As I indicated in an earlier post … the simulator manufacturers have developed and are building visual systems just as you suggest:

Additionally, VERY realistic programming for weather conditions are also available - winds, gusting winds, turbulence, rain on the windscreen, lightning flashes, wet runways, standing water on runways, the whole package is available.

Cosmokramer has provided every detail you require and yet you still refuse to tell us how you would fly it. You said you would. Please, in your own time, when you're feeling comfortable, go ahead...

I get the feeling that AirRabbit has never actually flown anything, let alone flown a circling approach.

Screwballs …

I wouldn’t have a clue as to what was posted by Mr. Kramer. He and I have pretty much agreed to disagree, and, as I indicated to him (along with one other participant here), I no longer can see his posts.

A better answer to your request is on the way … but will have to wait until I have the “down” time to do so. :ok:

In fact I'll edit my post to be more specific; AirRabbit, I don't think you are who you claim to be.

:confused: ... you wouldn't be the first to think that ... but ... you'd be just as wrong as those who went before you ... keep yer shirt on ...

Just a thought: there are some on here who consider a circling to be a visual manoeuvre. Correct, in that you must keep the airfield and/or runway environment in sight at all times. Considering a CAT C a/c with a minimum vis of 2400m, it is not VMC conditions. Below 3000' agl you are clear of cloud in sight of the service, but the vis is too low. I would suggest that if it is not a manoeuvre conducted in VMC conditions, and in an unfamiliar environment at low level, perhaps at night in rain, then a more structured procedure is best adopted rather than a suck it and see let's give it a shot type approach. Mk.1 eyeball may not be sufficient; and it's a bit late to find out as you turn onto finals scratching and searching for that illusive runway.
Just a thought.

Spot on.

And how convenient for you AirRabbit, one moment you are able to see what I post (and reply) and the next moment your are not. So far all you offered is hot air (and plenty of it too). :{

My shirt is on. Thanks for the concern. How would you fly the circling approach as provided for by Cosmo Kramer?

Will you, or will you not do as you said you would? Yes or no?

That's interesting...so, why is it that so many people have historically thought you were a faker?

our airline only allows circling in basic vfr/vmc conditions...and in this way the FAA doesn't make a big deal about circling on sim rides .

circling approaches and the old contact approach lead to many crashes. so, we dont do em.

Geeze! Who died and made you the Sheriff?
 

I've told you - a couple of times now - that I have no clue what that guy you keep referencing has or has not posted. I can't see posts from anyone with that name. I don't know what I need to do to convince you of that ... but, be that as it may, I'll ask you to keep your temperature down below the price of gold and I’ll do what I told you I’d do … but the fact is that some of us actually have a paying job to do. Besides, you’re beginning to sound like this issue is THE most important thing in your life … but, then again, maybe it is … and, how was it you decided on the moniker you’ve chosen to use?

I just use the TLAR system, in conjunction with the KISS principle, and I'm rather shocked that so many of you have gotten into habits of timing and other such nonsense in a primarily visual maneuver.

We have 113 posts on how to do a circling approach. How many of you do not have the 1000/3 limitation on your ticket, and how many of you without the limitation work for a company who allows circling approaches, and how many of you have actually made a circling approach within the last year...in the airplane?

What's this? You either have an instrument rating or you don't. :confused:

Capn Bloggs:



It's a type rating restriction that the FAA started requiring sometime after I took my last rating ride in 1986.


If you don't demonstrate to proficiency CTL during the rating ride then your type rating states (words to this effect) "Circle to land NA on A330" or such.


The carriers that are members of the "1,000 and 3" club don't want to train for something their crews are not going to use.

Rojer. Bit like an "automatic only" driver's licence. ;)

Actually, in the US, the issuance of an ATP conveys the same authorization as an “instrument rating” – but, of course, there can be restrictions issued as well, like "Circle to land NA on A330" (just as aterpster indicated) or “Circle to land limited to VFR” which would be a limitation that is much broader in its application.

... and Desert185 … an excellent point, sir!!
It is apparent that there is a growing concern about what kind of approaches should be able to be flown pretty much whenever, where ever someone wants. With the establishment of “airports” at locations to “better serve” the local residents of a particular area, and wanting to keep the cost to those residents to a minimum, a location is found that is cheap and more easily developed into something on which a landing strip can be constructed. Then someone has to come in and design an approach procedure that can accommodate airplanes … and it doesn’t take long before someone tries to bring in bigger airplanes, which brings more business into that location … and so on and so on. The destiny of such actions is that sometime in the future there is likely to be an attempt to get B747s or A380s into what was originally constructed as a fishing camp in some mountainous valley in central Alaska. :O

Rabbit, you've driven way wayward. Nobody is talking about shoving A380s into Dutch Harbor. Stay on topic, will ya?

How does your company describe circling approaches?
 

Actually, sensible post from AirRabbit. I do see the trend in my outfit (no widebodies though).

Edit: or did I miss the sarcasm?