Instrument Approach Speeds

Ideally, someone who is an instrument rated pilot should be able to perform an approach anywhere in the green arc for their aircraft. I learned 100 in a 172, I always thought it handled a little nicer at 90 especially putting flaps down and slowing up when breaking out but that's just splitting hairs.
 
In the 172, I like to use normal cruise until established on the final approach course where 1900 rpm typically yields about 90 kias which I finds works quite well on an ILS.
 
A150K said:
In the 172, I like to use normal cruise until established on the final approach course where 1900 rpm typically yields about 90 kias which I finds works quite well on an ILS.
Click to expand...
To add: Unless I'm trying to get into a short field, I dont add flaps in the 172 until I have the runway in sight.
 
A150K said:
To add: Unless I'm trying to get into a short field, I dont add flaps in the 172 until I have the runway in sight.
Click to expand...
I usually add 10 degrees at the FAF and leave it at that. Not really fun doing a configuration change when the needles get sensitive.

Then again, I'm not a II, I don't have to worry about not passing on bad habits yet.
 
Fly your category. Teach at a slower speed first with a new student. Needles and things are moving slower, giving the student more time to make corrections. The concept of a higher speed will require a faster descent to maintain glidepath/glideslope is not difficult to understand. I don't see a problem in teaching/demonstrating a faster approach, but keep it in your category for the students sake of learning first. So far the discussion has been about ILS approaches. Try this on a non-precision approach, just to possibly get higher mins for visibility and MDA. On a real NPA , why would you do this?
 
A150K said:
To add: Unless I'm trying to get into a short field, I dont add flaps in the 172 until I have the runway in sight.
Click to expand...

Me too. My CFII tried to get me to put in 10° flaps on approaches but I just wouldn't do it. I do pretty much the same in all the singles I fly. Even for a short field, most slow down pretty well to flap speed just with power management. An exception seems to be the newer group of faster fixed gear slippery singles - Diamond and Cirrus - where I find approach flaps to be a good idea.
 
90 works well for a 172, but some of them don't allow the first notch of flaps below 110 like most of them do. In those airplanes, I like to use 80 to prevent going over the flap limitation. That is if you prefer flaps.

If not, have at it.
 
Im usually as fast as I can get until the FAF, Then

90 knots for a 172. (10 degrees of flaps for straight in precision approaches for the S models)
100 knots for a Cirrus

120 knots in a 172 is not practicable. that is more like King Air speeds
 
Fly_Unity said:
Im usually as fast as I can get until the FAF, Then

90 knots for a 172. (10 degrees of flaps for straight in precision approaches for the S models)
100 knots for a Cirrus

120 knots in a 172 is not practicable. that is more like King Air speeds
Click to expand...
A King air is 200 at the FAF(first flap), Flaps, gear flaps on their respected speeds and then like the last mile might be at 120. Or if there's no pax, it's 250 at the faf, and slow down as you come down. Otherwise why are you flying a turboprop?
 
z987k said:
A King air is 200 at the FAF(first flap), Flaps, gear flaps on their respected speeds and then like the last mile might be at 120. Or if there's no pax, it's 250 at the faf, and slow down as you come down. Otherwise why are you flying a turboprop?
Click to expand...

I fly a C90B, and also fly the profiles that our company has set. (120-140)
Im not usually in a huge rush to save what? 30 seconds? Also I firmly believe that the every King Air driver should slow an extra 20 knots before extending the gear. Good to be easy on your equipment.

Also Im not a fan of extending the landing gear beyond the FAF in IMC. I tell our pilots to fly as if their were an FAA inspector on every flight and doing a checkride, even on the dead legs.
 
Fly_Unity said:
Also Im not a fan of extending the landing gear beyond the FAF in IMC. I tell our pilots to fly as if their were an FAA inspector on every flight and doing a checkride, even on the dead legs.
Click to expand...

+1 Big fan of configuring prior to the FAF

Really not that much more time and it puts you into the approach category you were designed for, VDPs and all factoring for faster jets.

Especially with higher spool time jets.
 
Flaps for an approach in a Cessna? Never done it. I've never seen it as being necessary. I'd teach my students to fly a MINIMUM of 90kt, no flaps. If you're on an ILS at 100kt at 200ft, there's ample time to slow to 60kt and touch down.

They should also be able to make speed adjustments inside the FAF if necessary. I haven't often done it at 120kt, but when I did, I'd simply start to slow at ~500ft.

Now in a twin, I'd have the gear down by the FAF. Flaps as necessary to comply with speed restrictions (usually a C152 in front of us doing the approach with flaps).
 
ryan1234 said:
+1 Big fan of configuring prior to the FAF

Really not that much more time and it puts you into the approach category you were designed for, VDPs and all factoring for faster jets.

Especially with higher spool time jets.
Click to expand...

Agreed....I think we are coming from a similar mindset here, but I still think it is the right way to do things in a jet. That isn't to say it is the only way, or an absolute, as you can probably do just about whatever you want in other types of airplanes, but when it counts, you want to start with a stabilized approach. Only exception for me is possibly emergency fuel, where I would basically be clean until the FAF, dirty and go half flaps, and then go full when/if I break out. Like I said, different techniques for everyone, just throwing out my perspective FWIW. I'm sure other answers are better for other airplanes.
 
///AMG said:
Agreed....I think we are coming from a similar mindset here, but I still think it is the right way to do things in a jet. That isn't to say it is the only way, or an absolute, as you can probably do just about whatever you want in other types of airplanes, but when it counts, you want to start with a stabilized approach. Only exception for me is possibly emergency fuel, where I would basically be clean until the FAF, dirty and go half flaps, and then go full when/if I break out. Like I said, different techniques for everyone, just throwing out my perspective FWIW. I'm sure other answers are better for other airplanes.
Click to expand...

I've been taught the same thing. I usually like to be configured about a mile from the FAF on a precision approach. In a 172 that means just slowing down to 90-100 KIAS, and situation depending, 10 degrees of flaps. Once I'm at the FAF, I'll drop the 10 degrees, power for 90 and fly the needles.

Makes sense with faster and more complex airplanes. If I were doing the same in an Arrow I'd be at 100 kts 3 miles out, first notch and GUMPS at the FAF.

Fits my theory of any instrument flight, plan ahead and think ahead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top