Approach briefing

jtrain609 said:
That may be true, but if you carry that technique into a longer/larger aircraft, you're going to find your mains getting dragged through the approach lighting system.

A few transport category aircraft pilots have found out about that one the hard way.
Click to expand...

Oh, absolutely correct. I'm well aware that different aircraft require different techniques and procedures...I was just pointing out to others that this was true. I've learned it, too, but the biggest lesson is for me to realize that my experience only represents a small fraction of the overall aviation picture.

Unfortunately, I've seen time and again on this site that there are pilots who have only flown certain types of aircraft who believe that the truisms for their particular aircraft are true across the broad spectrum of aircraft. Simply put, there's a lot of ignorance on the part of some pilots who think they have it all figured out.

People are naturally brought up with biases based on their experience, and sometimes they don't even know their belief systems include biases until other data is introduced. Since the majority of pilots on this site haven't flown pointy-nosed fast-mover jets, I try and interject that "other data" whenever possible in order to try and show counters to those biases.

There are LOTS of other ways to fly aircraft, and if a pilot gets to the position where he thinks he 'knows it all', that is the truly dangerous thing.
 
You're right, the same techniques don't usually apply to all aircraft.

But unless you're flying a twin engined rocket with stubby wings that has a ref speed of like what, 180 knots, you're probably safe following the PAPI's/VASI's into the touchdown zone.

So with that being said, there are some truisms that I think will keep you safe in the majority of situations and aircraft. Personally, I'd rather speak to what's true 95% of the time than spend too much time focusing on the exceptions to rules that generally work.

I think that's where these discussions go wrong. Folks look at these discussions and say, "But but but but, in this one aircraft, in this one situation, you're wrong!" and can give the idea to the uninitiated that their exception is actually the rule. That concerns me more than making blanket, generally true, statements about procedures, but I think it gives younger guys without the experience to know how to separate the wheat from the chaff that everything is open to interpretation and that the exception you read from an airline pilot/fighter pilot/helicopter pilot/bush pilot on the internet applies to all operation scenarios.

So for a discussion between you and me, who have a little bit of experience and knowledge under their belts, this turns into a valid discussion. My concern is the guys out there that are just working on their instrument rating who read this, take the wrong things from it, and then end up solidifying bad techniques. Whether we know it or not, there are A LOT of people reading this discussion right now, like in the thousands.

Does that make sense, or am I rambling?
 
jtrain609 said:
I'd rather speak to what's true 95% of the time than spend too much time focusing on the exceptions to rules that generally work.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the problem here -- the belief that the techniques used to fly transport category aircraft are the "rules" and that techniques used for anything else is an "exception to the rule".

Even your statement here shows that you're neck-deep in that belief:

the exception you read from an airline pilot/fighter pilot/helicopter pilot/bush pilot on the internet applies to all operation scenarios.
Click to expand...
That's a whole lot of corners of the flying world that you believe are "exceptions", I think. I don't know what other realms of flying your experience has taken you into outside of GA, single-pilot freight, and the regionals, but there are obviously hundreds of other types of flying that comprise the "rest of the world", and there IS a lot of other flying out there that differs in substance, demands, and techniques from those areas.

The corner I'm coming from isn't some errant, oddball sliver of the aviation world. The T-38 is the most prolific jet trainer in history. It has trained hundreds of thousands of USAF pilots over the last 50 years, and tens of thousands have gone on to very successful careers in many of those different corners of aviation (including 135 and 121 flying). I'm not bringing in techniques that apply to some homebuilt that have no application to any other aircraft in the world. I think there's probably some kind of value to it, but that's just me.

I'm also very aware that the techniques used to fly fighter aircraft don't apply to many other types of aircraft. The problem is that there are others who don't understand that's true.

Personally, I'm not worried about an inexperienced aviator reading about techniques that differ from their own (and may not apply to the aircraft they're currently flying). I happen to think it's a benefit: when differing viewpoints are posted it shows that peoples' own little corner of the aviation biz does not represent the entirety, and sometimes not even the majority, of the whole.

That's how you raise well-rounded aviators, with awareness of the world they're operating in (rather than the dangerous ignorance of anything outside their own sphere of experience).
 
