Radio Set-up For An Insturment Approach

[ QUOTE ]
Remember one key thing here: T-I-M...or Tune, Identify, and Monitor. Much like NDB approaches I used to fly, the TACAN and ILS approaches I fly now, I still have the volume turned up for the navaid morse code ID playing, as well as watching for any flags on the ADI. That's just some food for thought, as I agree that this bust appears to be one of technique vs procedure; these types of busts many here are familiar with my extreme dislike of.

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually like to keep the morse code going with the volume turned way down throughout the approach also but, during that stage check the Check CFI made me turn it off.
 
I think your failure was due to you not noticing the flag on the #1 nav. Appart from that, the decision to go missed was the right one, and I am one of those people as well to set the missed appch in #2 nav, when the x-radials are not needed.
It is though a technique, and therefore is not right or wrong. Just a preference.
I wouldn't set #2 as a backup for #1, for different reasons: if the VOR has been checked and is within limits, I would trust it. I think you can always find a VOR to set on the #2 with a radial that will enhance your situational awareness, and to me that is primary.
But I've had students do otherwise (set #2 as a backup) and as long as they did what was required of them, I see no reason to change their technique.
 
Talked to my examiner during my Checkride today about this, and He agreed with my thoughts...

For the ILS, I always set up NAV 2 for the MISSED, if that's what the missed is based on. NOT the ILS Localizer or anything to continue the approach if the GS fails or anything...

Set it up for the Missed, the last thing you want to do, LOW SLOW and if you're going missed, you're probably in the soup, is to have to fiddle with the radios and crap when you should be getting up and out and to the missed point.

The only way, I'd not set it up for the missed, is if I'm on fumes and have no other choice but to get to the runway, THIS TIME.

Of course, if that's the case, I've done some crap before hand to get in that stupid emergancy predicament, and I deserve to crash... Darwin...
grin.gif
 
Thats pretty much what I figured. I've decided to teach my students to have the missed approach set up in the NAV 2.
 
I know this is an older thread, but here is my take. Always have the approach morse code on the overhead speaker at a volume that won't distract communications, yet is loud enough to recognize when it stops. Unless I need cross radials for step-downs or such, the number two NAV and VOR is set up for the missed. Some people think that the number two NAV and VOR back-up the number one if it fails, just revert to localizer. The question is how long does it take for someone to recognize a COM failure in a high work load enviroment if you don't have NAV flags, or didn't monitor the morse code.

Now you have a COM failure and no clue as to your exact location on the approach. Why on earth would someone try to salvage an approach when going missed would give you the opportunity to set-up for a localizer approach and monitor the approach as well as regain situational awareness. The bust was uncalled for, he set you up to fail and pounced on you when you tried to do the right thing. BTW, good for you for doing all the right things during an approach.
 
Some of the saltier types out there would have you believe that a glideslope or #1 Nav failure means you simply switch to the LOC mins, but I don't think that's the safest or most professional solution. Why? Because you haven't briefed the LOC approach, and inside the FAF is the wrong place to be doing so.

Moreover, unless the MAP is based on DME, a marker beacon or some other means, you'd have to have started a timer at the FAF and possibly have had to calculate a time to the MAP if you're not flying the approach at one of the pre-calculated speeds--waaay too much busywork and stuff to keep straight in your head when you're supposedly flying a precision approach.

Finally, unless you've got a flip-flop type receiver, I don't like the idea of having to re-tune (and re-identify) the radio and spinning the OBS for the MAP during the early part of the Missed as you've got a lot of other stuff going on at that time as well--ATC, reconfiguring the aircraft, etc.

Bottom line, fly one approach or the other; don't try to fly both a precision and a non-precision approach at the same time.
 
aloft said:
Moreover, unless the MAP is based on DME, a marker beacon or some other means, you'd have to have started a timer at the FAF and possibly have had to calculate a time to the MAP if you're not flying the approach at one of the pre-calculated speeds--waaay too much busywork and stuff to keep straight in your head when you're supposedly flying a precision approach.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with going missed if the GS fails. However, not for the reasons you stated above.

I teach everybody to start the clock as they pass the FAF. If the GS fails, they can climb straight ahead, but they can't turn until the MAP. How will they know where the MAP is without time? Just fly for...a while?

As for calculating the time, remember that those times are just computed for reference and represent ground speed. You have to interpolate them to figure out the actual time. If you're flying at 90 KIAS, but have a 10 knot headwind, you have to interpolate the times between 90 and 70 knots on the chart, because you have an 80 knot groundspeed.

So my point is that it's all an estimate anyway, and an estimate is good enough to figure out the MAP.
 
aloft said:
Some of the saltier types out there would have you believe that a glideslope or #1 Nav failure means you simply switch to the LOC mins, but I don't think that's the safest or most professional solution. Why? Because you haven't briefed the LOC approach, and inside the FAF is the wrong place to be doing so.

Moreover, unless the MAP is based on DME, a marker beacon or some other means, you'd have to have started a timer at the FAF and possibly have had to calculate a time to the MAP if you're not flying the approach at one of the pre-calculated speeds--waaay too much busywork and stuff to keep straight in your head when you're supposedly flying a precision approach.

Finally, unless you've got a flip-flop type receiver, I don't like the idea of having to re-tune (and re-identify) the radio and spinning the OBS for the MAP during the early part of the Missed as you've got a lot of other stuff going on at that time as well--ATC, reconfiguring the aircraft, etc.

Bottom line, fly one approach or the other; don't try to fly both a precision and a non-precision approach at the same time.
Click to expand...

Truth be told, it shouldn't (and isn't) difficult to switch from the ILS to the LOC. Simply brief or review both. They're the same so far as final approach course, etc. Know the additional step downs at different points of the approach, know the minima for the non-precision, and it should be a non-issue. If at any point during the transition you feel uncomfortable or behind, or just choose to be conservative, then go missed.
 
Truth be told, it shouldn't (and isn't) difficult to switch from the ILS to the LOC. Simply brief or review both. They're the same so far as final approach course, etc. Know the additional step downs at different points of the approach, know the minima for the non-precision, and it should be a non-issue. If at any point during the transition you feel uncomfortable or behind, or just choose to be conservative, then go missed.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true former freight dawg, MikeD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top