If you want a wake up call. ..ask the tower what he expects from you on a go around on 32.
Radar contact lost with GA airplane approaching RDU
- Thread starter MarcoDA40
- Start date
Morgan3820
En-Route
Never asked that question of the tower but I am guessing that you have. Straight ahead has you crossing both runways and climbing over the terminals. What does the tower expect on a go around? I don't see anything in remarks.
They dont expect you to go around.. .you cross the two runways if you do...as you point out...
Incredibly awkward place to be.
The took MY number to talk to me about it...
I did a thread about it 5 or 6 years ago...cant remember whether it was here or on APPA.
Incredibly awkward place to be.
The took MY number to talk to me about it...
I did a thread about it 5 or 6 years ago...cant remember whether it was here or on APPA.
Grum.Man
En-Route
Man that was painful to listen to. I hope I can recognize if I’m getting that far behind the airplane and make the right calls. Practice practice practice!
I have a couple of questions about this flight.
Why did he make an unplanned stop just after reaching cruise altitude? Something important malfunctioned? Did it get fixed, or did he proceed with a piece of equipment INOP?
In the vicinity of RDU, he reported autopilot troubles, but from Flight Aware, the track enroute was very straight, implying that he flew autopilot until near the airport.
The basic approach to 32 is a VOR approach, with the station on the field, so the navigation inbound should have been straightforward and similar to following a Victor airway as far as needle sense and deflection. Unless the autopilot always flew the plane, and VOR coupling was the failure.
He definitely should have been flying the needle and altitude, not looking out the window for a runway. That is what your pax is for.
With such a relatively small plane, even if you arrive 1,000 feet above the runway before seeing it, you can circle in sight as you descend, and land on a long one. At that point in the approach, the tower was giving him plenty of attention, and would have waved off other arrivals to get him safely down.
A very unfortunate combination of events, with a sad end.
Why did he make an unplanned stop just after reaching cruise altitude? Something important malfunctioned? Did it get fixed, or did he proceed with a piece of equipment INOP?
In the vicinity of RDU, he reported autopilot troubles, but from Flight Aware, the track enroute was very straight, implying that he flew autopilot until near the airport.
The basic approach to 32 is a VOR approach, with the station on the field, so the navigation inbound should have been straightforward and similar to following a Victor airway as far as needle sense and deflection. Unless the autopilot always flew the plane, and VOR coupling was the failure.
He definitely should have been flying the needle and altitude, not looking out the window for a runway. That is what your pax is for.
With such a relatively small plane, even if you arrive 1,000 feet above the runway before seeing it, you can circle in sight as you descend, and land on a long one. At that point in the approach, the tower was giving him plenty of attention, and would have waved off other arrivals to get him safely down.
A very unfortunate combination of events, with a sad end.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,251
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
like you said, he flew in a straight line so either he was a skilled manual pilot.. or the autopilot was in fact working well, but maybe he was not as proficient on it.. or maybe certain feature didn't work. I've heard plenty of people say a club airplane's "nav hold doesn't work" simply because either the HSI wasn't aligned, or because they didn't switch the CDI from Nav 1 / 2 or GPS 1 / 2.. so they hit nav hold and the plane turns 45* right even thought the magenta line is straight ahead
For sure.. but it's night.. you're anxious.. you know you're low.. you want to see the airport and get home.. you stop paying attention to altitude.. and pow! It really only takes 3-7 seconds of inattention to end up in a serious mess
Looking at the link to the specs of the plane, and picture of the panel, could he have become confused, and failed to get the VOR selected and routed to the nav display? Too much modern technology to deal with in a stressful environment.
If you know the buttons, those 530's are magic, but if not, a tangled morass. I got lost in ours repeatedly, and in bumpy air, and accidental hit just a bit from where you meant to touch, and who knows what will be on the display.
I preferred to use the old VOR and comm radio with flip flop frequency selection, driving the conventional display. Anchor my hand with the knob while selecting a frequency.
I wonder what radios his previous airplane had?
edit I am going to predict that the Doctor was not instrument current
If you know the buttons, those 530's are magic, but if not, a tangled morass. I got lost in ours repeatedly, and in bumpy air, and accidental hit just a bit from where you meant to touch, and who knows what will be on the display.
I preferred to use the old VOR and comm radio with flip flop frequency selection, driving the conventional display. Anchor my hand with the knob while selecting a frequency.
I wonder what radios his previous airplane had?
edit I am going to predict that the Doctor was not instrument current
Last edited:
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,251
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
This is actually one of the reasons I really don't like the gtn650.. in the mildest bumps it's very annoying to use that touch screen
I love the architecture on the g1000 perspective, you can rest your hand on the main control knobs and it's basically a big beautiful 430..
Morgan3820
En-Route
I wonder what they would say if you requested RWY 14, guessing 'Negative'.
I have landed at KRDU dozens of times over many years, and the airport has evolved a lot. All my landings were on 23 or 5, until the last time.
