FAA Considers Canceling Certain Circling Procedures

[gotWXdagain]

Of course not but now you’re moving the goal posts.

Straight in GPS approaches are far more accurate and safe vs a circling maneuver.

I'm absolutely not moving the goalposts, this is the argument I've been making from the very beginning. There's many places out west and in Alaska where you have to come up a mountain valley and either land straight in or circle to the other side, but straight ins in both directions aren't possible. With RNP 0.3 curved approaches are becoming more feasible but the equipment to do that doesn't exist in the "out of the box and into the panel" form.

 

[ozziecat35]

I wouldn't mind not doing another RNAV 16 circle 34 @ PWK again. <30 hrs in the jet and I've done it twice personally, SIC 3 other times for it...Lot's of ways for that to become a bad day.

 

[wheelsup]

I'm absolutely not moving the goalposts, this is the argument I've been making from the very beginning. There's many places out west and in Alaska where you have to come up a mountain valley and either land straight in or circle to the other side, but straight ins in both directions aren't possible. With RNP 0.3 curved approaches are becoming more feasible but the equipment to do that doesn't exist in the "out of the box and into the panel" form.

After reading the linked article, please cite where the FAA is going to get rid of all circling approaches? Where in paragraphs one, two, or even three was that even mentioned as a possibility?

 

[Richman]

KLN 89bs on eBay are around $1k for the box vs $6k for the 430.

Do you need dual GPS boxes or two GPS antennas? We have one box but two antennas on our aircraft and we can do GPS approaches like that.

Did you lose GPS signal or did a component on your aircraft fail?

Lost signal. Was on a VFR approach and the approach guidance steadily degraded from LPV to LNAV/VNAV and then dropped off entirely with a LOS. A few other people on the CTAF noticed the same thing, so it wasn't equipment related.

Sure, you can buy a KLN89...and how supportable is it going to be? You going to spend serious cash on the install only to have BK declare the box EOL if they haven't already? Database updates?

No question, I am not a fan "integrated" solutions for GA. You pop a module on a G1000 or your groovy integrated engine display and not only are you AOG but your beholden to the manufacturer as a sole source repair (vs from multiple sources otherwise).

 

[MikeD]

First, anybody ever seen a circling line on a COPTER approach?

Don't care about circling approach minima, or even VDPs for that matter. Everything is a straight in, just turning into the wind for touchdown. And a landing can be made up to MAP.

 

[ASpilot2be]

I'm absolutely not moving the goalposts, this is the argument I've been making from the very beginning. There's many places out west and in Alaska where you have to come up a mountain valley and either land straight in or circle to the other side, but straight ins in both directions aren't possible. With RNP 0.3 curved approaches are becoming more feasible but the equipment to do that doesn't exist in the "out of the box and into the panel" form.

The curved approaches are awesome. The curved missed approach in Sun Valley is really cool..

 

[deadstick]

Don't care about circling approach minima, or even VDPs for that matter. Everything is a straight in, just turning into the wind for touchdown. And a landing can be made up to MAP.

Exactly. Another pilot at work and I were talking about this. We both recalled a circling COPTER at LAH, but when I went looking around Rucker’s IAPs i couldnt find one. Maybe they wised up in the last 20-something years.

 

[fiveninerzero]

I think they should still keep a few strategically placed navaids and associated approaches for backup. GPS satellites have basically no protection from attacks, and very little shielding against EMP and interference. If the grid goes down for whatever reason, you'll have a bunch of safety of flight issues that the world wouldn't even be able to begin comprehending.

 

[mshunter]

I've been controlling coming on a decade now and I've had exactly 2 pilots request a contact approach.

To be fair, the part of the US that you control in, doesn't exactly lend itself to be friendly with contact approaches. I used them on a fairly regular basis into VNY and WHP, before opspecs tied my hands.

 

[NovemberEcho]

To be fair, the part of the US that you control in, doesn't exactly lend itself to be friendly with contact approaches. I used them on a fairly regular basis into VNY and WHP, before opspecs tied my hands.

Both times I did them was in Florida going into KPFN

 

[mshunter]

Both times I did them was in Florida going into KPFN

I used them a lot, getting through passes where visibility was less than VFR, but good enough to "follow that road, don't get below 2000', the airport is only four miles that way."

I think the biggest problem with a contact approach isn't the approach, but that people are taught that they are going to die if they use them. I wouldn't go using one where I'd never been, but I'm also not afraid to use one where I've been a lot.

 

[Roger Roger]

I used them a lot, getting through passes where visibility was less than VFR, but good enough to "follow that road, don't get below 2000', the airport is only four miles that way."

I think the biggest problem with a contact approach isn't the approach, but that people are taught that they are going to die if they use them. I wouldn't go using one where I'd never been, but I'm also not afraid to use one where I've been a lot.

Need to be able to get low enough to see something for a contact. With our IFR altitudes only way to get low enough to get a contact is to already be on the approach inside the FAF usually.

 

[mshunter]

Need to be able to get low enough to see something for a contact. With our IFR altitudes only way to get low enough to get a contact is to already be on the approach inside the FAF usually.

Agreed, which is why I made the comment about location has a lot to do with a contact approach. It's either in airspace that's not friendly to it, or the terrain isn't, or the controllers aren't.

 

[Bandit_Driver]

1/2 my type are VMC Circle only...Most airlines don't want to spend the time or assume the risk IMO

 

[nibake]

GPS satellites have basically no protection from attacks

Yes, but does anyone, including the USA, even have the capability of going after satellites at this point?

 

[ASpilot2be]

1/2 my type are VMC Circle only...Most airlines don't want to spend the time or assume the risk IMO

When I upgraded in the SAAB I actually got the circling restriction removed. Circling is quite a maneuver in the sim.

 

[Bandit_Driver]

When I upgraded in the SAAB I actually got the circling restriction removed. Circling is quite a maneuver in the sim.

I’d have to look. But I’m pretty sure both my ifr circling planes are the 737 and Saab. The Saab restriction got removed when I flew it under 135.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cptnchia]

The only type I have with full circle mins is the E120. Not sure I’d want to circle at mins in a 767.

 

[Richman]

I've got a "full circle" on the 727, 757 and 767...oh yea, the R-22.

 

[Roger Roger]

1/2 my type are VMC Circle only...Most airlines don't want to spend the time or assume the risk IMO

Right, but when you're issued a clearance the controller doesn't say "with a circle to land in VMC to runway 13" it's just "circle to 13". So by my understanding if they start getting rid of circling mins it kills any circle to land even VMC, unless you do something like cancel IFR or request the visual when you break out.