Vent approach post

[Mahneuvers]

So today I'm flying a practice approach. As I'm headed to the IAF, my SP and I watched another plane apparently headed for the same fix. I made a call earlier announcing my intentions as I thought we might be trying to do the same thing. Despite this and how I would have arrived first, this douche conoe (credit @schmookeeg for the expression) continues on his course. Fine. I announce an extended 360 to allow him to go 1st. He thanks me. I start the approach. DC announces flying the missed procedure, which means he'll be flying back the approach course. As we're headed straight for each other, within 500 feet, I break off my approach. I've never experienced such a clueless pilot. I made a snark remark on frequency as I broke off my approach.

 

[schmookeeg]

Some pilots are just midair magnets.

 

[TCABM]

VFR is a see and avoid environment, even when practicing IFR. About a month ago, had a similar interaction, with a drop zone going active about 10 minutes early adding to the fun.

With the SP (also CFII), I simply briefed if we hear jumpers away or if the traffic continued on a crossing course in front of us we’d abort the approach to the south. Just past the IAF, we hit the exacta, despite making the calls, so we bailed to the south and lived to do it again another day.

 

[flyingron]

Not as bad as the douche canoe loitering upon the approach course one day as I was flying is solid IMC. Fortunately, ZTL called him out to me and I did another loop around the hold-in-loo until he moved off. Later I found out it was a local instructor who allowed a hooded student to drift up into the clouds doing a manouver. Both the student and I were ****ed when we realized who it was.

 

[Clip4]

So today I'm flying a practice approach. As I'm headed to the IAF, my SP and I watched another plane apparently headed for the same fix. I made a call earlier announcing my intentions as I thought we might be trying to do the same thing. Despite this and how I would have arrived first, this douche conoe (credit @schmookeeg for the expression) continues on his course. Fine. I announce an extended 360 to allow him to go 1st. He thanks me. I start the approach. DC announces flying the missed procedure, which means he'll be flying back the approach course. As we're headed straight for each other, within 500 feet, I break off my approach. I've never experienced such a clueless pilot. I made a snark remark on frequency as I broke off my approach.

If you are under the hood, how are you watching for a plane headed to the same fix?

The safety pilot should be looking outside for aircraft and not trying to determine what going on by looking at displays in the aircraft. Not every plane out there has a transponder and very few of the gliders do.

Neither aircraft seems to have been using ATC, which is team rookie for practicing approaches.

 

[Salty]

If you are under the hood, how are you watching for a plane headed to the same fix?

The safety pilot should be looking outside for aircraft and not trying to determine what going on by looking at displays in the aircraft. Not every plane out there has a transponder and very few of the gliders do.

Neither aircraft seems to have been using ATC, which is team rookie for practicing approaches.

You are my sunshine.

 

[Mahneuvers]

...If you are under the hood, how are you watching for a plane headed to the same fix?....

I had the the approach plate up on my tablet with the traffic overlay on. When I'm a SP, I do the same, with primary focus being outside. I didn't realize that's controversial.

 

[Mahneuvers]

...Neither aircraft seems to have been using ATC, which is team rookie for practicing approaches...

I usually don't engage ATC when cranking out four quick approaches at airports around 25 miles apart. When I have, they call out the traffic they see, remind me he's not talking to any of them, then approves advisory frequency. I admit I'm a rookie compared to most here but I didn't think practicing approaches w/o talking to ATC supported such.

 

[Gary Ward]

We always talk to approach while practicing. The radio work is just as important to me as flying the plane. Plus it seems a lot safer?

 

[Clip4]

I usually don't engage ATC when cranking out four quick approaches at airports around 25 miles apart. When I have, they call out the traffic they see, remind me he's not talking to any of them, then approves advisory frequency. I admit I'm a rookie compared to most here but I didn't think practicing approaches w/o talking to ATC supported such.

Then don’t complain when 2 or more aircraft are approaching the IAF and things don’t work out the way you like. It takes about 2 minutes for a pilot conducting practice approaches to get a code and tell ATC what they want.

 

[eman1200]

Then don’t complain when 2 or more aircraft are approaching the IAF and things don’t work out the way you like. It takes about 2 minutes for a pilot conducting practice approaches to get a code and tell ATC what they want.

when you're not on an instrument flight plan, do you always get flight following?

 

[Clip4]

when you're not on an instrument flight plan, do you always get flight following?

When I am involved with practice instrument approaches, I always get VFR radar service. ATC knows the IFR arrivals and the participating VFR aircraft in the area and their intentions.

 

[Salty]

When I am involved with practice instrument approaches, I always get VFR radar service. ATC knows the IFR arrivals and the participating VFR aircraft in the area and their intentions.

LOL, yeah, every region is exactly like yours.

 

[eman1200]

When I am involved with practice instrument approaches, I always get VFR radar service. ATC knows the IFR arrivals and the participating VFR aircraft in the area and their intentions.

