PAR No-Gyro Approach

[JEP]

I remember doing the PAR approach into YUM (now NYL ) as a student, Very cool experience.

Not knowing what I was doing I was given exact headings to fly, and like a good student I read back all the headings, well after the 2nd or 3rd heading they set me straight pretty quick. Made it just a little more memorable.

I did one way back when, during training and a long IR x/c into KRST. I got the exact same reaction...We checked in with tower and they cleared us for the visual and I asked for teh PAR and they seemed excited to do one. I did the same and read back the instructions until they said, ...not needed.......

 

[deadstick]

Does anybody have PAR on C052?

 

[killbilly]

I did one way back when, during training and a long IR x/c into KRST. I got the exact same reaction...We checked in with tower and they cleared us for the visual and I asked for teh PAR and they seemed excited to do one. I did the same and read back the instructions until they said, ...not needed.......

What I found interesting was that as I got closer, he was calling turns almost faster than I could make them.

 

[MikeD]

What I found interesting was that as I got closer, he was calling turns almost faster than I could make them.

Because no-gyro, he has to anticipate or lead your roll outs and such a bit more. Regular PAR isn't like that.

 

[killbilly]

Because no-gyro, he has to anticipate or lead your roll outs and such a bit more. Regular PAR isn't like that.

Yeah it was tough. But it was really cool, though. I finally cheated and sneaked a peak under the foggles to see what was what, and it was very cool seeing the runway out there.

My CFII and I had to have a little discussion when we got back on the ground - there were a few things that would have been useful for me to know ahead of time on that particular exercise. Like what heading the runway was, what altitude I was flying to...it's not so much that I was behind the airplane, I was behind the instructor.

We sorted that out. He's going to brief me on what we're doing next time.

 

[MikeD]

Yeah it was tough. But it was really cool, though. I finally cheated and sneaked a peak under the foggles to see what was what, and it was very cool seeing the runway out there.

My CFII and I had to have a little discussion when we got back on the ground - there were a few things that would have been useful for me to know ahead of time on that particular exercise. Like what heading the runway was, what altitude I was flying to...it's not so much that I was behind the airplane, I was behind the instructor.

We sorted that out. He's going to brief me on what we're doing next time.

What heading the runway was? You didn't know which runway you were doing the PAR to? You weren't ever told that?

Do a regular PAR next time. You'll see. Read and know what's in the link of mine I posted, that'll prep you well.

 

[killbilly]

What heading the runway was? You didn't know which runway you were doing the PAR to? You weren't ever told that?

Do a regular PAR next time. You'll see. Read and know what's in the link of mine I posted, that'll prep you well.

No, I didn't. It was sort of a "lesson of opportunity." I think he assumed that I knew what was going on.

We had been doing DME arcs, when he said, "We're going to ask for a no-gyro PAR approach to Quantico. You good with that?" "Sure," I said. He assumed I knew the rest of those details. I didn't. Additional lesson learned.

I knew that a no-gyro PAR approach meant I would be partial-panel under the foggles and getting some instruction from the controller on the radio, but not what it all meant procedurally. Did it mean they were just lining me up for a visual? What altitude was I going to? Where was I supposed to be pointed?

I still flew it decently despite those issues. And then we had a chat later about how I would be the most studious guy in the world, but I couldn't read his mind and he shouldn't assume that I knew something without checking with me first, especially since it wasn't what I planned for that night. I totally don't mind curve balls - love them, in fact...and I flew it safely and decently. Just could have done it better. It was all good.

EDIT - I don't want this to sound like an indictment of my CFII - it's not at all. He's been great about creating some good experiences for me in the air. I was pretty task-saturated at that point anyway, as a newbie IR student, so I was pretty slow on the uptake when things changed rapidly. Additional lessons learned!

 

[fholbert]

I believe they are required to say "do not acknowledge further transmissions" prior to the final portion of the approach. Perhaps some experienced controllers can clarify/confirm/deny this, but there have been plenty of times when I have heard that on a normal (ie not no gyro) PAR when I hadn't been responding.

When I was a USAF controller PAR's were SOP. Fighter types didn't have VHF radios so they couldn't shoot an ILS, that and a PAR DH was 100 feet. More than once a PAR controller talked an emergency fuel pilot beyond DH to touch down in 0/0. In those days 0/0 was rocks off or W0XOV0F (Indefinite ceiling zero sky obscured visibility zero fog).

We were working F-4's, F-105, F-106's even worked a F-104 once.Those aircraft came down final REALLY fast. When heavy with bombs and such, 250 knot final, when returning empty 230 knot final. The PAR controller had to be good because things were changing fast.

ATC: Spad 22 xxxxx final controller how do you hear?
Pilot: Loud and clear
ATC: Loud and clear also do not acknowledge further transmissions. (At that point if the pilot didn't hear a transmission for 5 seconds they were required to go missed.)
Left of course turn right heading 272, 6 miles from touchdown.
Holding left of course turn right heading 274.
Heading 274 approaching glide path wheels should be down.
Correcting to course from the left.
Turn left heading 272. 6 miles from touchdown.
Begin decent on glide path.
Turn left heading 270.
4 miles from touchdown
On course going slightly below glide path
Cleared to land wind 270 at 8
Correcting to glide path from below, going right of course turn left heading 268.
3 miles from touch down
On glidepath
On course
2 miles from touch down ....

