Zero-Zero Below and Out of Options - IFR Past Minimums

wayneda40

wayneda40

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jul 31, 2017
Messages
618
Display Name
Display name:
waynemcc
The darn marine layer has come ashore over the entire region… and we’re short on fuel. What’s the plan, captain?! We shoot an ILS and an RNAV approach in the sim to practice this unlikely (and inexcusable) situation. In addition to good decision making to avoid this predicament, what are your thoughts on an emergency approach into a ground-hugging cloud layer? Thanks for flying with us. Wayne, GeezerGeek Pilot
 
Once you are in the air, you have to come down. At this point it is an emergency, and you do what you have to do to try to survive.

FAR 91.3 In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

That being said, a series of decisions was made that put you in such situation. For the sake of personal longevity, Id my best to avoid being in such a situation.
 
NoHeat said:
I’m one who prefers reading something short vs watching a 5 min video. So I swiped through the video and read the words printed within it.

I’m just curious why you would choose RNAV LPV over ILS.
Click to expand...

I'd go LPV as well. Standard ILS signals can get a little squirrelly in close where as the GPS signals seem to be more stable. Cat III ILS systems used by airliners for zero/zero approaches have a lot more protections on the ground and tighter tolerances.
 
midwestpa24 said:
Once you are in the air, you have to come down. At this point it is an emergency, and you do what you have to do to try to survive.

FAR 91.3 In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

That being said, a series of decisions was made that put you in such situation. For the sake of personal longevity, Id my best to avoid being in such a situation.
Click to expand...
Agreed on all counts! Thanks for watching.
Wayne
 
NoHeat said:
I’m one who prefers reading something short vs watching a 5 min video. So I swiped through the video and read the words printed within it.

I’m just curious why you would choose RNAV LPV over ILS.
Click to expand...
The logic for preferring the LPV has been discussed on several scenarios by the instructor group on PilotWorkshops.com IFR Mastery... and I agree:
  • an ILS is subject to analog noise from the radio signal
  • an ILS is subject to ground-based interference (an airplane or truck near the transmitter)
  • generally the RNAV LPV approaches are rock solid laterally and vertically
  • often the ILS and LPV minimums are the same; in this case at KSBA the LPV minimums are higher; but for the hypothetical scenario in the video, we're blowing through the minimums anyway
Thanks for reading thru (that works just fine),
Wayne
 
I’m sorry to the person that ignored alternate requirements and illegally put themselves in this pickle.

how about a different approach. Follow the FARs and reduce the likelihood of getting yourself in this mess to begin with.
 
Rgbeard said:
I’m sorry to the person that ignored alternate requirements and illegally put themselves in this pickle.

how about a different approach. Follow the FARs and reduce the likelihood of getting yourself in this mess to begin with.
Click to expand...
Agreed. "We shoot an ILS and an RNAV approach IN THE SIM to practice this unlikely (and INEXCUSABLE) situation."
 
Rgbeard said:
I’m sorry to the person that ignored alternate requirements and illegally put themselves in this pickle.

how about a different approach. Follow the FARs and reduce the likelihood of getting yourself in this mess to begin with.
Click to expand...

While you are not wrong, weather sometimes does surprising things. I once went on a trip, filed IFR, but forecast was severe clear VFR. When I arrived at my destination I ended up shooting an approach to minimums. I fortunately made it in, and had plenty of fuel to find an alternate even though wasn't required by regulations due to existing and forecasted weather. Just saying it happens.
 
My experimental EFIS will generate a 3 degree glideslope for any runway in the database, to which I can couple the autopilot. I routinely practice coupled approaches to 50 feet (while VFR) with a disconnect and a landing. Just, because.
 
Just the other day I let the AP fly the LPV to about 20' AGL in calm VFR. The mains would have straddled the centerline. At the very least, you're going to be travelling mostly horizontally into an area without hard objects to impact. For a survival situation, I like those odds better than any other alternative.
 
KeepWatch said:
Just the other day I let the AP fly the LPV to about 20' AGL in calm VFR. The mains would have straddled the centerline. At the very least, you're going to be travelling mostly horizontally into an area without hard objects to impact. For a survival situation, I like those odds better than any other alternative.
Click to expand...
That's something I'd suggest we all try. In real life I haven't kept the AP on thru touchdown, but in the sim if I slowly bring the power back, the sim raises the nose much like in round out, slows down and touches down reasonably well (certainly survivable for the occupants, and maybe even for the aircraft). Thanks. Wayne
 
wayneda40 said:
That's something I'd suggest we all try. In real life I haven't kept the AP on thru touchdown, but in the sim if I slowly bring the power back, the sim raises the nose much like in round out, slows down and touches down reasonably well (certainly survivable for the occupants, and maybe even for the aircraft). Thanks. Wayne
Click to expand...

Certainly better than the alternative.
 
How about this video? Not in an emergency for this ATR and I could see nothing when the minimums is called until almost 50 feet AGL.
Moreover, the autopilot was disconnected right after minimum is called.
Can someone explain what the hack is this technique? It seems very dangerous, like it's title said.

 
This is actually an excellent thing to practice in the sim

NoHeat said:
I’m one who prefers reading something short vs watching a 5 min video. So I swiped through the video and read the words printed within it.

I’m just curious why you would choose RNAV LPV over ILS.
Click to expand...