Hacker15e said:
That's exactly the problem here -- the belief that the techniques used to fly transport category aircraft are the "rules" and that techniques used for anything else is an "exception to the rule".

Even your statement here shows that you're neck-deep in that belief:
Click to expand...

I'd say that for the majority of folks at this site, those avenues are the minority. Yeah, we've got fighter pilots, bush pilots, freight drivers, a few guys that do aerial fire fighting, but what are the majority of folks here doing? Airline and corporate flying. Straight and level, and admittedly largely boring.

That's a whole lot of corners of the flying world that you believe are "exceptions", I think. I don't know what other realms of flying your experience has taken you into outside of GA, single-pilot freight, and the regionals, but there are obviously hundreds of other types of flying that comprise the "rest of the world", and there IS a lot of other flying out there that differs in substance, demands, and techniques from those areas.

The corner I'm coming from isn't some errant, oddball sliver of the aviation world. The T-38 is the most prolific jet trainer in history. It has trained hundreds of thousands of USAF pilots over the last 50 years, and tens of thousands have gone on to very successful careers in many of those different corners of aviation (including 135 and 121 flying). I'm not bringing in techniques that apply to some homebuilt that have no application to any other aircraft in the world. I think there's probably some kind of value to it, but that's just me.
Click to expand...

That's fair, but as a percentage, how many of the folks on this forum are Air Force pilots, and more specifically Air Force pilots that were in a fighter track?

I'm also very aware that the techniques used to fly fighter aircraft don't apply to many other types of aircraft. The problem is that there are others who don't understand that's true.
Click to expand...

Exactly, we're on the same page.

Personally, I'm not worried about an inexperienced aviator reading about techniques that differ from their own (and may not apply to the aircraft they're currently flying). I happen to think it's a benefit: when differing viewpoints are posted it shows that peoples' own little corner of the aviation biz does not represent the entirety, and sometimes not even the majority, of the whole.

That's how you raise well-rounded aviators, with awareness of the world they're operating in (rather than the dangerous ignorance of anything outside their own sphere of experience).
Click to expand...

It's a valid point, and while I don't hold the same one, yours doesn't have any less merit.
 
jtrain609 said:
That may be true, but if you carry that technique into a longer/larger aircraft, you're going to find your mains getting dragged through the approach lighting system.

A few transport category aircraft pilots have found out about that one the hard way.
Click to expand...

I've known a few old skoooooooool Alaska Airlines pilots that would hit the numbers in Juneau and make the echo exit. They were good though, and had been doing it for years and years. Consider the Dutch harbor airport, the back door approach with the VASI puts you down the field by about 500' if you follow the VASI then chop and drop when you're in the Alaska Air 737 (which they no longer do) you could be in a world of hurt. Touch down as close to the threshold as you can without touching down early, I can't see anything wrong with that if you are able to do it.
 
Oh boy, here we go again... land a 172 before the 1000' markers and YERRR DANGEROUUUUS!!!! *CHOMP*.
 
Bumblebee said:
Then raise up them damn flaps!
Click to expand...

I actually cancelled at the gate the other day (well, FBO). I was doing some checkride practice with my CFII the other day and we flew IFR from SAF to Belen, NM, an uncontrolled field. As I was pulling off the runway, I went to dial in ABQ approach (one of the few uncontrolled fields in NM where you don't have to cancel/get clearance with FSS) and in my CFI's words, "Wait till you get to the ramp, then we'll cancel." The look on his face when I started laughing was priceless.
 
A150K said:
I actually cancelled at the gate the other day (well, FBO). I was doing some checkride practice with my CFII the other day and we flew IFR from SAF to Belen, NM, an uncontrolled field. As I was pulling off the runway, I went to dial in ABQ approach (one of the few uncontrolled fields in NM where you don't have to cancel/get clearance with FSS) and in my CFI's words, "Wait till you get to the ramp, then we'll cancel." The look on his face when I started laughing was priceless.
Click to expand...
That's funny:laff:....did you ask him why?
 
Bumblebee said:
That's funny:laff:....did you ask him why?
Click to expand...

I didn't, but I wish I had. It was a clear and 10 kind of day anyway, so it didn't make a huge difference when we cancelled-nobody was trying to get into or out of any of the area airports (or else we would have cancelled in the air and shot the approach VFR).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top