Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Intercepting Final Inside Outer Marker  
User currently offlineRedcordes From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 245 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1802 times:

A good friend was recently flying (as capt. PNF) a night, VFR approach at a major US airport in the midwest in a 737-700. They were vectored from a close base (about 3 or 4 miles out) to intercept final. He said that the PF got messed up from this non-typical approach and vowed not to accept a vector to intercept final inside the OM--particularly at night or in marginal weather. Any thoughts from the pros?


"The only source of knowledge is experience." A. Einstein "Science w/o religion is lame. Religion w/o science is blind."
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1767 times:

I'd say he was right in not accepting a clearance that made him uncomfortable. And there are a lot of variables here, lots of factors including familiarity with the airplane in question.

Personally, if I know the area at all, and the weather is decent and I know my airplane (I'm not brand-new to it.) I'd probably have accepted the clearance and been grateful for it.

But I would not pressure a copilot to take such a thing, or appreciate being so pressured myself. I am a proponent of CRM! I might privately think him excessively cautious but he'd never know that.

I even accepted such an intercept once in IMC. We were 'low fuel' because of incredible ATC delays and utterly familiar with airport and airplane. We got vectored in too close (because of low fuel) behind slower traffic and just did a climbing/descending 360 to re-intercept localizer and glideslope at about a mile inside the final approach fix. I'd do that one again, but I can certainly understand hesitance in unfamiliar surroundings.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineRedcordes From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1764 times:

Thanks Slam. Actually, they did accept the vector (which wasn't apparent from my wording), and it led to a not-so-pretty landing.


"The only source of knowledge is experience." A. Einstein "Science w/o religion is lame. Religion w/o science is blind."
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1745 times:

Quoting Redcordes (Reply 2):
and it led to a not-so-pretty landing.

Well it doesn't take much for that to happen I can tell you on good authority. Just get slightly behind the airplane and the operation underway and it is a struggle to get caught back up. Add being just generally uncomfortable, and feeling like you are behind it and the final two minutes of the flight might well not be enough time to gather it all back in.

If you never push yourself just a little bit then five thousand hours in type is not really five thousand hours in type - it is one hour, repeated five thousand times over. You don't want to endanger anyone but sometimes we learn a lot when we crowd ourselves just a little bit.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1698 times:

If it's a VFR approach, ATC has no requirement to put inside the LOM for the approach. All they really have to do is point you in the right direction.

The simple solution is to just take vectors for the ILS rather than the visual. Then ATC is required (in theory) to put no closer than 3 miles to the LOM. However, they can descend you, obstructions permitted and then turn you in. But normally, the GS intercept altitude is the lowest they will go.

If I'm not familiar with the area or am behind the aircraft, I will decline the visual and get the whole approach. No big deal. But not admitting you have lost situational awareness is the worst thing you can do.

As the PNF (Captain), it's incumbent on you not to let the PF (FO) get too far behind. There are a lot hf hints, prompts you can give to help him/her.


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1650 times:

It happens more than you might think. As has been previously posted the main factor is what you're prepared to do. If you've driven into the terminal area fat, dumb and happy thinking you're going 3 mi. outside the marker for a turn yea, you will be caught way off guard but if you have an idea that you may be no.1 or this may be their practice you should be ready for that short turn on. We routinely keep this in the back of our minds that "I don't hear him talking to anyone ahead of us, we might get a short turn on, let's go head and slow down" or "hey these guys always turn you in close, be 220kts abeam the arpt."

User currently offlineRedcordes From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1604 times:

Slam, Phil and Cosmic; thanks for the input. Now I'm wondering: On a typical approach where final is intercepted well outside the LOM, is the passage of the LOM a "reality check" and a time when the flight crew is verifying that the landing checklist has progressed to a certain point or is complete? What would be left to do for the flight crew? Also, at what point in the approach should Vref be established and the aircraft absolutely configured for landing? Thanks.


