Lear down TEB

dtuuri said:
No, smarty pants, it's the aiming spot you pick 1/2 mile from the threshold, so you can line up with the runway as I described here:

​
Click to expand...
And just to throw a little math at this, for a Cat C, 140-knot turn with 25 degrees of bank, the turning radius is less than 3800 feet, or .7 statute miles. Even at the Cat C minimum visibility of 1 1/2 miles that exists for a lot of circling approaches, you’ve still got more than 1/4 mile of wiggle room when putting yourself on a half-mile extended centerline. (Obviously no-wind conditions.)

Whether that’s enough depends largely on your potty training and recent practice.
 
MauleSkinner said:
And just to throw a little math at this, for a Cat C, 140-knot turn with 25 degrees of bank, the turning radius is less than 3800 feet, or .7 statute miles. Even at the Cat C minimum visibility of 1 1/2 miles that exists for a lot of circling approaches, you’ve still got more than 1/4 mile of wiggle room when putting yourself on a half-mile extended centerline. (Obviously no-wind conditions.)

Whether that’s enough depends largely on your potty training and recent practice.
Click to expand...
I know I'm talking to the choir, but it really bothers me that theorists putt-putting around in theoretical IMC weather on sunny weekends for the fun of it want to constrain workaday pilots trying not to kill themselves at night during snow storms, fog or driving rain by saddling them with outrageous demands. No working IFR pilot is doing a real circling approach unless the weather demands it and then the only ones s/he need worry about running into is an idiot. No law can protect against them.
 
dtuuri said:
I know I'm talking to the choir, but it really bothers me that theorists putt-putting around in theoretical IMC weather on sunny weekends for the fun of it want to constrain workaday pilots trying not to kill themselves at night during snow storms, fog or driving rain by saddling them with outrageous demands.
Click to expand...

A perfectly reasonable thing by which to be annoyed. However, understand that the only "saddling" is being performed by the FAA (and its counsel). Please don't shoot the messenger.
 
PPC1052 said:
A perfectly reasonable thing by which to be annoyed. However, understand that the only "saddling" is being performed by the FAA (and its counsel). Please don't shoot the messenger.
Click to expand...
The less said about bad opinions, the better. Flying a circuitous route at low altitude in lousy weather just to please the Chief Counsel is dangerous. The "Circle to land maneuver" is an IFR procedure protected by TERPS designers and explained in FAA handbooks. The Chief Counsel ought to talk with those authors and others who've actually done the maneuver on a dark misty night before rendering an opinion. Or fix the damn law if they need to, which I don't think is needed btw.
 
dtuuri said:
The less said about bad opinions, the better. Flying a circuitous route at low altitude in lousy weather just to please the Chief Counsel is dangerous. The "Circle to land maneuver" is an IFR procedure protected by TERPS designers and explained in FAA handbooks. The Chief Counsel ought to talk with those authors and others who've actually done the maneuver on a dark misty night before rendering an opinion. Or fix the damn law if they need to, which I don't think is needed btw.
Click to expand...

Yeah, dark misty night, low and maneuvering on a circle to land, not for me. Different approach or different airport. I hope that the PIC of any airplane I'm in feels the same way.
 
PaulS said:
Yeah, dark misty night, low and maneuvering on a circle to land, not for me. Different approach or different airport. I hope that the PIC of any airplane I'm in feels the same way.
Click to expand...
Hope isn't a strategy.
 
PaulS said:
Yeah, dark misty night, low and maneuvering on a circle to land, not for me. Different approach or different airport. I hope that the PIC of any airplane I'm in feels the same way.
Click to expand...
I've done plenty, with windows fogging over or ice crystals blocking most of the view too. As long as you can see what you need and you know your TERPS—you'll be fine. Not much point owning an airplane if the pilot can't deliver the mail. That's why we practice them and FAA certifies them—so you can get on the ground, into the wind, instead of running out of gas enroute to an alternate. That said, a pilot's got to stay within his limitations. If you only want to fly to airports with airline service, then do like they do and make ILS straight-ins all the time.
 
I just watched the NTSB initial report video on this crash. These guys did just about everything wrong. Horrible...
 
I didn't notice if the NTSB video had been linked in the thread. For the folks that were discussing the circle procedure in question if you have not watched the video it might help understand just how bad the crew screwed up and how easy the procedure really is if flown as instructed.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted
TCABM said:
Post 276.
Click to expand...
I read the transscript of the cockpit voice recorder then watched the NTSB vid. It is really shocking how little the respected the airspace complexity or the approach. Merely briefing the approach would have prevented them from getting that behind and they may have lived to see another day. While it is certainly Possible they did review it before they took off on the ground-it was not evident on how they handled themselves.
 