That wasn’t my question

 

[brcase]

Fair chance if I had been the other guy and saw you were going get there first is I would have just slowed up and let you go. But then you decided to do a 360 and put me 1st.
So I shoot my approach and want to practice the missed approach.

What approach is this that sends the missed approach aircraft right back up the approach coarse? Even if it does, it would seem odd that he would still be below you on the glideslope (or descent profile) after a climbing 180 degree turn and intercepting of the approach coarse.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[eman1200]

Fair chance if I had been the other guy and saw you were going get there first is I would have just slowed up and let you go. But then you decided to do a 360 and put me 1st.
So I shoot my approach and want to practice the missed approach.

What approach is this that sends the missed approach aircraft right back up the approach coarse? Even if it does, it would seem odd that he would still be below you on the glideslope (or descent profile) after a climbing 180 degree turn and intercepting of the approach coarse.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

I was kind of wondering how he had time to do the full approach and get all the way back before mahn even got to the iaf, but then I remembered he flies a 172 hiyoooooo

 

[Clip4]

LOL, yeah, every region is exactly like yours.

Or you’re in Florida. No traffic there.

 

[Clip4]

That wasn’t my question

Of course not. Sometimes I am in the pattern with a student. But I do get flight following in the practice area quite often. Especially when visibility is a factor.

 

[eman1200]

Of course not. Sometimes I am in the pattern with a student.

Ok I’ll go back to ignoring you now.

 

[eman1200]

FYI this was on my approach last night

 

[schmookeeg]

I always wondered who used the little fighter jet icon

Also seems I am not the only garmin pilot user in the world, as previously suspected.

 

[Palmpilot]

I always contact ATC when I want a practice approach because

1) I don't want to interfere with traffic that might have been cleared for the approach, and

2) for my own safety.

 

[PaulS]

Good thread, lol. Op, I think you got your pound of flesh with the snark remark.

 

[Mahneuvers]

Good thread, lol. Op, I think you got your pound of flesh with the snark remark.

I fully agree w/ the assertion talking to ATC is part of practice so, for that reason alone, is a good idea. However, until everyone flying practice approaches in an area is talking to ATC, then it would have made no difference. I don't have a ton of experience but every time I've been talking to ATC in this area, ATC has told me they are not talking to called out traffic. I stand by my snark remark The events at
the IAF is akin to being cutoff in the pattern. And I personally would not have flown the missed if I knew someone else was trying to fly the approach -- in particular when that pilot delayed his approach so I could fly mine.

 

[MauleSkinner]

And I personally would not have flown the missed if I knew someone else was trying to fly the approach -- in particular when that pilot delayed his approach so I could fly mine.

Why would you assume someone would yield right of way on one part of an approach and not the rest?

 

[midlifeflyer]

We always talk to approach while practicing. The radio work is just as important to me as flying the plane. Plus it seems a lot safer?

Using ATC or not when flying practice approaches under VFR seems to be a geographic thing. I've been in areas where we used it all the time and areas where it is rare. Having experienced both, personally, the pluses and minuses depend on the goal of the flight and where it is taking place.

 

[Mahneuvers]

Why would you assume someone would yield right of way on one part of an approach and not the rest?

Right. I figured there might be some approach etiquette here about which I am unaware. To me, when practicing, flying the missed is an optional add-on to practicing the approach itself. Maybe others view the missed procedure as integral. Maybe in another forum somewhere there's a pilot berating me for starting the approach when he had not yet finished the missed

 

[MauleSkinner]

Right. I figured there might be some approach etiquette here about which I am unaware. To me, when practicing, flying the missed is an optional add-on to practicing the approach itself. Maybe others view the missed procedure as integral. Maybe in another forum somewhere there's a pilot berating me for starting the approach when he had not yet finished the missed

My experience is that pilots need more practice on missed approaches than they need on the approaches themselves, so unless we’re landing out of the approach, we’re going to fly the missed.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Then don’t complain when 2 or more aircraft are approaching the IAF and things don’t work out the way you like. It takes about 2 minutes for a pilot conducting practice approaches to get a code and tell ATC what they want.

I agree with you about not complaining. After all, the airplane @Mahneuvers is complaining about may have been making the opposite complaint, maybe thinking, "we're trying to practice approaches and learn things, and this guy just ticking of the currency checkbox is trying to rush us!"

And it may not help anyway. Even if both airplanes are talking to ATC (and apparently the airplane ahead wasn't either), I really don't see ATC instructing VFR Airplane #1 not to practice the missed because VFR Airplane 2 someone else is waiting (I am assuming a nontowered airport).

This situation takes place at my home base regularly. We remain on CTAF, talk to each other, and work things out. That obviously didn't happen in this case, but that's the way it goes.

 

[PaulS]

My experience is that pilots need more practice on missed approaches than they need on the approaches themselves, so unless we’re landing out of the approach, we’re going to fly the missed.

That and go arounds. Both should be like second nature, especially the first 30 seconds.

