IFR checklists

Ralgha said:
It's going to go full deflection and you're going to lose the signal.
Click to expand...

Hendrick Motorsports lost a King Air 200 on October 24, 2004 and during the post accident investigation the NTSB discovered this on the demonstration flight.

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2006/AAB0601.htm

During two approaches, when the airplane had overflown the localizer antenna, some CDI needle movement occurred to the right and back to center. During all of the runway overflights, the NAV flags did not appear on the captain’s or the first officer’s HSIs when the airplane passed over the localizer antenna.
Click to expand...

During a busy, bumpy approach I can imagine how hard it would be to detect crossing the localizer antenna if the only movement is a small deflection and then return to center... If they would have been timing this approach at least they would have gone missed in the vicinity of the airport.
 
FlyOrDie said:
I concur. I use TOMATO FLAMES as a memory device to remind me to use the briefing strip cause otherwise I'll end up looking like a splattered tomato on fire.
Click to expand...
That is absolutely the =best= use of TOMATO FLAMES I've ever heard!

And all this time I thought that particular nmemonic was completely useless! :)
 
Ralgha said:
What's up with everyone trying to prove me wrong? I only said that time is not required on an ILS approach, which it's not, . . .
Click to expand...

Don't feel bad - I don't time on an ILS either.
 
FlyOrDie said:
Hendrick Motorsports lost a King Air 200 on October 24, 2004 and during the post accident investigation the NTSB discovered this on the demonstration flight.

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2006/AAB0601.htm



During a busy, bumpy approach I can imagine how hard it would be to detect crossing the localizer antenna if the only movement is a small deflection and then return to center... If they would have been timing this approach at least they would have gone missed in the vicinity of the airport.
Click to expand...

Well I've always noticed when I've crossed the antenna, so that's what I based my statement off of.
 
Ralgha said:
Well I've always noticed when I've crossed the antenna, so that's what I based my statement off of.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough. I was just very curious what you meant by LOC antenna crossing in the first place.
 
First let me say that I'm here to learn! I just passed my CFI rides a couple weeks ago.

Time is not required for an ILS, BUT if you lose the GS you cannot continue the LOC approach unless you have an accurate way to identify the MAP.

So, if you don't have GPS or DME and don't even have a MM to identify the MAP you cannot continue the approach as a LOC approach unless you did start your timer at the FAF.

If you DO time on an ILS and you lose GS you can continue the LOC appraoach because you'll be able to identify the MAP... but would you actually want to? If the GS failed who knows what is going wrong with the equipment that is sending you the signals that keep you away from mountains? Would you bet your life that the LOC is still in perfect condition if the GS suddenly and unexpectedly crapped out?

If you DON'T time on an ILS and you lose the GS you have to go missed. But you cannot even positively identify the MAP (in this scenario with no GPS, DME, MM) unless you started timing.

It takes very little effort to hit that little button on the timer as you cross the FAF to ensure that you can accurately identify the MAP in the event of GS failure in IMC. Right?

What do you think?

I am just here to get the opinions of experienced CFIs - not argue with anyone! :)

thanks!
 
Matt777 said:
First let me say that I'm here to learn! I just passed my CFI rides a couple weeks ago.

Time is not required for an ILS, BUT if you lose the GS you cannot continue the LOC approach unless you have an accurate way to identify the MAP.

So, if you don't have GPS or DME and don't even have a MM to identify the MAP you cannot continue the approach as a LOC approach unless you did start your timer at the FAF.

If you DO time on an ILS and you lose GS you can continue the LOC appraoach because you'll be able to identify the MAP... but would you actually want to? If the GS failed who knows what is going wrong with the equipment that is sending you the signals that keep you away from mountains? Would you bet your life that the LOC is still in perfect condition if the GS suddenly and unexpectedly crapped out?

If you DON'T time on an ILS and you lose the GS you have to go missed. But you cannot even positively identify the MAP (in this scenario with no GPS, DME, MM) unless you started timing.

It takes very little effort to hit that little button on the timer as you cross the FAF to ensure that you can accurately identify the MAP in the event of GS failure in IMC. Right?

What do you think?

I am just here to get the opinions of experienced CFIs - not argue with anyone! :)

thanks!
Click to expand...

Excellent post. I think you put everything in a very good, understandable nutshell.
 
Matt777 said:
It takes very little effort to hit that little button on the timer as you cross the FAF to ensure that you can accurately identify the MAP in the event of GS failure in IMC. Right?
Click to expand...

You're correct in that it takes very little effort to start the timer.

That being said, an ILS and a LOC approach are fundamentally TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. Simply because they use the same source for lateral guidance, doesn't make them the same approach.

I know for a fact that there are some companies (if we're talking about professional aviation) that DO NOT allow pilots to transition from an ILS to a LOC approach in the even of a GS failure.

Is there a reason for that?

Don't know . . .
 
mtsu_av8er said:
I know for a fact that there are some companies (if we're talking about professional aviation) that DO NOT allow pilots to transition from an ILS to a LOC approach in the even of a GS failure.
Click to expand...

Yeah, personally, I'd go around and re-set up for the approach.

Unless I was running late ;)
 
mtsu_av8er said:
I know for a fact that there are some companies (if we're talking about professional aviation) that DO NOT allow pilots to transition from an ILS to a LOC approach in the even of a GS failure.

Is there a reason for that?

Don't know . . .
Click to expand...

The reason would probably be because you may already be below LOC minimums if/when the GS fails at which point you would want to go missed.
 
mtsu_av8er said:
You're correct in that it takes very little effort to start the timer.

That being said, an ILS and a LOC approach are fundamentally TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. Simply because they use the same source for lateral guidance, doesn't make them the same approach.

I know for a fact that there are some companies (if we're talking about professional aviation) that DO NOT allow pilots to transition from an ILS to a LOC approach in the even of a GS failure.

Is there a reason for that?

Don't know . . .
Click to expand...
Probably because they did not brief for the LOC approach.

I would do the miss to regroup, then I would brief the LOC only approach. Sometimes it could be a different approach plate then the ILS plate.

That's just me, cause I'm cool like that :)

HS
 
LOL . . . I know that there was a reason, I was just being silly. The reason is that it's silly and wreckless to assume that "having started the stopwatch . . . " makes you safe!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top