Search results

So I found a reason #7 which is sure to make everyone agree (grin) JO 7110.65, section 3-7-5 that discusses protecting the ILS critical areas. There are some weather mins, but it also says it will only be protected when an air aircraft is within the outer marker. So following the glide slope...

This is an old post, but it still pops on Google as a top resource to address this question, so I'd like to add my $0.02. The OP was a new CFII looking to know what to teach his students. Being in a similar boat, I, too, had this question, and after careful research, I've come up with six...

Hi Allan -- why not just approach the flight school. Offer to be an instructor for the school with the caveat you get to teach your son at the same time. Time with your son is not billable, and you get the plane at some sort of steep discount. Most schools are eager to have experienced pilots...

I just called Flight Service. They say it's due to those wildfires in Nova Scotia. Apparently it's impacting all the TAFs in the North East.

Have you ever seen FU in a forecast before? Check the FM302300 line KSWF 301602Z 3016/3118 14008KT P6SM SKC FM301800 12009KT P6SM BKN200 FM302000 13009KT 6SM HZ BKN200 FM302300 13005KT 6SM HZ FU BKN200 FM310300 VRB02KT P6SM FEW250 AMD NOT SKED

One of the exceptions to ROW during landing has always confused me. (g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an...

I’m looking for feedback from anyone who’s worked with CFI Academy in Lodi, CA. thanks

Man -- I just couldn't buy that. I've been flying for over 20 years and I've never seen someone hang an e6b around their neck. No way (I thought) would ASA spend money all these years for something like that. So I emailed their support department. Turns our you were pretty much spot on. Here's...

Does anyone know what that weird black circular attachment is on the ASA E6-B is? For the life of me, I can't see any use for it.

As you've already surmised, nothing stops you from giving him the sign-off, and the score would be official. The 141 school will still make him sit for the ground, but they can't make him re-take the written. However, restesting is not limited to just after a failure. He is welcome to retest...

Not sure how far back you want, but the wayback project lets you pull up old versions of any website. Go to https://web.archive.org/ and plunk in the TPP page url https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/productcatalog/ifrcharts/TerminalProcedures/ Looks like the have plates back to...

First, I agree with the other posters here — you were good, and there was no need to ask ATC, however noone ever got in trouble who asked for confirmation (and you should just ignore any annoyed sounds from ATC who is comfortably down on the ground drinking coffee). I really like how you...

We have a SIGMET for Severe Turbulence today, so, I thought I'd check the LLWS chart. But if you check the LLWS Chart, there's no material coloration...just some white, which is the lowest level (and it almost always shows white). So then I thought, OK, a SIGMET is a forecast, whereas the...

I'm not sure I follow the math. Would you mind walking me through it (for the "calculations challenged flyers").

That explanation hurts my head. But thanks for digging up the reference (somehow I missed it on the Info page).

I like the aviationweather.gov weather details and it's my first stop when looking for pre-flight. The one chart I can't understand is the LLWS chart as part of the GFA tool. I get it that the further to the right in the color scale is "bad", but can anyone explain what these numbers mean?

Without logs, how can the buyer confirm AD's are complied with? If the seller can't demonstrate compliance with AD's, then its airworthiness status is in question, no? The buyer might need to re-perform every applicable AD during the first annual. Even if the buyer doesn't care about the...

The other thing that caught me was the overlapping frequency range of localizers and VORs. Clearly there's some shared circuitry in the receiver -- but I'm going with you. The regs mention VORs so I think the check is not required.

True -- and the technique of tracking is completely different (keep the receiver between the two transmission lobes). But I paused for a moment when I considered the receiver still needs to accurately measure the two signals. I still agree the 30-day check is not called for -- but I had a...

So let's say I have a WAAS certified GPS (TSO 145 or 146) and a King KX 165a Nav/Com (which includes glideslope & localizer receivers). One day, I'm out flying in IMC and decide to request an ILS approach. While a localizer uses the same frequency range as a VOR, they are very different...