I was vectored to 32, did a go around, and they brought me back to 23.
They now like to send the little guys to 32 to make their lives easy with the heavy birds, and sometimes they fail to deal properly with the little guys. The Doctor needed the big runway, and they tried to fit him in the little one.
Daylight conditions, but they gave me cleared to land so high and close that with 40 degrees of flaps, the wheels were still in the air past the midpoint of the runway. The vectoring altitudes were assigned, not pilot selected. And, Yes, the missed went across both main runways.
Tough break if you flunk vectoring to final to 32. The turboprop regional with cleared to take off had his clearance canceled, and stood on his brakes to avoid going under me, as I crossed at about 50 feet.
My wife had suggested refusing the approach, but I thought that I could get down. I should have listened to my wife, she had about 800 hours right seat with me, and has good judgement on what the plane will do.
I was vectored to 32, did a go around, and they brought me back to 23.
They now like to send the little guys to 32 to make their lives easy with the heavy birds, and sometimes they fail to deal properly with the little guys. The Doctor needed the big runway, and they tried to fit him in the little one.
Daylight conditions, but they gave me cleared to land so high and close that with 40 degrees of flaps, the wheels were still in the air past the midpoint of the runway. The vectoring altitudes were assigned, not pilot selected. And, Yes, the missed went across both main runways.
Tough break if you flunk vectoring to final to 32. The turboprop regional with cleared to take off had his clearance canceled, and stood on his brakes to avoid going under me, as I crossed at about 50 feet.
My wife had suggested refusing the approach, but I thought that I could get down. I should have listened to my wife, she had about 800 hours right seat with me, and has good judgement on what the plane will do.
jpskies
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2015
- Messages
- 102
- Display Name
Display name:
jpskies
RDU RWY32 approach has LNAV+VNAV, which will enable vertical guidance on a WAAS GPS, no step down is needed. However, the last 1.3 NM will be LNAV only. I circled the "LNAV/VNAV DA", DA - decision height, which indicates a precision approach.
The LPV has much better precision than LNAV+VNAV. See article at BoldMethod: what is the difference between lpv and lnav-vnav approach.
I think he planned on a daytime arrival. Reminds me of something I was taught: if the situation changes, your risk assessment needs to change as well. Basically if you go from planning a daytime arrival to then having to arrive at night, you need to start from scratch and do your planning anew.
Every approach at night with marginal weather should be backed up with a instrument approach if it’s available unless you are very familiar with the area. There is a RNAV approach to 32 that would have kept him safe. There are obstacles on that side of the airport as high as 995 feet. As a option as the PIC he could have requested a ILS to 23. Might have needed to wait a bit but if unfamiliar a better option.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,517
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Personally I backup every landing at night if I’m able. The weather doesn’t have to be marginal. I need all the help I can get
MarcoDA40
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 143
- Display Name
Display name:
Marco
As a VFR pilot, (halfway through instrument training) let’s say I’m flying at night.. could I request a “practice X approach to a full stop”? (VFR)
The issue with that is becoming too dependent on the advisory glide path, because it’s just that - advisory only. Becoming too reliant on it can send you into a CFIT situation on some approaches. As with any approach, one should never exceed the MDA without having visual cues outside.
If I could like this post 100 times I would.
Of course.
TopDollar
Filing Flight Plan
I went to RDU for my night xc during PPL training. Landing on 32 was great because of how close it is to the FBO and you avoid the airline traffic. I wouldn't necessairly call it a dangerous runway, but you certainly get the black hole effect.
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,889
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
Personally I back up EVERY approach, night or day.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,517
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Lol. I didn’t want to sound like a worry wart but yeah... me too.
lots of benefits, makes it real hard to land at the wrong airport too.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,517
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Sure. As long as you don’t accept an IFR clearance. You can also brief and setup the approach without getting anyone’s permission. Just comply with the controllers instructions and have the approach there to back you up.
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Messages
- 4,414
- Display Name
Display name:
Kayoh@190
Since I'm required to do it at work, it's pretty easy to carry that philosophy over to the GA stuff. I find that it helps my feeble brain when I operate in a similar manner between the two different types of flying.
Chip Sylverne
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2006
- Messages
- 6,042
- Display Name
Display name:
Quit with the negative waves, man.
Since when is the LPV GS advisory only for WAAS equipped aircraft? As far as I can see in the FAA LPV advisory circular LPV will bring you right down to the ILS dh in most cases where the DH is 250' agl or more. Maybe I missed something?
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/ND/8260_50.pdf
I’m sorry, I should’ve been more specific. I was referring to LNAV+V not LPV.
Garmin provides three types of glidepaths as appropriate...one for LPV minimums, one for VNAV minimums, and one that's advisory only. In the Garmin system, they're all dependent on WAAS. Feel free to use that glidepath at the level anunciated or any lesser level.