I have a suspicion the Captain was compromised in some way. Tired, substance abuse, other health issues, IDK but I can't figure out how you let yourself screw up that badly. Nothing they were doing made any sense.
 
cowman said:
I have a suspicion the Captain was compromised in some way. Tired, substance abuse, other health issues, IDK but I can't figure out how you let yourself screw up that badly. Nothing they were doing made any sense.
Click to expand...

Read the interviews from the docket (I think I linked to it above). It's illuminating. Several of the captains that the captain had flown with previously when he was an FO talked about how he didn't want to make any decisions, or even help them make decisions. He never wanted to handle the controls, and he never wanted to make decisions. He had no business being a captain, because he didn't have any semblance of command authority/attitude.

After you read those interviews, go back to the transcript and look at how hard the captain avoided taking control of the aircraft, when the FO was practically begging him to do so.

I'll say it again. Nobody was in command of that airplane. In fact, they were pretty much both passengers.
 
It was painful for me to watch that FAA video. This accident chain started years before these guys destroyed themselves and a beautiful airplane. I was so fortunate to have an extremely experienced Lear pilot mentor me with this type. Better fly it by the book or don't fly it at all!
 
I just found this video of a Lear 35 doing the same circle to land maneuver at TEB.
In this video and on the ILS, you start to pick up sight of runway 6 at about :20 seconds in and in the reflection left of the center post in the windscreen.

This shows how a relatively benign procedure was so screwed up by these two.
Compare this video to the earlier video from the NTSB.
Remember, it was VFR with about 5,000' overcast at the time of the accident.

 
champ driver said:
I just found this video of a Lear 35 doing the same circle to land maneuver at TEB.
In this video and on the ILS, you start to pick up sight of runway 6 at about :20 seconds in and in the reflection left of the center post in the windscreen.

This shows how a relatively benign procedure was so screwed up by these two.
Compare this video to the earlier video from the NTSB.
Remember, it was VFR with about 5,000' overcast at the time of the accident.

Click to expand...
Wow. When you watch that it seems hard to find a way to F that up.
 
dtuuri said:
Heads down, fussin' with the magenta line I suspect.
Click to expand...

For the mishap aircrew, they were busy trying to swap controls while the other didn’t want to take them, after being out to lunch for the entire flight.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Pretty sure the FAA issues the type ratings.
Click to expand...
Well, ultimately you are correct.
That said, the type checkride is generally given by company personnel who do not (by company protocol) give the applicant a circling approach on the ride.
 
TCABM said:
For the mishap aircrew, they were busy trying to swap controls while the other didn’t want to take them, after being out to lunch for the entire flight.
Click to expand...
Yeah, a circling approach isn't the best time to play 'hot potato'.
 
I'd buy that the lear is a little bit closer to a fighter jet (century series mind you, not the FBW softie we fly today) than most other biz jets or transports, and I also buy that the right seater had way too little time in jets to probably be dabbling with one without a strong CA backing him up. Weak CA wanted to give him a try, but mistook a cry for help for rookie mistakes. In the end, id agree, both stopped actually flying the plane several miles from the airport/impact. This is a pretty good case study, that unfortunately cost a couple good lives to write.
 
cowman said:
I have a suspicion the Captain was compromised in some way. Tired, substance abuse, other health issues, IDK but I can't figure out how you let yourself screw up that badly. Nothing they were doing made any sense.
Click to expand...

Some people are just that bad at flying airplanes.
 
35 AoA said:
I'd buy that the lear is a little bit closer to a fighter jet (century series mind you, not the FBW softie we fly today)
Click to expand...

I commend you on that sense of introspection, the Hornet is indeed a sweet purry cat. Lord knows you can't get a Viper driver to admit the same. Auto-slats? LOL. Cute.
upload_2019-3-27_21-20-38.png

#equalizer #CatEmafia :D
 
dtuuri said:
I know I'm talking to the choir, but it really bothers me that theorists putt-putting around in theoretical IMC weather on sunny weekends for the fun of it want to constrain workaday pilots trying not to kill themselves at night during snow storms, fog or driving rain by saddling them with outrageous demands. No working IFR pilot is doing a real circling approach unless the weather demands it and then the only ones s/he need worry about running into is an idiot. No law can protect against them.
Click to expand...

Except that TEB uses this procedure all the time.

dtuuri said:
The less said about bad opinions, the better. Flying a circuitous route at low altitude in lousy weather just to please the Chief Counsel is dangerous. The "Circle to land maneuver" is an IFR procedure protected by TERPS designers and explained in FAA handbooks. The Chief Counsel ought to talk with those authors and others who've actually done the maneuver on a dark misty night before rendering an opinion. Or fix the damn law if they need to, which I don't think is needed btw.
Click to expand...

