He could do that. But why not stabilize the approach by capturing the glidepath early and making one configuration change ("keep your speed up" requests aside) instead of a series of descents and level offs?I don't know the A/P he has, but why not only use the lateral guidance, and manually hit the step downs with trim/power rather than VTF?
He could do that. But why not stabilize the approach by capturing the glidepath early and making one configuration change ("keep your speed up" requests aside) instead of a series of descents and level offs?
Yes, I know it's Jerry to whom "stabilized approach" is an oxymoron.
That’s true and it’s why most people read and comprehend the approach plate prior to flying the procedure. The only strategy that works for every approach is to comply with the procedure as published.Well, there are a couple approaches out there where the glidepath does take you below the stepdown fixes - although, that may be limited to a couple ILS approaches, but it's still a possibility for GPS also I would think.
And by activating VTF, you have eliminated all of the step down fixes outside of the FAF, so you have increased your workload trying to make sure you haven’t gone below the required altitudes.
That depends on the avionics. The G1000 keeps the waypoints on the final approach course, Jerry's avionics probably do too.
Will the G1000 keep you above the step downs if the glidepath from intercept to MAP goes below an intermediate fix if you go VTF?
Of course there are. But let's translate this to old school. Make it the days before GPS. There were (and are) ILS approaches where the glideslope goes below pre-FAF step down fixes. There are two techniques to deal with it.Well, there are a couple approaches out there where the glidepath does take you below the stepdown fixes - although, that may be limited to a couple ILS approaches, but it's still a possibility for GPS also I would think.
Of course there are. But let's translate this to old school. Make it the days before GPS. There were (and are) ILS approaches where the glideslope goes below pre-FAF step down fixes. There are two techniques to deal with it.
I don't see anything wrong with either. And I don't think RNAV changes that.
- Capture the glideslope and watch for the stepdowns, adjusting as necessary
- Dive and drive to each step down.
View attachment 98329
Not with Jerry's. He's flying with a GTN. The fixes along the FAC remain, so it doesn't matter.And by activating VTF, you have eliminated all of the step down fixes outside of the FAF, so you have increased your workload trying to make sure you haven’t gone below the required altitudes.
Certain people absolutely look for the step owns. Others don't even know they are required to remain at or above them. But that's true with or without an autopilot.Do you think certain people really look for the step down alts if they hit VTF and let it do what it does, though? I'm fairly certain some just let the A/P do what it's gonna do, and if they bust an altitude, oh well.
Certain people absolutely look for the step owns. Others don't even know they are required to remain at or above them. But that's true with or without an autopilot.
Edit: That's wrong. It actually doesn't work. Not well, anyway. Yes the along tack waypoints remain in the flight plan, so they are accessible, but whether you use activate leg or VTF, you don't get waypoint sequencing before the FAF - the active waypoint is the FAF. So you end up using the moving map or some other situational awareness tool - or a second unit, which would be fine - to keep track of your progress. Now Jerry does have that but I doubt he would use it for the purpose.Not with Jerry's. He's flying with a GTN. The fixes along the FAC remain, so it doesn't matter.
That depends on the avionics. The G1000 keeps the waypoints on the final approach course, Jerry's avionics probably do too.
Not with Jerry's. He's flying with a GTN. The fixes along the FAC remain, so it doesn't matter.
Yes but does the G1000 let you know when - with a primary nav function - you are crossing them once you to to VTF or activate the leg to the FAF?That depends on the avionics. The G1000 keeps the waypoints on the final approach course, Jerry's avionics probably do too.
Of course there are. But let's translate this to old school. Make it the days before GPS. There were (and are) ILS approaches where the glideslope goes below pre-FAF step down fixes. There are two techniques to deal with it.
I don't see anything wrong with either. And I don't think RNAV changes that.
- Capture the glideslope and watch for the stepdowns, adjusting as necessary
- Dive and drive to each step down.