 

[iamtheari]

when you're not on an instrument flight plan, do you always get flight following?

I live in such a remote area that I don't even always get flight following when I am on an instrument flight plan. Utilizing optional ATC services really does depend on where you're flying.

I never not talk to ATC for practice approaches in VMC at my home airport. You can't even reach ATC at the lowest altitude on any segment of any approach, much less at the MDA or DA, and both of our approaches straddle ZLC and ZMP airspace between the initial fix and the missed approach fix. So you'd constantly be losing radio contact just when you begin the approach and regaining it in a different Center's airspace when you climb above the missed approach altitude. It's just a hassle for everyone involved. But if I'm practicing approaches in airspace with a TRACON, I'll talk to them.

 

[eman1200]

I live in such a remote area that I don't even always get flight following when I am on an instrument flight plan. Utilizing optional ATC services really does depend on where you're flying.

I never not talk to ATC for practice approaches in VMC at my home airport. You can't even reach ATC at the lowest altitude on any segment of any approach, much less at the MDA or DA, and both of our approaches straddle ZLC and ZMP airspace between the initial fix and the missed approach fix. So you'd constantly be losing radio contact just when you begin the approach and regaining it in a different Center's airspace when you climb above the missed approach altitude. It's just a hassle for everyone involved. But if I'm practicing approaches in airspace with a TRACON, I'll talk to them.

I am not advocating one way over another. I'm saying there's more than one way to do things. I've been banging out approaches for a long time without talking to atc with zero issues. I've also done plenty of practice approaches while talking to ATC with zero issues. do it or don't do it, but don't claim your way is the only way everyone should be doing it.

 

[PaulS]

Personally I like talking to ATC on practice approaches, makes it more interesting, especially when they start jerking you around for other traffic. Hones the avionics skills and exposes weak areas.

 

[midlifeflyer]

My experience is that pilots need more practice on missed approaches than they need on the approaches themselves, so unless we’re landing out of the approach, we’re going to fly the missed.

It's a problem because it's rare in real life. For many, the only missed pilots do is when practicing. The interesting is, it seems to be worse with automation. Leaving aside the installations where the autopilot remains coupled for the missed, there seems to be a rush to get the AP back on rather than fly the procedure and leave the button pushing for once stabilized.

 

[MauleSkinner]

It's a problem because it's rare in real life. For many, the only missed The interesting is, it seems to be worse with automation. Leaving aside the installations where the autopilot remains coupled for the missed, there seems to be a rush to get the AP back on rather than fly the procedure and leave the button pushing for once stabilized.

In 13,000 hours of flying, I’ve done exactly 7 missed approaches in real life. I remember every one. They were all traumatic experiences.

Coincidentally I’ve had 7 engine failures or shutdowns. With one exception, the missed approaches were more traumatic.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I’ve done exactly 7 missed approaches in real life.

Many less hours than you. I've done two real ones and (ironically) they were both during my instrument training. One was off an NDB approach during the dual cross country. The other was less than four weeks later, off an ILS. My CFI was rock solid and I was too dumb and green to be traumatized (except by having to do an NDB approach ).

 

[TCABM]

Right. I figured there might be some approach etiquette here about which I am unaware. To me, when practicing, flying the missed is an optional add-on to practicing the approach itself. …

The missed approach is part of the plate, right? That makes it part of the procedure. IAPs usually result in one of two outcomes; landing or missed. Can’t read anybody’s minds, so I expect worst case scenario of a missed as published on every practice approach, because that’s how a lot of folks tick the “H” box for currency since I know more than a few who VTF for “efficiency”.

 

[Mahneuvers]

The missed approach is part of the plate, right? That makes it part of the procedure. IAPs usually result in one of two outcomes; landing or missed. Can’t read anybody’s minds, so I expect worst case scenario of a missed as published on every practice approach, because that’s how a lot of folks tick the “H” box for currency since I know more than a few who VTF for “efficiency”.

Yep. Good lesson learned for me. I will not be so quick to be the nice guy and voluntarily give up my spot in line next time By my deferring to him at the IAF, I essentially sentenced myself to 20 minutes of loitering. Actually, being the nice guy has nothing to do with it. This other pilot, after I announced my intentions, seemed determined to start the approach anyway. Deferring was the safe thing to do.

 

[Pinecone]

I always wondered who used the little fighter jet icon

The military uses Fore Flight. So for some of them, the fighter icon is very appropriate.

 

[Pinecone]

Yep. Good lesson learned for me. I will not be so quick to be the nice guy and voluntarily give up my spot in line next time By my deferring to him at the IAF, I essentially sentenced myself to 20 minutes of loitering. Actually, being the nice guy has nothing to do with it. This other pilot, after I announced my intentions, seemed determined to start the approach anyway. Deferring was the safe thing to do.

Hmm, once he goes missed, he no longer has right of way for landing. You are on the approach, therefore do have right of way.

Guy in the Pink Shirt teaches NEVER do a practice instrument approach without talking to the controlling agency.