Alphabet Challenge Leg 2 - KBFL - KCMA

[Talan2000]

Pilots,

I'll leave the definitive lessons learned guide to those who follow (Steve?

http://peaware.pilotedge.net/flight.cfm?id=86329

Things I enjoyed on this flight -- leaving in Marginal VFR 2400 OVC and trusting in the weather forecast as presented by Skyvector. I enjoyed having to be a bit worried about when I could get through that OVC and start my ascent as I flew along at 2400 heading towards mountains at 6500+...Absolutely right on schedule and as predicted by METRO the clouds parted and I climbed up to 10500 approaching Filmore.

Lesson Learned:

- It's ok to go in MVR if you have a bailout plan (what if the clouds hold at 2400 or less than obstacle clearance mins). And the destination has severe clear.

- I will probably get chastised but I don't think anyone on earth (or above it anyway) maintains an actual 500 ft below clouds in a night VFR flight with low clouds like I flew in. Especially flying towards rising terrain. I probably kept a 100 ft buffer - I'm much more concerned about the dirt leaping up at me than I am about a plane popping out from above. Debate....

http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1501/00680v26.pdf

- I requested the VOR 26 Approach (Under VFR/VMC) and specifically the Baine Intersection. I was surprised that ATC wanted to confirm I was /G before he gave it to me out of Filmore. I replied I was (but didn't know why that was relevant as Blaine can be defined as 247/11DME from CMA which is how I intercepted it - not with GPS). Later he told me that it was because the 90 degree intercept was too steep for ATC to give it to me unless I had GPS. Huh.

EDIT: Looking back on it I should have done the full approach or asked for different vector. This takes me back to "the Avalon dicussion"...I guess I don't see 90 intercepts as that big a deal for practice in VMC but there's no way I'd want to have to do that in IMC so...no point in practicing that way ...mea culpa.

R-163 is NOT technically a feeder route as there is no distance measure so there you go. Interesting.

- Watch out for the CONDORS!

Condor Crossing

Condors Beware.JPG (191.21 KiB) Viewed 13147 times

The FAA and bird lovers everywhere want to make sure you are at least 9000 MSL crossing over the mountains V107, V299. Interesting that V107 SE bound has an MSA of 8000 and no note about condors so I guess you IFR rated guys using enroute charts instead of sectionals could inadvertently become Condor Killers. Watch out!

Enjoy!
Todd
N3298S

[Keith Smith]

- I requested the VOR 26 Approach (Under VFR/VMC) and specifically the Baine Intersection. I was surprised that ATC wanted to confirm I was /G before he gave it to me out of Filmore. I replied I was (but didn't know why that was relevant as Blaine can be defined as 247/11DME from CMA which is how I intercepted it - not with GPS). Later he told me that it was because the 90 degree intercept was too steep for ATC to give it to me unless I had GPS. Huh.

BAINE is not an IAF or IF. The only way to commence the approach from BAINE would be if you were cleared direct to BAINE with an intercept angle of 30 degrees or less to the final approach course.

ATC can exceed 30 degrees, but not exceed 90 degrees at Intermediate Fixes (labeled 'IF').

Ref. 7110.65 4-8-1 (a)(5)

5. Where adequate radar coverage exists, radar facilities may clear an aircraft to any fix 3 NM or more prior to the FAF, along the final approach course, at an intercept angle not greater than 30 degrees.

[Peter Grey]

For clarification here Keith's quotes are correct if you are operating IFR.

You were operating VFR so you can really do whatever you want. You requested direct BAINE for the approach so the controller gave that to you. IFR he would not have been allowed to.

Airborne the controller was a bit confused on the exact request you were requesting (he didn't realize you were on the FIM radial, as he wasn't thinking of that route as a flyable route {as it technically isnt IFR}) and there was no need for him to ask if you were /G.

When you asked about it on the ground he didn't quite mean to say what you got from him. The controller was talking about something that relates to Keith's point.

What he intended to say is that to clear you direct to BAINE you have to intercept at less then 30 degrees. That can't be done via the radial and therefore requires the GPS to comply with the 30 degree rule assuming you go direct BAINE and not via a heading.

Hopefully that clarifies it.

[Talan2000]

Peter,

Yeah you for confirming I was sorta right in an unexpected way again

You were operating VFR so you can really do whatever you want.

Never have sweeter words been said to a non-rated pilot and that's why I filed VFR.