 

[MikeD]

I knew that a no-gyro PAR approach meant I would be partial-panel under the foggles and getting some instruction from the controller on the radio, but not what it all meant procedurally. Did it mean they were just lining me up for a visual? What altitude was I going to? Where was I supposed to be pointed?

Enroute radar such as TRACON/RAPCON will vector you and descend you to the altitude needed prior to handing you over to the GCA final controller. For any of the approaches, you should know the DH or MDA you'll be flying to, but if you don't....such as an emergency divert and don't have time to look it up......just query the final controller. For a PAR, there are no altitudes for you to descend to other than DH, since you're being talked down; for an ASR, the controller will read you the DH for the runway you are shooting the approach to, and if requested by you, will offer recommended altitudes per mile in a step-down fashion.

Like I said, read the link, understand what's what, and you'll be far more prepared next time.

 

[ahw01]

A slight aside, but this is a good radar guided approach made up on the fly

If I can find a youtube PAR, I'll add that also.

 

[ahw01]

 

[///AMG]

A slight aside, but this is a good radar guided approach made up on the fly

If I can find a youtube PAR, I'll add that also.

Yeah that is a pretty crazy story as well. Maybe I can find the link to the report later on.

As for DH, yeah MikeD, I just meant 200 1/2 because that is all we are legally authorized to do in single piloted aircraft per our regs. Unless you have a 2 seat side by side seater a la EA-6B or something.

 

[MikeD]

Yeah that is a pretty crazy story as well. Maybe I can find the link to the report later on.

As for DH, yeah MikeD, I just meant 200 1/2 because that is all we are legally authorized to do in single piloted aircraft per our regs. Unless you have a 2 seat side by side seater a la EA-6B or something.

Are the USMC Ds and USN Fs allowed to the lower mins?

 

[Springer]

In addition to working tower, I ran PARs there from 1978 until PATCO strike deployment in mid-August of 1981.

We had one of your guys teaching at Embry Riddle's DM facility after the PATCO strike.

 

[///AMG]

Are the USMC Ds and USN Fs allowed to the lower mins?

nope, in tandem seating the aircraft is still considered to be "single piloted" by the letter of the law in OPNAV. I'm not sure what the reasoning was behind this.....maybe they decided you need two sets of eyes looking out for the runway environment, which after riding in the back of a Rhino earlier this week, I can attest the view is not particularly conducive to helping the front seater out with that regardless of how high you raise the seat.

 

[MikeD]

nope, in tandem seating the aircraft is still considered to be "single piloted" by the letter of the law in OPNAV. I'm not sure what the reasoning was behind this.....maybe they decided you need two sets of eyes looking out for the runway environment, which after riding in the back of a Rhino earlier this week, I can attest the view is not particularly conducive to helping the front seater out with that regardless of how high you raise the seat.

USAF F-4 Phantoms were considered "two pilot"; so you could do a check ride flying up front, with an IP in the back. The one exception was the F-4G Wild Weasel model, which was considered single pilot, and when you got a check ride, the check pilot was in another F-4G as wingman. This was due to the EWOs instrument panel in the back cockpit extending onto the dash and up to the forward windscreen, thus completely restricting forward visibility.

 

[genot]

A slight aside, but this is a good radar guided approach made up on the fly

If I can find a youtube PAR, I'll add that also.

Thanks, I really appreciate that. It took 5 controllers and an absolutely rock solid pilot.

 

[ahw01]

I agree @genot, it had to be improvised, and all played their part perfectly.

 

[Pilot Fighter]

I got to fly one tonight. First time. Very cool experience.

I'm actually not quite to the approach phase in my IR training yet, but since we were in the area and it wasn't too busy, the controllers at Quantico were enthused about letting us do one.

Very interesting hearing "turn left. stop. on course...right of course correcting slowly..." etc...

We were apparently flying neara V-22 doing something similar, but I never got to see him. Those things are badass, by the way.

Anyway, it was a really neat thing to do. I celebrated this by making one of the worst landings of my career into VKX. Amazingly bad landing. Safe...but bad.

Makes it memorable, I suppose.

Great thread. Nice to see something other than a "state of the industry" exchange.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

Anyway, it was a really neat thing to do. I celebrated this by making one of the worst landings of my career into VKX. Amazingly bad landing. Safe...but bad.

You are going to make the worst landings in your flying career while doing instrument training. I suspect your CFI-I already told you the same thing. Your brain needs to be focused on the book and the approach and going missed, and task saturation is going to but the actual landing last in your mind. It is is totally normal. You are also coming down 20 kts fast at 100 AGL than your are accustomed to, with less flaps. Just how it is.