[Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

announcements, discussions and recordings of PilotEdge real-time workshops
Post Reply
Keith Smith
Posts: 9939
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

[Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

Post by Keith Smith »

Video is now available: http://www.pilotedge.net/workshops/inst ... hes-part-1

Thanks to Mark Hargrove for recording this, and to Christian Braun for providing the backup.
kullery
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:13 am
Location: Medina, OH

Re: [Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

Post by kullery »

regarding use of GPS in lieu of DME:

from AOPA:
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/ ... 13gps.html

from AIM 1-1-19, Table 1-1-6:
aim.png
aim.png (28.96 KiB) Viewed 11964 times
Ken Ullery - PPL-SEL, 1G5
Keith Smith
Posts: 9939
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: [Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

Post by Keith Smith »

Thank you for looking that up, Ken, greatly appreciated.

So, there's the answer, you can use it GPS in lieu of DME.
Mark Hargrove
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 11:42 pm
Location: Longmont, CO

IFR Workshop 4 - Companion Video

Post by Mark Hargrove »

I've posted a companion video to IFR Workshop 4, covering the KSNA ILS Rwy 19R approach discussed in the workshop, with a little bonus of a departure procedure thrown in as an appetizer.

The link is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG5WJ_xlNqU

If anybody spots any egregious errors, please let me know!

-M.
Mark Hargrove
Longmont, CO
PE: N757SL (Cessna 182T 'Skylane'), N757SM (Cessna 337 'Skymaster'), N757BD (Beech Duke Turbine)
Keith Smith
Posts: 9939
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: [Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

Post by Keith Smith »

Thanks, Mark,

Is the video quite similar to the I-6 cockpit video by any chance? :)

If so, I might add both of them to the workshops page when I get back from this trip.
Mark Hargrove
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 11:42 pm
Location: Longmont, CO

Re: [Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

Post by Mark Hargrove »

My video has more drama in it, involving danger, character development and, ultimately, a series of life-changing lessons on preparedness and the rewards for righteous planning.

In other words, yeah, it's pretty much exactly the same as the I-6 cockpit video you did. :-)

I added a review of the material at the front, though, and flew it in a G1000 cockpit so it would be easy to follow the route of flight. Watch it when you can and let me know if I made any bonehead errors in the information I presented.

-M.
Last edited by Mark Hargrove on Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Mark Hargrove
Longmont, CO
PE: N757SL (Cessna 182T 'Skylane'), N757SM (Cessna 337 'Skymaster'), N757BD (Beech Duke Turbine)
Keith Smith
Posts: 9939
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: [Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

Post by Keith Smith »

Sounds like a nail biter! I look forward to watching. The additional material sounds very helpful and ties it nicely to the workshop. It truly is a great companion!
kullery
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:13 am
Location: Medina, OH

Re: [Mar 26] IFR approaches (part 1)

Post by kullery »

Great job on the video Mark! Excellent use of graphics to illustrate the 'HILPT'.

The traffic during the course reversal made it very interesting. Had the traffic been called out prior to starting the turn, I might have been tempted to request an extension to the "1 minute leg" but since you were in established in the turn, I don't know what else you could have done. I know that Keith recently discussed being comfortable with a 500 foot separation in visual conditions, but an unverified 800 foot separation (and eventually <500 ft) without visual is pretty nerve racking. I would be very interested to know if others have comments about options in this situation. Would breaking off the approach and requesting vectors to final be appropriate in this situation? (Mark, in no way am I criticizing your handling of this, I think I would likely have done the same as you did in the sim, but this is a great learning opportunity to discuss at what point should evasive action be taken and what should it be).

One question for any controllers. Does the fact that Mark indicated the availability of TCAS (as opposed to TIS) make any difference at all? Is there an assumption that Citation 757CM will be maneuvering based on TCAS advisories (if required) and therefore not suggesting a heading/altitude based on the assumption that Mark would receive a TCAS resolution to a potential conflict?
Ken Ullery - PPL-SEL, 1G5
Post Reply