Personal minimums

z987k said:
I wouldn't recommend taking a 172 through all the virga you can find in the southwest.
Click to expand...
I hear it can be pretty bad. I was flying through virga all day today. The bumps didnt feel any different. Of course flying out here in Aniak I get my butt kicked all day everyday.
 
cencal83406 said:
Why?

When I upgrade, I won't have choice but to add 100 and 1/2 to the approach.

If it's so "bad" to have a personal minimum higher, why can't you, the capable instrument rated pilot, shoot that Cat I ILS down to 100 and 1/4...? You can take off 0/0, but you aren't man enough to land with a personal minimum less than the recommended chart minimum???
Click to expand...

Whoa, easy sailor...

I clearly said that anyone can do what they want. It was my personal opinion.

Do you really need me to explain why you can't go below 200 1/2 on a CAT I ILS? You are TRAINED during instrument training (hopefully) to the limits of your certificate.

So if you are trained to do CAT II approaches, are you gonna add 200 feet and 1/2 visibility because you have personal minimums?

Taking off 0/0 is a common sense bad move because you cannot get back into the airport with an issue. Tell me the problems and implications on shooting an approach down to the published minimums, I would love to hear them...
 
Inverted said:
Whoa, easy sailor...

I clearly said that anyone can do what they want. It was my personal opinion.

Do you really need me to explain why you can't go below 200 1/2 on a CAT I ILS? You are TRAINED during instrument training (hopefully) to the limits of your certificate.

So if you are trained to do CAT II approaches, are you gonna add 200 feet and 1/2 visibility because you have personal minimums?

Taking off 0/0 is a common sense bad move because you cannot get back into the airport with an issue. Tell me the problems and implications on shooting an approach down to the published minimums, I would love to hear them...
Click to expand...

When I have to add personal mins (high mins CA mins) I will. We are trained out of the box as FOs to do CAT II. I have 4000+ hours in my type and I've got hundreds of hours of instrument, and countless approaches to mins. Yet, when I move 3 feet left, I have to add 100 and 1/2 to my minimums for about 100 hours.

As a new FO, I couldn't land the airplane when:
Visibility less than 4000 RVR or 3/4 SM
Contaminated runway
Braking action less than "good"
Crosswind > 15 knots
LAHSO

As an experienced FO, I'm not allowed to land on contaminated runways in winter at "Special Winter Ops Airports".

There are more, but I don't feel like typing.

The bottom line is, to state that a newly minted instrument pilot should be comfortable taking an approach right to mins or return that rating is not a representation of good ADM.

You are now confusing it with a professional pilot with thousands of hours having "personal" mins. Huge difference.
 
I am all familiar with high captain mins, been there and done that, and I will do it again in my career no doubt. Can you not see that it is just a tad overkill that you have to add 100 and 1/2 by moving 3 feet to the left? New captain in a new airplane ok, but I always thought that reg was overkill. So tell me why the FAA is so interested in hindering professional pilots from shooting published minimums, yet they allow the newb in a 172 to do whatever he wants? People can develop whatever personal minimums they want in the non-professional world of aviation, it is totally fine. I still think people should be trained to the limits of their certificate, and should be comfortable being able to shoot and ILS.
 
Inverted said:
I am all familiar with high captain mins, been there and done that, and I will do it again in my career no doubt. Can you not see that it is just a tad overkill that you have to add 100 and 1/2 by moving 3 feet to the left? New captain in a new airplane ok, but I always thought that reg was overkill. So tell me why the FAA is so interested in hindering professional pilots from shooting published minimums, yet they allow the newb in a 172 to do whatever he wants? People can develop whatever personal minimums they want in the non-professional world of aviation, it is totally fine. I still think people should be trained to the limits of their certificate, and should be comfortable being able to shoot and ILS.
Click to expand...
Because they don't really care if you ball up an airplane and kill yourself. They care a little if you ball up an airplane and kill yourself and 3 of your homeboys. They care a lot if you ball up an airplane and kill paying passengers.
 
Roger Roger said:
Because they don't really care if you ball up an airplane and kill yourself. They care a little if you ball up an airplane and kill yourself and 3 of your homeboys. They care a lot if you ball up an airplane and kill paying passengers.
Click to expand...
Precisely.

Duty to care much?
 
My homeboy and myself have decided that we don't feel like dropping $200 a piece on golf only to play in a thunderstorm, so this made my no go decision easier. Looks like I'll just have to go find some fun crosswind conditions in town tomorrow and wait till next weekend for Wolf Creek. If you've never heard of that golf course in Mesquite, you need to Google image it asap.
 
I only fly IFR multi crew 121 in the jet.....so what ever is legal or approved by the opspecs or FARs im comfortable with. Flying for recreation....daylight vfr only multi engine......i dont fly pistons IFR or at night....ever.....and i won't even set foot in a single anymore.
 
Akbush said:
I only fly IFR multi crew 121 in the jet.....so what ever is legal or approved by the opspecs or FARs im comfortable with. Flying for recreation....daylight vfr only multi engine......i dont fly pistons IFR or at night....ever.....and i won't even set foot in a single
Click to expand...
The most fun you can possibly have in aviation can only be done in a single, turbine would work but who can afford that?

Also you might want to look into a screen name change.
 
Change Why? Had this name when i flew the bush before i knew singles were dangerous and a bad idea...but thanks.....doosh....
 
Akbush said:
Change Why? Had this name when i flew the bush before i knew singles were dangerous and a bad idea...but thanks.....doosh....
Click to expand...
Chill hombre. These people are here to help...for real. A little sarcasm never hurt nobody.
 
Akbush said:
I only fly IFR multi crew 121 in the jet.....so what ever is legal or approved by the opspecs or FARs im comfortable with. Flying for recreation....daylight vfr only multi engine......i dont fly pistons IFR or at night....ever.....and i won't even set foot in a single anymore.
Click to expand...
Do you also wear a straight jacket, rock back and forth, and chant "I'm a very good driver...I'm a very good driver..." during your off time ??
 
PhilosopherPilot said:
:)

"Hey scheduling...yeah this leg is below my personal minimum."

Seriously though, I would play it on the super safe side until you feel more comfortable. At some point you should start stretching your comfort zone, but take it slowly!

Good luck man.
Click to expand...

Had a guy at FLX do that... First day on the line, the chief pilot was like, well sometimes people are nervous first day out. Second day, same thing, had a little chat with the CP and DO, and decided to not continue with FLX. Went through training, passed a 135 ride, never flew a revenue flight.
 
Akbush said:
I only fly IFR multi crew 121 in the jet.....so what ever is legal or approved by the opspecs or FARs im comfortable with. Flying for recreation....daylight vfr only multi engine......i dont fly pistons IFR or at night....ever.....and i won't even set foot in a single anymore.
Click to expand...
Considering you fly a jet, it's far more likely that the piston twin would kill you than the single.

Akbush said:
Change Why? Had this name when i flew the bush before i knew singles were dangerous and a bad idea...but thanks.....doosh....
Click to expand...
Well they're not a dangerous. That statement is ridiculous. It was to poke fun at you for going soft(like we all do).
 
z987k said:
Considering you fly a jet, it's far more likely that the piston twin would kill you than the single.


Well they're not a dangerous. That statement is ridiculous. It was to poke fun at you for going soft(like we all do).
Click to expand...
I like what Clyde Cessna said--"this airplane is just fast enough to kill you."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top