Drone flying within LAX restricted airspace
 

People, regrettably, don't behave sensibly.
Stand by for substantial legislation :sad:

Folks, when I saw this and the idea of 10 miles east at 4000feet. I thought...hmm, pretty close to the ILS glideslope altitude.


We all know about 300' per nm for glideslope.

But to be sure, I looked up the ILS apch and here it is:

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1409/00237IL24L.PDF


One of many as you all know. And while not exactly on the glideslope, it is close enough to be of great concern to landing traffic.

Now, some of you will point out that 300 per nm would make the glide at 3000'. but it is really closer to 316 per nm. And , while not the best way, most plane intercept from above the glideslope.

This should be considered a serious incident. I just hope ISIS doesn't get a drone.

Prompted by a comment on that news page, for balance, until laws are put in place to require them to be operated to very widely avoid any remotely possible interference with aviation then they should be a legitimate target for a shotgun.

Really?

Why would you say that?

I can think of only a couple of occasions in the last 5-6 years when we did that. Usually it is because someone cocked up (ATC or Crew). It is not a comfortable experience and can lead to an unstabilised approach.

From below is standard.

globally challenged

Oh, I know intercepting glideslope from beneath is the right way to do things, but reality is different than that. ATC, Wake turbulence, so many reasons.

Just checked your age. I've been a pilot 3 years longer than you have been alive.

But stuff happens. You cope. Now we cope with drones.

"spotted by a Canadian jetliner hovering about 10 miles east of LAX at 4,000 feet".


What airliners are the Canadians using these days?

Comment earlier in thread about ISIS obtaining a drone...........

Not to worry, they can disassemble their drones and bring them with them as they are welcomed with open arms at the U.S. Southern "border", and then transported to wherever thruout the country :-)

Stuff does happen - but not so often that it can be said that 'most plane intercept from above'.

Perhaps it may occur more regularly in the US that Europe although this has not been my experience - particularly when coming in to LAX when we are typically cleared the approach some 40 miles out meaning the correct GS would be a good 3000' above you, especially with the new 'descend via' clearances.

guess we don't fly to the same airports. intercepting from above does take a bit more skill, understanding of auto systems and the like.

how wonderful to intercept from below, or even from 40 miles out, but not every US airport does that.

Check this out.
 

Sorry to continue with the thread drift, but maybe this will end it:

Glendalegoon, it 's so wonderful to intercept the GS from below that the FAA made it a rule.

Here's the Guidance:

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publi...c/atc0509.html

Gee, an FAA advisory that has said what has been said for 30 plus years.

YET it doesn't always happen.

And it even makes exceptions for visual approaches. LAX doing visuals? it can't be.

Yes, I'm being sarcastic.

Aarrhh, cap'n, shall we pull speedbrake, drop the gear or do a sneaky sideslip?
(If all three, then I sincerely hope you aren't on a route check :} )

Let me put it this way:

You are vectored to intercept the localizer/glideslope and end up high on the glideslope.

DO YOU:

1. Request a vector back on to the localizer below the glideslope.

2. Increase rate of descent and intercept glideslope from above>


You get to choose. You make the choice. ATC may even apologize and give you number 1, but it is your airline's fuel, money, schedule. ATC doesn't refund fuel cost do they?

ADD in wake turbulence. Do you fly on the glideslope or do you fly a little above and land past the landing point of larger plane ahead of you?

I am certainly aware of the way things OUGHT to be. But I know how things really are.

glendalegoon :

Are you a MSFS pilot?

If not, are you an airline pilot?

Hey mods, dare I acknowledge Glendalegoon's remark about ISIS hopefully not acquiring drones? Or ist das verboten? :E

I think we revived the Avrocar:

Avro Canada VZ-9 Avrocar

glendalegoon

In over 40 years in the business i have never heard of anyone suggesting to deliberately fly above the glideslope and land long to avoid wake turbulence. Separation rules exist to take care of that. If it does get screwed up then go around rather than destabilizing your approach.

The menace of drones is exaggerated
 

Inadvertent infractions into controlled airspace by quadcopters/tricopters/hexacopters etc is incredibly rare. I was looking at various examples of these devices recently and came to the conclusion they are all very fragile, and usually quite small. The vast majority weigh well under 2kg. In my career I have had various gulls and pigeons re-arrange their organs on my windscreen, radome and even the tips of my skids. Any self propelled meat-bomb or toy is a hazard, but since man took to the skies part of our lot as pilots.

