Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
Serious question: Is it really oversimplified? I'd really like to know why you think so. Why not widen your "pattern"? No snark.
Challenger Truckee
- Thread starter Boris Badenov
- Start date
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
Having the landing zone, even the airport in sight is not a requirement for a visual approach.
In the case of this accident getting wide and fat could put you into terrain. Look at that 7,371' piece of granite just off final. I'd sure be thinking of that with reduced visibility and it's on the blind side from the left seat. In flight visibility was reported at only 3 miles.
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
Actually (@canadiantrailers), visual reference is absolutely a requirement of a circling approach... I specifically said, "Circling" approach. Nice try at changing the context in order to change the rules, distract the masses, and support the lunacy. We've seen a LOT of that lately. As much as they've tried to inure me to it, I'm still not falling for it.
I completely agree with your hypothesis that hitting stuff is a bad idea... always looks bad on one's record.
CFIT99
I'm probably commenting ironically...
Omg, I can’t even with this guy…
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
How we get from circle to visual then back to circle?
Last edited:
scooter2525
Very well Member
You need a decoder ring to get to the point of his posts.
BaronPete
Jaw Harp Troubadour
Now I’m just a humble, small-town jet driver, but if it’d please the forum, I’d like to submit that a circle can result from a visual approach and a visual approach can include a circle — all while requiring continuous visual contact with the airport.
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
Not to be confused with a Contact Approach.
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
And you clearly didn't read what I said. I was referencing a circle to land off an instrument approach, not a visual approach per se. Still, mi amigo, even during a visual approach per se under IFR, one MUST maintain visual contact with the airport or the traffic in front of one. ...it is written, sabji.
Also, there is no such technically described or legally standing thing as a VFR "Visual Approach"; A visual approach conducted under VFR is just, er, an approach... you know, a descent to the runway like you did before every single landing you did before you got your instrument rating.
Not to be a total ass, but this one is pretty damned easy. It's called a "Visual" approach for a reason. A reason having directly to do with the nomenclature, "Visual".
Last edited:
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
A contact approach is (forgive me here, it's the FAA's fault) an approach done under less than VFR conditions under Visual Flight Rules (VFR). I know, clear as mud. Right?
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
I'll endeavor to write more clearly, but clear writing is rarely done quickly, and I have little time. Words... and math and logic and context are hard, m'kay.
If you think I'm bad, try parsing 14CFR, or any other CFR for that matter.
I'm here to be your Huckleberry, not your Fox News, not your troll.
Last edited:
fholbert
Mod's - Please don't edit my posts!
With the exception of a few published contact approaches...
It takes two things for a contact approach. A dumb ATC'er and a dumb pilot.
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
I've done precisely one in my life. It seemed practical at the time (I was dumb, kinda), and I really like to try things at least once.
BigZ
Well-Known Member
Can't speak for the ATC'er (who cannot clear you for one unless you ask for it), but contact approaches are useful if you are flying reasonably slow, know the area, gotta pee and the only "published" approach is a VOR-A or some such.
Unfamiliar with the airport and the approaches in the thread subj, but reminded me of the home airport I flew out of for many years. Winds favoring 5, ceilings higher than 500-600 needed to circle, you're coming from the SE, Bravo airspace nearby, request rnav 30, circle to land 5, save solid 15-20 minutes of scenic driving around. Worked well enough in a single piston airplane.
Anyway, RIP. Sad loss of lives.
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
I think we might have been talking about the same airport!
NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
CONTACT APPROACH− An approach wherein an aircraft on an IFR flight plan, having an air traffic control authorization, operating clear of clouds with at least 1 mile flight visibility and a reasonable expectation of continuing to the destination airport in those conditions, may deviate from the instrument approach procedure and proceed to the destination airport by visual reference to the surface. This approach will only be authorized when requested by the pilot and the reported ground visibility at the destination airport is at least 1 statute mile.
Had a couple of them at KPFN cause you could just follow the coastline to the runway.
NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
Why? Not my ass in the plane. You have as much right to kill yourself as you want. I only step in when you don’t want to kill yourself.
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
That's correct. To initiate. But to do a contact, you have to cancel IFR, no?? It's possible I've had this wrong for a long time. Like I said, I've only ever done one of them. But during that one, I definitely cancelled before receiving the contact clearance. (Which, upon writing that on paper... makes little sense. Yet, you can be VFR and get certain clearances, so ... maybe.)
NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
negative
Space Monkey
Arbitrariness replaces reason with authority.
Copy.
But like I said, ATC made me cancel before receiving my contact clearance. ??? IDK??