"The only source of knowledge is experience." A. Einstein "Science w/o religion is lame. Religion w/o science is blind."
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1586 times:

Each operator has their own SOP for stabilized approaches, both instrument, visual and circling. At my current carrier on an instrument approach you have to be stable at 1000'. That means in the landing configuration, on speed. For a visual it's 500' and a circling it's 300'.

With that said, it's not uncommon for approach to issue speed control, such as 180 knots till 4 mile final, which would be about 12-1300' AGL.

With the advent of DMEs associated with ILS, the importance of the LOM has really decreased. It's a good place to cross-check your altitude as there is normally not a final approach fix associated with a precision approach. If there was no DME, you could always start your clock to give you a backup if you lost the GS and wanted to do a LOC only approach. However, in today's world, it's just as easy to do a missed and come back for another approach.


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1570 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 7):
At my current carrier on an instrument approach you have to be stable at 1000'. That means in the landing configuration, on speed. For a visual it's 500' and a circling it's 300'.

We used to have the 1000' and 500' rule but it was changed a couple of years ago to a flat 1000' stabilized. The Before Ldg Chklist is complete with the cleared to land confirmation at 500' agl.


User currently offlineIAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1512 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 4):
The simple solution is to just take vectors for the ILS rather than the visual. Then ATC is required (in theory) to put no closer than 3 miles to the LOM. However, they can descend you, obstructions permitted and then turn you in. But normally, the GS intercept altitude is the lowest they will go.

I hate to say this but not totally correct in this post sorry Phil. In the US ATC can and we routinely do vector for an instrument approach using the .65 criteria!

5-9-1. VECTORS TO FINAL APPROACH COURSE

Except as provided in para 7-4-2, Vectors for Visual Approach, vector arriving aircraft to intercept the final approach course:

a. At least 2 miles outside the approach gate unless one of the following exists:

1. When the reported ceiling is at least 500 feet above the MVA/MIA and the visibility is at least 3 miles (report may be a PIREP if no weather is reported for the airport), aircraft may be vectored to intercept the final approach course closer than 2 miles outside the approach gate but no closer than the approach gate.

2. If specifically requested by the pilot, aircraft may be vectored to intercept the final approach course inside the approach gate but no closer than the final approach fix.

Most controllers that have been around awhile do not mess with the above paragraph because if that led "to a not-so-pretty landing" and let us say it turned into an incident, guess who is going to the chapel....you guessed it, Johnny or Joannie controller.

When operating in a dual/triple approach to parallel runways it gets even trickier how to navigate around the extensive regs we have to deal with, if you get a chance to visit your local large airport and get into the approach control facility that deals with this stuff thousands of times a day it will certainly open your eyes as it has airline drivers I know that are quite good at what they do and excellent instructor pilots/check airmen as well. Best of luck and sorry Phil, you'll get your turn at me soon I am sure!  Smile



Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Intercepting Final Inside Outer Marker
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Inside Rear Mounted Engines posted Tue Oct 24 2006 01:06:25 by Baw2198
"rain" Inside An MD 11 posted Thu Oct 19 2006 19:15:46 by RootsAir
Weighted Patches Inside Tires - On Airliners Too? posted Sun Aug 6 2006 17:31:42 by Mr Spaceman
Inside The Belly Of A 763 Or Other Heavies posted Wed Jun 21 2006 04:54:17 by Evan767
A330 Loud Thumping Just Prior To Final Approach posted Tue Jun 20 2006 17:55:25 by Hrhf1
"one Mile Final"? posted Thu Mar 2 2006 00:29:39 by Mischadee
Any Pics Of The Inside Of A VOR Antenna? posted Thu Sep 8 2005 23:21:15 by FLY2HMO
A New Computer Inside The B777-200LR Cockpit? posted Sun Aug 28 2005 21:22:54 by Palladium
Planes On Final Approach posted Wed Aug 24 2005 19:08:36 by Aircanada333
Burst Of Power On Short Final (with Video) posted Sat Aug 20 2005 14:20:09 by ZSOFN

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format