Specifically regarding the advisory VNAV, stabilized approaches are great, but there may be reasons that a dive-and-drive is preferred. The altimeter, however, is controlling, and in no case can you allow an advisory (or any) glidepath to take you below the designated altitude for the approach segment. There are some approaches that by following the advisory glide slope, can create a CFIT situation, so just a note to be very cautious when using it.
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,889
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
Quoting my own post here, but...
Not only do I back it up, I fly it. Yes I’ll accept a visual approach, but I’ll just intercept the published final approach, and will not duck below.
I believe that is in our company manual actually.
Polarisguy
Pre-takeoff checklist
no sign of fire or damage caused by fire. Maybe a shortage of fuel? He had taken a diversion earlier
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Since we're speculating I'll throw out what I think is the most likely scenario.
Guy is on the approach looking for the field, he pops out of the clouds and he mentally switches to "visual" mode and is trying to find the field to land. He gets tunnel visioned on locating the field and loses track of altitude, in the dark the treetops aren't visible and he unwittingly descends into one. Wouldn't be the first time for something like that to happen, pretty easy trap for anyone to fall into if you're not staying on top of everything.
Guy is on the approach looking for the field, he pops out of the clouds and he mentally switches to "visual" mode and is trying to find the field to land. He gets tunnel visioned on locating the field and loses track of altitude, in the dark the treetops aren't visible and he unwittingly descends into one. Wouldn't be the first time for something like that to happen, pretty easy trap for anyone to fall into if you're not staying on top of everything.
That's what I meant earlier. I agree.
That'd be a real kick in the pants, wouldn't it? Guy goes through all that, manages to load the approach, gets himself lined up on final, breaks out into visual conditions, gets eyes on the runway and the fan stops turning...
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,517
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
that was my first thought as well. It’s a dark hole on the approach end of that runway.
Lack of a fire is interesting.
He spent half an hour wandering around the countryside after arriving near the airport. If he did not add fuel at his intermediate , unscheduled stop, and originally departed with an hour of reserves, those two unplanned events may have totaled up to all his reserve fuel.
As previously pointed out by others, the original plan called for a daylight arrival.
Had the airport fitted him into the flow for the long runway, the heavy traffic would have been delayed a small amount, but since they elected to send him to the second class runway, they had to close the whole airport for a short time. They lost that gamble. The Doctor should have insisted on the main runway, and accepted minor vectoring to fit the stream of traffic.
I have accepted a "Slow 360, half standard rate, turn left" to let a heavy pass me and rejoin the ILS far enough behind him that wake turbulence would have sunk safely from the path. I was just outside the OM when this request was made.
He spent half an hour wandering around the countryside after arriving near the airport. If he did not add fuel at his intermediate , unscheduled stop, and originally departed with an hour of reserves, those two unplanned events may have totaled up to all his reserve fuel.
As previously pointed out by others, the original plan called for a daylight arrival.
Had the airport fitted him into the flow for the long runway, the heavy traffic would have been delayed a small amount, but since they elected to send him to the second class runway, they had to close the whole airport for a short time. They lost that gamble. The Doctor should have insisted on the main runway, and accepted minor vectoring to fit the stream of traffic.
I have accepted a "Slow 360, half standard rate, turn left" to let a heavy pass me and rejoin the ILS far enough behind him that wake turbulence would have sunk safely from the path. I was just outside the OM when this request was made.
Bill Watson
En-Route
Bill Watson
En-Route
And I’ve been slam dunked into RDU’s long runways to fit into the flow.
Given the conditions, I don’t view 32 as a 2nd class runway. LNAV +V with A 1600’(?) ceiling should be pretty comfortable.
The change from 5 to 32 may well have caught the pilot a bit off guard. Personally I would have been setup for 5 as soon as I heard the ATIS even if 32 was mentioned. That kind of change in a dark cockpit for someone who may only be flying daylight legs, could be a challenge. The combination of the dark hole, a slight slope and the visual sense of the run way terminating in T with the main runway and the terminal buildings at the end could cause excessive focus on not landing long.
Perhaps a chain of reasonable but unfortunate events,
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
It is not a "second class" runway. From his direction both the approach and landing were shorter and more direct than being fit into the flow of arriving jet traffic.
When I first heard about this, my initial thought was, "oh no! RDU's tendency to tell you to expect one approach and then switch you caught up with someone." But listening to the modified recording, I didn't see that. I won't speculate in the other direction either, but, depending on his equipment, unless one is using paper charts, the change should have been a non-event. I do agree, if he was concerned, he should have insisted on the runway he set up for.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
There might be some issues with the Runway length and steepness of the Glideslope required that could make it not meet requirements for a precision approach. Paging @aterpster
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Another reason to do it is sometimes Approach will give you direct to a fix on final with the Visual Approach Clearance. They want to control the point at which you make the turn to straight in for spacing. It’s fairly common I believe at the big iron type airports.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Yes. None of practice Approach procedures have anything to do with day or night