You really think they'd be doing this on a "dark, misty night?"

PaulS said:
How the heck would I find that out??
Click to expand...

If you know a pilot who works at one, you can see it on their airmen cert relating to the aircraft they are type rated on, or on their ATP

mtuomi said:
Pretty sure every airline in the US issues type ratings with "Circling Approach VMC only" limitation.
Click to expand...

I don't think every airline, but many do.

Tarheelpilot said:
I didn't notice if the NTSB video had been linked in the thread. For the folks that were discussing the circle procedure in question if you have not watched the video it might help understand just how bad the crew screwed up and how easy the procedure really is if flown as instructed.

Click to expand...

The procedure is essentially a precise sort of 45 and then left base entry. Basically a VFR entry to an airport under IFR instructions, right down to flying to a landmark.

benyflyguy said:
I read the transscript of the cockpit voice recorder then watched the NTSB vid. It is really shocking how little the respected the airspace complexity or the approach. Merely briefing the approach would have prevented them from getting that behind and they may have lived to see another day. While it is certainly Possible they did review it before they took off on the ground-it was not evident on how they handled themselves.
Click to expand...

"Hundreds of miles away." That was insane. Were they even "hundreds of miles away" at any point in that flight? I don't think so.

eman1200 said:
they were supposed to turn at met life stadium but they were looking for giants stadium?
Click to expand...

LOL
 
N1120A said:
Except that TEB uses this procedure all the time.



You really think they'd be doing this on a "dark, misty night?"
Click to expand...
It seems you've missed the context of my comments. There are CFIs out there, well, here too, who want to add to the complexity of IFR circling approach maneuvers, based on Chief Counsel opinions that traffic pattern rules under Part 91 apply, i.e., all left turns. Rubbish, I say.

As for TEB, what they do "all the time" is really a visual "circle to land on a different runway" instruction. The Pilot/Controller Glossary distinguishes (see my quotes up thread) between the two usages of the term "circle".
 
hindsight2020 said:
I commend you on that sense of introspection, the Hornet is indeed a sweet purry cat. Lord knows you can't get a Viper driver to admit the same. Auto-slats? LOL. Cute.
Click to expand...

Hah, I don't actually know which one (Hornet or Viper) I found easier to fly. They are/were both very much pilots airplanes that rarely put you in a place you didn't want to be unless you really tried hard. I guess id submit that going pure nose high in a viper without the airspeed to do it is about the closest thing a 4th gen fighter will get to a 3rd gen fighter response. Several jets in the dirt around the world due to that error. Hornet really won't do that to you......it'll flop around with 0 airspeed for a while, but will eventually right itself with enough altitude and provided you aren't like full cross controlling the jet with prospin afterburner. Viper will angrily depart, go into an "inverted deep stall", and you have a precious few thousand feet to work the OCF control inputs before it is time to give it back to the taxpayers. Its actually auto flaps in the Viper (which I found weird).....LEF and TEFs, just like we have in the FA-18. Only difference is that there is an actual flap switch in the -18, while in the viper the FCS flap gain logic was entirely based on the landing gear handle position (i.e. no flap switch).
 
dtuuri said:
It seems you've missed the context of my comments. There are CFIs out there, well, here too, who want to add to the complexity of IFR circling approach maneuvers, based on Chief Counsel opinions that traffic pattern rules under Part 91 apply, i.e., all left turns. Rubbish, I say.

As for TEB, what they do "all the time" is really a visual "circle to land on a different runway" instruction. The Pilot/Controller Glossary distinguishes (see my quotes up thread) between the two usages of the term "circle".
Click to expand...
You actually bring up a very good point. The whole "circle to" instruction there, in a pilot's mind, has a lot of connotations about protected airspace, configurations, etc., that the controller probably doesn't care about.

Maybe a better instruction at TEB would be "...cleared localizer 6 to TORBY, then enter a left base for runway 1." Now you're not hung up on a bunch of "how am I going to circle" questions.
 
Sluggo63 said:
You actually bring up a very good point. The whole "circle to" instruction there, in a pilot's mind, has a lot of connotations about protected airspace, configurations, etc., that the controller probably doesn't care about.

Maybe a better instruction at TEB would be "...cleared localizer 6 to TORBY, then enter a left base for runway 1." Now you're not hung up on a bunch of "how am I going to circle" questions.
Click to expand...
Or you could just not have the ole head up butt and be a remotely experienced pilot. That would help as well.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Or you could just not have the ole head up butt and be a remotely experienced pilot. That would help as well.
Click to expand...
I won't defend the two guys in the cockpit; they made their own fate. But if the controller's options are to give an instruction that requires local knowledge to understand or to give an equally succinct instruction that does not rely on local knowledge, my preference is the latter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top