Personally, I have come to the conclusion that the proliferation of geese, buzzards and gulls represent a much greater and much much more likely menace to me on ARR/DEP than the rogue idiot and his expensive RC toy. (ASK SULLY:ok:)

..and finally as for glide-slopes... I look very dimly on any controller who leaves me high and joining the ILS from above! :=

aterpster

airline pilot.


FLY3, you might want to read up on the subject: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...m/aim0703.html


A DC9 was lost following too closely to a DC10 about 42 years ago. You might want to read up on it.

Flying a dot high is no sin, in fact in some situations it is the thing to do (assuming wx above mins)

I am really shocked that you seem to be taking wake turbulence so haphazardly . Part of the triggering event to an airbus crash near JFK was a wake turbulence encounter on climbout.


Are you guys pilots? Aterpster, I thought you flew for TWA. Certainly you avoided wake? I just have to ask. Ever get cleared for a visual approach? Do you know who has responsibility for wake avoidance during a visual approach?

Landing long? Why not? Certainly remain inside the touchdown zone. You do realize what the touchdown zone is, and I'm not talking about football.

FLY3, it amazes me what you said, really. And since the FAA suggests what I said, I must assume you are not a pilot. Read that URL it even says to fly on or above the glideslope. How you couldn't have heard about this amazes me! It gets even more complex if a slight tailwind or crosswind on parallel runways is present.

I don't know who you are but---

1/ intercepting the G/S from above is NOT normal and indeed is discouraged for many reasons an experienced Pilot would know.:=

2/ deliberately flying 1 dot high is also NOT normal and would be outside SOP, wake turbulence lateral separation standards are designed to take care of any problems.

Not to mention it isn't the way the approach is designed to be flown!!

In more than a few years of Airline flying I've never heard of such a thing.....

I am learning so very much. Pilots who don't know the real world.

ACMS, yes, its better to intercept from below. But does your autopilot have a selection to force capture from above? . And, though I am sure you don't hand fly, you can quite easily handle an interception from above.


Flying a dot high outside of SOP? Wow. I am so happy I fly for who I do fly for. Its even in our FOM.

We even train for vortex encounters in the sim. Do you?

And trusting wake separation standards? So you have never , ever been hit by wake turbulence. yeah.

No the 737 747 777 and A330's don't have an "intercept from above" function on the MCP/FCU.

It's far from ideal intercepting from above, yes I can and do fly a raw data approaches and intercept from above but I'll stress again it's not IDEAL and indeed discouraged by most flight operations departments for obvious reasons.

Airbus, Boeing together with all Airline flight Ops departments teach stabilized approach criteria for good reasons today my friend, Airlines have learnt the hard way in the past.

Yes in the last 27 years I've had a few wake encounters, both en-route in cruise and on approach, gets your attention without doubt. A little common sense and following the rules goes a long way. I wouldn't be flying 1 dot high on approach.......just not done in the wide body I fly.

Why don't you one-dot-high-shock-horror people just turn off the ILS, then fly a bit high on the PAPI. What's the drama?

Heliphile, where does this drones stuff end though? They might be small now, but they are much harder than your average bird (it seems you were in a chopper..skids??... bit different to one of these things being sucked into a spooled up jet engine) and will become bigger. They might also be "incredibly rare" now, but in a fews year's time, they'll be everywhere.

As for the one hovering by the cop's window, I would have opened it and shot the thing down. Rampant technology being used by inconsiderate @#$%%^ who don't have any morals... :}

I don't think the goon is suggesting you persevere below 1000ft trying to get onto the GS from above... or does your outfit force you to be stabilised higher up?

1,500' fully configured ideally, 1,000' at the latest on-speed and spun up.

FDAP is not your friend!!

ACMS, gee you are getting a little flumoxed eh? NOT IDEAL. WOW, no flight I have ever done in real life is IDEAL.

You don't have a function called, "MAN GP"? Fine. I just reread my POH and MAN GP allows for interception from above within 1.5 dots.