Sensitivity, workload and modern autopilot prefer GPS

KeepWatch said:
Just the other day I let the AP fly the LPV to about 20' AGL in calm VFR. The mains would have straddled the centerline. At the very least, you're going to be travelling mostly horizontally into an area without hard objects to impact. For a survival situation, I like those odds better than any other alternative.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly why Garmin has their Autoland systems pick an LPV approach.
 
Being an “old timer” I wouldn’t hesitate to fly a ILS “zero-zero”, done it several times raw data, no auto pilot, but to a carrier, no pesky flaring.

That being said, declaring an emergency to keep people away from the end of the runway to prevent signal distortion blah blah blah, and being in a GA aircraft, a lot slower and smaller, while nerve wracking, not insurmountable. At all.

Being open minded, watching GPS at the same time would be a GREAT idea.

simply saying “don’t get in that situation” isn’t very helpful. Practicing this is actually fun.

on my instrument check in A-4’s my check pilot actually talked me down to a touch and go UNDER THE BAG. Was confidence enhancing. This is not as dicey as it sounds in a jet where you don’t flare by the way...
 
Tools said:
Being an “old timer” I wouldn’t hesitate to fly a ILS “zero-zero”, done it several times raw data, no auto pilot, but to a carrier, no pesky flaring.

That being said, declaring an emergency to keep people away from the end of the runway to prevent signal distortion blah blah blah, and being in a GA aircraft, a lot slower and smaller, while nerve wracking, not insurmountable. At all.

Being open minded, watching GPS at the same time would be a GREAT idea.

simply saying “don’t get in that situation” isn’t very helpful. Practicing this is actually fun.

on my instrument check in A-4’s my check pilot actually talked me down to a touch and go UNDER THE BAG. Was confidence enhancing. This is not as dicey as it sounds in a jet where you don’t flare by the way...
Click to expand...
Agreed... not insurmountable... and definitely fun to practice (on the sim and/or IRL in VMC). An RNAV LPV would be preferred over an ILS (for reasons stated elsewhere in this thread). Odds are further improved with a good digital autopilot and Synthetic Vision (for visual reassurance). Thanks for the carrier landing info.
Wayne
 
It may not make ATC happy, but one could consider one other possibility in this situation. If one is within range, go to the big airport. Class B or maybe C. The one with the 10,000’ long 150’ wide runway and a melt your eyeballs HIRL lighting system. Your odds of a safe landing would be even better.
 
Lance F said:
It may not make ATC happy, but one could consider one other possibility in this situation. If one is within range, go to the big airport. Class B or maybe C. The one with the 10,000’ long 150’ wide runway and a melt your eyeballs HIRL lighting system. Your odds of a safe landing would be even better.
Click to expand...
If it’s below minimums there, ATC probably would welcome the business. :cool:
 
Daleandee said:
secondary minimums
Click to expand...

This one was a term I learned about juuuuuust after IR checkride. Wish I would have know it sooner. I could have really impressed the DPE while we were flying a circling approach, blasting through MDA and calling out, "MDA too close, switching to secondary minimums" (I would have said this in my best Top Gun/Iceman voice). Imagine how impressed the examiner would have been as I executed a 50* banking turn through a questionable hole in the ceiling to execute a terrifyingly steep approach to land.... I mean, he probably would have just skipped passing me for IR and just given me an ATP on the spot.
 
Lance F said:
It may not make ATC happy, but one could consider one other possibility in this situation. If one is within range, go to the big airport. Class B or maybe C. The one with the 10,000’ long 150’ wide runway and a melt your eyeballs HIRL lighting system. Your odds of a safe landing would be even better.
Click to expand...

My IFR alternate when headed home is ALWAYS (as long as it forecasts 600/2) the big Class B airport with the 9400' long, 200' wide runway with every eyeball melting lighting system that exists. If I have to go missed and I'm on alternate fuel, I'm on a heading for a nice vector to the opposite direction ILS/LPV there. That makes me happy.
 
N1120A said:
My IFR alternate when headed home is ALWAYS (as long as it forecasts 600/2) the big Class B airport with the 9400' long, 200' wide runway with every eyeball melting lighting system that exists. If I have to go missed and I'm on alternate fuel, I'm on a heading for a nice vector to the opposite direction ILS/LPV there. That makes me happy.
Click to expand...
Get yourself a 135 certificate and you can probably use it as an alternate with a forecast down to 400/1.
 
N1120A said:
Lol. Probably is safer in my Bonanza with superior avionics to any 121 airplane out there :p
Click to expand...
Agreed. I'm thinking a well-equipped 4/6-seater with WAAS, a digital autopilot/flight director (e.g. GFC700), and Synthetic Vision would meet or exceed most part 121 aircraft. Maybe the only thing missing from a full-up airliner would be Autothrottles and Cat 3 certification.

As an example, my little DA40 G1000/GFC700 could auto-fly a SID, of course the full en-route, then an Arrival, then a multi-stepdown LPV approach... right to the runway. I'd just manage the throttle, otherwise fully hands off.
 
N1120A said:
Lol. Probably is safer in my Bonanza with superior avionics to any 121 airplane out there :p
Click to expand...

Believe me it is not. Especially since you are single engine. I fly 91, have flown 135 and also now 121. You may have slick displays but the capabilities of modern airliners with RNP capabilities, cat II and even cat III auto land, in crewed cockpits are in another league...

But honestly with lpv we can all land pretty low especially if coupled. It’s more down to runway size and lighting.

The issue with SE piston low imc is if the engine has an issue you have no options.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
PS - another vote from me for the rnav lpv
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top