I'm sure that's all correct.
All things equal - which approach are you taking
- Thread starter kaiser
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 6,674
- Display Name
Display name:
3G
8% (DL’s 2023 full year number) ain’t bad; a lot of auto/property insurers hope to get half that to call it a good year.
ILS.
There are no CAT 2 or CAT 3 RNAV approaches. There never will be.
Simple, easy to fly, extremely accurate, very difficult to spoof by external means. No worries about area outages or signal degradation.
No modern navigational equipment needed. You don’t have to load the approach in the box. Just TIM, and fly the bars down to minimums.
So easy, even a cave man can do it.
kaiser
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2019
- Messages
- 2,465
- Location
- Chicagoland
- Display Name
Display name:
The pilot formerly known as Cool Beard Guy
Fantastic discussion! it gave me lots to consider. I ended up deciding on the RNAV, as well as a 2nd pilot. The trip went well and we landed with OVC004 and "reported" 2 1/2 sm viz with mist - though I think it was probably closer to 1 3/4 miles before i caught the lights (on high!!!). Lowest viz approach ever for me I think - very fun.
Either way, the one thing I did discover is that regardless of the approach, nothing beats having a 2nd pilot to tell you when they have the lights / runway in sight. Made the whole thing super simple and allowed us to catch it above DA. I suppose single pilot I'd just look up right at DA and hope to see something, but when #2 said lights in sight, I looked up and it definitely took me a good 3 seconds to catch them.
Either way, the one thing I did discover is that regardless of the approach, nothing beats having a 2nd pilot to tell you when they have the lights / runway in sight. Made the whole thing super simple and allowed us to catch it above DA. I suppose single pilot I'd just look up right at DA and hope to see something, but when #2 said lights in sight, I looked up and it definitely took me a good 3 seconds to catch them.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
- Messages
- 19,669
- Location
- Oakland, CA
- Display Name
Display name:
Bro do you even lift
weird, that 2nd pilot wasn't me............. hhhmmmfff
kaiser
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2019
- Messages
- 2,465
- Location
- Chicagoland
- Display Name
Display name:
The pilot formerly known as Cool Beard Guy
move to chicago!
ja_user
Pattern Altitude
With some avionics suites/installations, there is no difference in the button pushing between either approach. Not in the setup, the missed or anything else. Yes the needles turn green for ILS, but you also have to make sure the magenta sequences, so it really doesn't matter... You take whichever is getting advertised...
Now where is this airport where there are no Notam's impacting the approaches?
Now where is this airport where there are no Notam's impacting the approaches?
why?
Perhaps you always take what’s advertised. I ask for what I want.
ja_user
Pattern Altitude
Unless there is a compelling reason, sure… it makes little difference
We all have our own choices.
Besides I see way too many pilots who are not assertive with ATC, so I wish more asked just as an exercise. I get looked at funny by trainees when I tell ATC what I want. I remember a 20 gazillion hour retired airline pilot who was shocked when I once asked for a different runway than advertised. Who ever heard of such a thing?!?!
ja_user
Pattern Altitude
Oh I agree on that completely, ask for what you want/need. Happens all the time, no big deal.
Back to the original topic, I really like some of the newer GPS/ILS approaches that use the same fix names for FAF, etc. Makes the controller jobs easier, and less confusion then them clearing you to a fix on the GPS, when you have the ILS loaded, etc..
You might also begin to see a lot more controller use of approach clearances direct to the IF instead of vectors to intercept final as they get more appreciative of the reduction of workload that gives them without impacting on traffic flow.
Yea but they still generally won’t spend money on things that they don’t think will have a decent ROI
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 6,674
- Display Name
Display name:
3G
Very few companies will.
Honestly, I was just surprised DL’s margin was as high as it was last year. For perspective, Walmart ran a 2% net profit margin in 2023; BofA ran 24% for the same year.
This is the correct answer.
flyingcheesehead
Taxi to Parking
Huh?
I'm in the "interior regions of the US" and I'm not aware of any ILS approaches being decommissioned yet, and I just went and looked and even the ones I've flown to podunk uncontrolled municipal airports are still there.
Yes, they will go away if not enough people fly them. Military or air carrier service, significantly better minimums (>50ft), and at least 6200 operations using them per year will be kept. GA airports where they get used <1400 times per year, they'll go away. In between, remains to be seen.
But, if there's an LPV approach with the same minimums, I'd rather the FAA decommission the ILS and spend all the money it takes to maintain them (I've heard ~$1 million per year) for something more useful, like certifying an unleaded universal replacement for 100LL.
ILS on the Block - IFR Magazine
In 2015, the FAA began looking to rationalize ILS approaches. In this context, rationalize means cut. The following year, the FAA developed a cost/benefit quantitative model and conducted an analysis at about 2900 airports with few or no RNAV SIDs or STARs. The finished product was a plan to...
www.ifr-magazine.com
RNAV: Load the approach.
ILS: Load the approach, verify (and possibly tune, depending on your equipment) the frequency, turn the marker beacons back on on your audio panel, wait until you're in range, verify the ID, wait until you're on vectors or intermediate leg, switch to green needles and verify course guidance, switch autopilot to APR again if you were already cleared for the approach.
It's not hard to fly an ILS, but it absolutely takes less to set up and activate an RNAV approach and there are plenty of potential stumbling blocks, some of which cannot be done until the last couple of minutes prior to the FAF.
As such, I don't think I've flown an ILS in my personal airplane since 2017 outside of currency/IPC flights. RNAV all the way.
Last edited:
John Collins
En-Route
Huh?
I'm in the "interior regions of the US" and I'm not aware of any ILS approaches being decommissioned yet, and I just went and looked and even the ones I've flown to podunk uncontrolled municipal airports are still there.
Yes, they will go away if not enough people fly them. Military or air carrier service, significantly better minimums (>50ft), and at least 6200 operations using them per year will be kept. GA airports where they get used <1400 times per year, they'll go away. In between, remains to be seen.
But, if there's an LPV approach with the same minimums, I'd rather the FAA decommission the ILS and spend all the money it takes to maintain them (I've heard ~$1 million per year) for something more useful, like certifying an unleaded universal replacement for 100LL.
ILS on the Block - IFR Magazine
In 2015, the FAA began looking to rationalize ILS approaches. In this context, rationalize means cut. The following year, the FAA developed a cost/benefit quantitative model and conducted an analysis at about 2900 airports with few or no RNAV SIDs or STARs. The finished product was a plan to...
RNAV: Load the approach.
ILS: Load the approach, verify (and possibly tune, depending on your equipment) the frequency, turn the marker beacons back on on your audio panel, wait until you're in range, verify the ID.
It's not hard, but it is more.
I agree, but there are even more ways to mess up an ILS, especially if you are using automation. The ILS frequency needs to be tuned and made the current frequency in the Nav Receiver. The CDI has to be changed to select VLOC when on final and back to GPS during the missed approach. There are just more things the pilot needs to do or consider with an ILS that doesn't need to be accomplished with an LPV. Once you are on the GS or GP, things are the same, at least until the DA. I only practice ILS regularly as a backup to the case where LPV is unavailable.