Cappn Bloggs is quite right, I wouldn't tell you to intercept the glideslope at 500' or 1000' depending on weather. I am a huge advocate of stable approaches. ACMS we are even allowed to be stable at 500' if the weather is good.

But outside the marker, intercepting from above at busy airports helps out ATC, accepting a vector inside the apch gate makes things move.

I hope you read that US AIM URL I posted. You might learn something.

In the sim, everything is ideal and we intercept from the min GS intercept altitude and the "needle" shows the glideslope coming down to meet us. Oh how nice to do that in real life.

IDEAL. WOW. What planet do you fly on? I'm sure you haven't flown to some of our oddball airports like KDCA.

AS I mentioned before, this isn't when you are down to mins.

I am still laughing at "IDEAL".

Tell me, again I asked: There you are, wx above basic VFR, and you are intercepting high on the GS, do you:

ask for vectors back to do it again

or intercept from above by either using an increased descent rate until about on GS, or, GOD FORBID , Clicking off the autopilot?


Come on ACMS, do you really ask for vectors back for another try? I can imagine a 15 minute addition to your flying time at some airports here in the good old USA.

Do you ever land past the puff of smoke on the runway if you are following a plane bigger than yours?

And yes, you can certainly be stable on the approach and I wouldn't want you to be anything but stable. A dot high is very different than a dot low.

Ideal flying works fine in the sim.

Willy waving competition is it?

Ok sorry, yours is bigger than mine I do humbly apologize.

Sir.

By the way, what kind of light Jet do you fly?

Obviously not a wide body heavy, because if I'm landing behind another heavy or maybe a super then I certainly don't land beyond the guys smoke!!! If I was that close to see his smoke then.............:D

I think it's time you stopped flying it like you stole it....:=

I'm laughing at you now....:eek:

Oh and just for the record, the ideal approach isn't just for the Sim, in fact just the opposite is true and you should know that.

Outside the Sim you should be aiming for the ideal approach EVERY TIME but the Sim trains you to cope if it's not.

bye? isn't it by? I've never flown a light jet.

if you want to continue exposing your ignorance of wake turbulence (even though I provided a nice link for you to learn something. Maybe I should have included the ALPA article too, chances are you don't read that magazine), why not PM me?

I should have made myself clear, an ideal vector or other nav to join an apch below glideslope is rare in real life. Flying the approach well is not rare.


The subject is drones near apch paths. This drone obviously was near the apch and someday a drone will get sucked into an engine, or bounce off your windshield. Transponders should be on drones flying above 400'agl.

I don't agree with you, whilst it's not unknown to get vectored to intercept the G/S from above it is far from the normal in Australia, Asia, and Europe. I've operated into a lot of major Airports in the US as well and never had to intercept from above. Maybe I'm just lucky? ..........maybe the US controllers are nicer to international wide bodies?

Either way we are capable to handle such events and are trained in doing so, big deal!!

99.9% of my flying is in Wide bodies so maybe I don't worry as much about wake turbulence as you guys in light and medium Jets? I've certainly experienced it on approach following other heavies and it's a serious subject but I repeat we do not fly high on the approach OR land long to avoid it. That has the serious potential to create bigger problems than the one you were trying to avoid in the first place......:D

ICAO has mandated separation standards for takeoff and landing to mitigate wake encounters, designed via testing and in service experience. Works for me :ok:

Now back to topic on drones in LAX.....

yes, US controllers are nicer to international widebodies. Even before Asiana214.

And please remember this forum is for many pilots, not all widebody international pilots who get very little 'stick' time and usually couple their approaches. ;-)

"Turn right heading 200, maintain 2500 until established localizer cleared ILS 24R".

Now the glideslope intercept altitude at JETSA there is 2200. If you get vectored at the approach gate you should still grab the glide from below HOWEVER this frequently does not QUITE happen, especially if it is a VMC day and you are doing an "ILS backed up by the Visual". Solution? Configure and slow as appropriate, V/S 1300-1500 down, arm APPR, spin the altitude window up to something above you. Catch glideslope, land.

That is if you insist on using (or are required by an emasculating SOP to use) the autopilot and autothrust. Much easier to simply turn it all off, grab a fistful of throttle, idle it, look out the window, pick an aim point and land the damned airplane.