View attachment 98329
Absolutely. We think of altitudes as having an obstacle function but they can also have a traffic separation function. Either way, it is our job to understand and comply with minimum, maximum, and mandator altitudes in published procedures. The OAK approach just happens to be a no-harm/no-foul - pretty sure somewhere along the way I saw that the GS actually meets the crossing restrictions.So this is where all the Cleared for the Approach forum stuff has gone. I haven't looked at the Jerry thread for a long time. @EdFred 's "oh well" above is really not all that cavalier. In the area were talkin about here, closer in, it is kinda a 'no harm, no foul' thang. The reason for the rule is about traffic underneath you. The Glideslope keeps you off the rocks regardless of how hot it is. It's the effect that the heat has on the other planes altimeter that is the problem. That airplane's 'actual' altitude is going to be higher than what it's altimeter reads. Heat don't affect the Glideslope so your altimeter is going to be lower than your 'actual' altitude. Now, ATC running another airplane underneath you at NIXDE at 1100 just ain't gonna be happening. And the effect that each degree of temperature has on how many feet difference is less at lower altitudes then up higher where the whole column of air has expanded.
It was way out there on the ILS's to KLAX RWY's 24/25 where it was causing problems. Planes getting on the Glideslope around 35 miles out up around 9000 were picking off traffic underneath them assigned altitudes a 1000 feet below the ILS Chart altitudes. It was on those hot LA basin temperature inversions. I know you know all this, just replying to you to set the context and you had the pictures
Yes but does the G1000 let you know when - with a primary nav function - you are crossing them once you to to VTF or activate the leg to the FAF?
What philosophy could there possibly be? Just follow the damn procedure.Latest video comments on other YouTubers, his takeoff/departure/terrain clearance philosophy, and address the call sign issue.
What philosophy could there possibly be? Just follow the damn procedure.
the jerry philosophy of "I'm always right and anything other people perceive as me doing wrong is someone else's fault".
The latest one that I see, he discusses the 421C crash at Monterey. His discussion also gets the departure wrong and would theoretically turn into terrain instead of away from it. Is that the one?Latest video comments on other YouTubers, his takeoff/departure/terrain clearance philosophy, and address the call sign issue.
The latest one that I see, he discusses the 421C crash at Monterey. His discussion also gets the departure wrong and would theoretically turn into terrain instead of away from it. Is that the one?
View attachment 98370
View attachment 98371
I did the screen caps in that post to illustrate what was said about the crash. Since you asked for the video, here it is:It won’t play. It’s just pics. Can you put the video here?
You mean you don't agree turning left in advance in case the right engine fails is a good reason for not flying the procedure as published?The latest one that I see, he discusses the 421C crash at Monterey. His discussion also gets the departure wrong and would theoretically turn into terrain instead of away from it. Is that the one?
He took the KLLR-KOAK vid with the botched ODP down
Maybe this guy subscribes to the old adage, ‘a bad reputation is better than no reputation at all.’
It's all about the clicks. Smooth proper IFR flying is about as exciting as watching sap run in January. Dropping out of the clouds at a 45* angle and then "saving" the approach, now that's some exciting stuff right there!
Not sure if that would work as well for Jerry.Doesn't he know the way to get clicks is to pimp your wife/girlfriend/wife's girlfriend in the still of the video?
Another JFR classic.... turn the way you want...
And hey, three lefts = a right, amirite?
"NORCAL, request."
"Go ahead"
"request vectors to deviate 40 degrees left or right of course to avoid the clown in the 421."
Hmm. Maybe he should get an award for promoting excellence in Air Traffic Control. Not the Archie. It’ll be known as the Jughead Award.No, you're three lefts.
They'd probably give it to you. The Norcal controllers know his tail number - They are on their best behavior when they hear it because they know that recording is likely to be listened to (after Jerry crashes).
niceIt would be great if Wagner would become Peter’s test pilot for the Raptor.
We can then combine the two threads into one catastrophic crescendo of palm slabs to the forehead!