What he intended to say is that to clear you direct to BAINE you have to intercept at less then 30 degrees. That can't be done via the radial and therefore requires the GPS to comply with the 30 degree rule assuming you go direct BAINE and not via a heading.

I'm afraid you lost me again here. I don't get how it's ok to make the same turn in my plane with one form of electronic navigation but not with another.What's the difference between going direct to BAINE via GPS or Direct to BAINE via radial. I'm pretty sure the plane doesn't know the difference in the heading you fly. This just seems sorta regulatory crazy to me. If the problem is the difficulty in making a 90 intercept it shouldn't matter if I get to that intercept 90 via terrestrial radial or via satellite.

McBane Intersection...

McBane.JPG (172.93 KiB) Viewed 13110 times

[Peter Grey]

I'm afraid you lost me again here. I don't get how it's ok to make the same turn in my plane with one form of electronic navigation but not with another.What's the difference between going direct to BAINE via GPS or Direct to BAINE via radial. I'm pretty sure the plane doesn't know the difference in the heading you fly. This just seems sorta regulatory crazy to me. If the problem is the difficulty in making a 90 intercept it shouldn't matter if I get to that intercept 90 via terrestrial radial or via satellite.

It's not the same turn.

The 90 degree turn at BAINE you propose is illegal period IFR. No matter how you try to do it.

What is legal at BAINE is a 30 degree intercept. The only way you can go direct BAINE with a 30 degree intercept is with the use of a GPS.

[Talan2000]

Ok I see. We're switching between IFR/VFR and changing the scenario.

Yes if I had been further east out of Filmore I could have taken a 30 intercept to baine if gps equipped and so vectored under IFR. Got it.

Thanks

T

[Peter Grey]

Correct, we are doing lots of scenario substitution.

To summarize:

VFR - Do what you want, your specific request confused the controller which is why you were asked about the GPS. You can get to BAINE using FIM. The GPS question was irrelevant.

IFR - Getting to BAINE is only legal via a 30 degree intercept vector or direct on a course that will hit BAINE with under a 30 degree intercept to the approach. This can only be done via GPS. The FIM radial is no longer an option (as it's not an IFR flyable route for this approach).

[flyingdrill]

My idiot moment tonight was on the MARIC3 departure, when I had brilliantly set up everything in the Garmin 530 and both NAV radios, and then proceeded to fly the correct heading to intercept the 196 radial off Shafter, monitoring it off NAV1, when I had actually set it up on NAV2.

This is the sort of thing that happens when it's time for bed in the UK.........

Still, to my credit (?), I did see it and sorted it, just as the controller (I think it was Peter) gave me a direct to Gorman!

So, 2 flights down and a lot to go. This Challenge is a great idea.

[Juan Cardona]

Great flight!! Almost messed it up: Got cleared for visual approach runway 26, after looking for a while I see what I think is KCMA, report field in sight and get landing clearance; I set up the Camarillo VOR just to make sure I'm on the right approach (I thought I was way too high to land at the airport on my right) and it turns out I was on final for Point Mugu!! GEAR UP, FLAPS UP AND TURN. I said I had missed the approach, did a visual pattern and landed safely. I guess I saved myself from a terrible mistake

"CAX107 uhmmm I think you landed a the wrong field, please say intentions"

[stevekirks]

Fellow Challenge Pilots:

I've flown this a couple of times, but I chose to log my most recent flight for this leg. Weather was pretty good, but Camarillo had haze and a cloud layer conveniently placed at pattern altitude. I was in an Eclipse 500 (incorrectly logged as E50 and EA50) and that made the approach dicey. Bakersfield Approach was reluctant to hand me off to tower until I had the airport in site since I was on a visual approach. I made the airport at 8 miles and was able to sight the runway on both ends and the beacon through scattered clouds. Approach sent me to tower and I was cleared to land and *that's* when X-Plane put me in a cloud layer and hard IMC. I waited until I broke through the layer at about 500' AGL and called "missed approach" but requested to stay in the pattern. I surfed just underneath the cloud layer in the sim, flew the pattern and made a nice landing.

Lessons learned. I had the VOR approach plate out, but even though the sim told me I could see the airport, it threw me a curve. I should have stayed with an instrument approach unless I had a very clear shot.

NOTE: after reading Todd's posts, I realize just how hard it is to sit down and write that many words about these flights. Thanks Todd for all of these write-ups and the pressure for me to keep up and keep flying.