavy haze with no horizon and still be VFR ---they are published simply to protect IFR traffic so that the two don't mix operationally when things get iffy---to see and avoid and see and be seen
one myth is you need a natural horizon to be VFR [ maybe hard nosed joe does not] you don't really need a horzon to fly VFR just ceiling and visibilty to help cut down on aluminum shower forecasts
remember they don't care too much about your safety or abilty just that of others
PA
not necessarily for safety
VFR minimums are not published to help VFR pilots at all that's why you can fly 'VFR' on moonless nights or in heavy haze with no horizon and still be VFR ---they are published simply to protect IFR traffic so that the two don't mix operationally when things get iffy---to see and avoid and see and be seen
one myth is you need a natural horizon to be VFR [ maybe hard nosed joe does not] you don't really need a horzon to fly VFR just ceiling and visibilty to help cut down on aluminum shower forecasts
remember they don't care too much about your safety or abilty just that of others
PA
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
one myth is you need a natural horizon to be VFR [ maybe hard nosed joe does not] you don't really need a horzon to fly VFR just ceiling and visibilty to help cut down on aluminum shower forecasts
They don't care if you can or can not actaully control the plane by reference the/a natural horizon only that you don't interfere with IFR traffic; actual sky conditions don't matter [legally] the FAA can't be there to know that
if you go up on a hazy day find yourself in IMC on the guages due to haze or night but you can see the other aircraft [legal reported vis] and you meet the cloud clearance requirements then feel free to spiral into the ground as you wish
same goes for rain on the wind shield
if you go up on a hazy day find yourself in IMC on the guages due to haze or night but you can see the other aircraft [legal reported vis] and you meet the cloud clearance requirements then feel free to spiral into the ground as you wish
same goes for rain on the wind shield
Last edited by Pugilistic Animus; 14th Oct 2009 at 21:55.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the end, captjns, it is the pilots that were never taught how, nor never practiced a circling maneuver in a jet transport airplane are nearly always the ones who profoundly shout....can't be done, safely'.
Of course they are truly misinformed, nevertheless...
Best to ignore these folks, as they have their minds made up, never mind the facts.
Of course they are truly misinformed, nevertheless...
Best to ignore these folks, as they have their minds made up, never mind the facts.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the end, captjns, it is the pilots that were never taught how, nor never practiced a circling maneuver in a jet transport airplane are nearly always the ones who profoundly shout....can't be done, safely'.
Of course they are truly misinformed, nevertheless...
Best to ignore these folks, as they have their minds made up, never mind the facts.
Of course they are truly misinformed, nevertheless...
Best to ignore these folks, as they have their minds made up, never mind the facts.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They don't care if you can or can not actaully control the plane by reference the/a natural horizon only that you don't interfere with IFR traffic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And why is the minimum ceiling for a visual operation on an aerodrome 1500', or 1000' Special VFR?
The ceiling of 1500ft for a VFR flight in a control zone come about as a result of two other ICAO rules;
1. minimum cruise height of 500ft AGL and
2. requirement for a VFR flight in such a case to be 1000ft vertically from cloud.
i.e. if the ceiling is 1400ft you are not going to be able to comply with the above ICAO rules.
If I make an ILS approach with a DH of 200ft and an RVR of 550m, the bit from 200ft to touchdown will be a visual manoeuvre. With circling there is simply a lot more manoeuvring before touchdown.
Hey Captjns,
There's no regulation that states that you specifically can not.
however the explanation is a little circuituous
but the reason that in controlled airspace we have basic VFR weather minima is NOT to protect pilots from themselves but rather to protect those operating in controlled airspace so that when a certain amount of cloud cover or visibilty prevails everone is under positive ATC control; also, in the US visual contact with the ground is not required[except for some limited licences i.e sport pilot, ultralights]
furthermore visibilty as reported is slant range visibility and the refractive effects of haze, lack of good sky ground contrast etc.. can cause a legal visibilty and it can be cloudless, for example, yet the natural horizon is non-existent requiring Instrument flying techniques-so the basic reason for VFR mins are
1. to allow IFR and VFR traffic the ability to see and avoid one another without being unduly restrictive
2. to set a final minima where all traffic operating within the specific class of controlled airspace must be positively controlled
Historically, basic US basic flight rules come from the Avigation Act of 1926?
written in blood-of course
going back to the old axiom of "what is legal is not always safe and vice versa]" there is not regulation that stops a newly minted PPL with no IR to take off over-water on a moonless night with little backgound lighting as long as he wont hit anybody--the burden of flying is on the PIC---there's no reference in the FARS about horizon just cloud clearance and visibilty
lastly the reason we have VFR mins for uncontolled airspace is becuase it is legal for an IR pilot to fly IFR in class G airspace WITHOUT even a flight plan or clearance --- dumb in most cases IMHO,...but at least he wont be contending with some fool scud running
I hope I've clarified myself a bit
PA
There's no regulation that states that you specifically can not.
however the explanation is a little circuituous
but the reason that in controlled airspace we have basic VFR weather minima is NOT to protect pilots from themselves but rather to protect those operating in controlled airspace so that when a certain amount of cloud cover or visibilty prevails everone is under positive ATC control; also, in the US visual contact with the ground is not required[except for some limited licences i.e sport pilot, ultralights]
furthermore visibilty as reported is slant range visibility and the refractive effects of haze, lack of good sky ground contrast etc.. can cause a legal visibilty and it can be cloudless, for example, yet the natural horizon is non-existent requiring Instrument flying techniques-so the basic reason for VFR mins are
1. to allow IFR and VFR traffic the ability to see and avoid one another without being unduly restrictive
2. to set a final minima where all traffic operating within the specific class of controlled airspace must be positively controlled
Historically, basic US basic flight rules come from the Avigation Act of 1926?
written in blood-of course
going back to the old axiom of "what is legal is not always safe and vice versa]" there is not regulation that stops a newly minted PPL with no IR to take off over-water on a moonless night with little backgound lighting as long as he wont hit anybody--the burden of flying is on the PIC---there's no reference in the FARS about horizon just cloud clearance and visibilty
lastly the reason we have VFR mins for uncontolled airspace is becuase it is legal for an IR pilot to fly IFR in class G airspace WITHOUT even a flight plan or clearance --- dumb in most cases IMHO,...but at least he wont be contending with some fool scud running
I hope I've clarified myself a bit
PA
Last edited by Pugilistic Animus; 14th Oct 2009 at 23:36. Reason: a few things here and there
PA
Indeed, it is legal and frequently done in many remote areas--Africa, Canada, Australia, South Atlantic Ocean, parts of the Indian Ocean, all of it in jet planes at FLs.
GF
it is legal for an IR pilot to fly IFR in class G airspace WITHOUT even a flight plan or clearance --- dumb in most cases IMHO
GF
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: dublin
Age: 44
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Guys.
Just did a circling app in my last sim. I fly a cat B a/c which is limited to 135 kts on these approaches. We configure as normal on the circling app but delay landing flap till 90 degrees in the turn on final
In icing conditions, we are required to fly at a speed plus 10kts which, at certain weights, will take the speed above 135. In such cases, I assumed that we simply couldnt fly the circling approach.
Not so say our wise TRI - you simply go to the next category that the new speed takes you into, in our case, B to C
Is that legal. How can we simply re categorise our a/c. I am aware that the speeds associated with each category is based on the turn radius required to maintain a rate one and be wings level on final with sufficient distance to go, but I didnt think I could simply cherry pick the category I wished based on my airspeed.
Cheers
Just did a circling app in my last sim. I fly a cat B a/c which is limited to 135 kts on these approaches. We configure as normal on the circling app but delay landing flap till 90 degrees in the turn on final
In icing conditions, we are required to fly at a speed plus 10kts which, at certain weights, will take the speed above 135. In such cases, I assumed that we simply couldnt fly the circling approach.
Not so say our wise TRI - you simply go to the next category that the new speed takes you into, in our case, B to C
Is that legal. How can we simply re categorise our a/c. I am aware that the speeds associated with each category is based on the turn radius required to maintain a rate one and be wings level on final with sufficient distance to go, but I didnt think I could simply cherry pick the category I wished based on my airspeed.
Cheers
Last edited by dubfan; 15th Oct 2009 at 09:43. Reason: spieling!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes you can use a higher category during the circling. You have to use the higher MDA and need the increased visibility.
There is noting stopping a Cat A aircraft using Cat C minima for a circling approach since all that happens by raising the minima to the CAT C ones is that the area within which the aircraft must remain gets bigger.
So if as you found that due icing or due configuration limitations etc you have to use a speed higher than 135 for your CAT B aircraft all you have to do is use the higher minima for a CAT C so as to increase the size of the circling area to accomodate your higher speed.
What you must not do is fly a CAT C aircraft and say that "today we are so light that we can fly at 135 knots during the circle so we will use the CAT B minima". That is totally against the rules.
There is noting stopping a Cat A aircraft using Cat C minima for a circling approach since all that happens by raising the minima to the CAT C ones is that the area within which the aircraft must remain gets bigger.
So if as you found that due icing or due configuration limitations etc you have to use a speed higher than 135 for your CAT B aircraft all you have to do is use the higher minima for a CAT C so as to increase the size of the circling area to accomodate your higher speed.
What you must not do is fly a CAT C aircraft and say that "today we are so light that we can fly at 135 knots during the circle so we will use the CAT B minima". That is totally against the rules.
