flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 4:00 am

I've noticed that some airports don't have full-procedure approaches.

Just as an example, what would you do in this situation?
You are flying in a Cessna 172/U (no DME) into Houston Intercontinental (IAH) on an IFR flightplan in IMC. You lose communication and you have determined after going thru all the troubleshooting steps that your radios have died. Because it's total IMC, you must continue on your flight plan to your destination and shoot a full procedure approach, however IAH has no full approaches published. Your alternate that you filed, Hobby Airport (HOU), has 1 full procedure approach published, but it requires a DME. What do you do?
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 4:33 am

I'd consider a radio failure in IMC an emergency condition, thus you have the right to violate the FARs if you deem it necessary.

You'll notice that DME is not required for the approaches to 9 and 27 (and perhaps some others, but those are the ones I looked it). Let's say that the wind was from the east, so a landing on runway 9 was in order. I'd proceed to the HUB VOR, then outbound on the HUB 331 radial to the localizer. I'd proceed outbound on the localizer, make a standard procedure turn to the left in order to stay away from the other runways, and head back inbound. I'd stay at or above the published OROCA for that area for terrain clearance until I was inbound on the localizer. Since I'd be squawking 7600, ATC would know to get everyone else out of my way. They'd definitely want a report afterwards, but that would mean that I'd gotten down safely, and I'd feel confident that I could rationalize everything that I did to the FAA.

Good question, though.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 5:03 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
I'd proceed outbound on the localizer, make a standard procedure turn to the left in order to stay away from the other runways, and head back inbound.

If a procedure turn isnt published you can't just create one. All of the approaches at IAH say "RADAR REQUIRED" meaning you have to be in communication with ATC and receive instructions for them on how to intercept the approach, whether it be radar vectors or being told to intercept it at one of the fixes.

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
I'd consider a radio failure in IMC an emergency condition, thus you have the right to violate the FARs if you deem it necessary.

There are specific rules to follow when you have a radio failure when flying IFR. You can still navigate, so this isn't an all-out emergency. You still can't throw the FARs out the window... yet. If you lose your NAV radios, then that's a different story.

Personally in this situation I would proceed to a smaller, uncontrolled airport that had a full-approach published that didn't require DME. I would probably exercise a little better pre-flight planning and find an alternate airport that had a full-procedure approach that my aircraft was capable of. But again thats just me. Keep the hypothetical answers coming!
 
bri2k1
Posts: 952
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:13 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 5:21 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 2):
You can still navigate, so this isn't an all-out emergency. You still can't throw the FARs out the window... yet.

I agree with part of this and disagree with part of it. If you're in the rediculously crowded airspace over Texas in actual IMC with no radios, can that be considered an emergency? I would argue that yes, it would. The C172 POH Emergency Procedures section tends to agree, indicating you should sqwak 7700 for one minute, followed by 7600 for 15 minutes. That will indicate to ATC that you deem an emergency is in progress, and as such, can deviate from any FAR to the extent necessary to meet the emergency.

My old instructor had failed comms once returning to our home base of APA, in Class D under a Class B shelf. There's a non-towered field that was probably within fuel range but with very limited maintenance facilities, and the airplane's home base was APA. He followed the standard procedure of circling over the tower sqwaking 7600, received a green light signal, and landed safely. Afterwards, he called the tower, and they said, "Are you calling us from your cell phone?" He said, "well, yes, of course..." And they replied, "Is there any reason you couldn't have called us from your cell phone in flight?" He quickly realized the value of having all the ATC telephone numbers published in the A/FD. Even if you couldn't hear them, they could probably hear you, at least enough to understand the situation, and have a better awareness of your intentions. Just food for thought...
Position and hold
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 7:03 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 2):
There are specific rules to follow when you have a radio failure when flying IFR. You can still navigate, so this isn't an all-out emergency. You still can't throw the FARs out the window... yet. If you lose your NAV radios, then that's a different story.

There are indeed specific rules to follow, but I would contend that it is indeed an emergency, and thus while it's good to follow the rules as much as practical, I'd have no problem with breaking them if I felt that it was absolutely necessary.

This situation has a lot of variables in it. Are you coming in on a STAR? If so, then you may want to find a published holding pattern and do a few turns there while squawking 7600 so that you can both let ATC know your predicament, and think about what you are going to do. Has ATC already started vectoring you for the approach? If so, you're going to have no idea where you are, and you'll have to find some sort of navaid to get your bearings. Coming in right off a STAR there may be no navaid around to use, and you don't really have a clearance limit to proceed to.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 2):
If a procedure turn isnt published you can't just create one.

I'd rather do a non-published procedure turn on an ILS where I knew I had obstruction clearance than take my chances shooting a full procedure VOR/DME approach without DME. Neither is a good idea, but one is a lot less risky than the other, and, as I've mentioned, options are short in this scenario. I don't like the idea of diverting to an airport that's not your alternate without letting ATC know, especially an uncontrolled one - you never know whether there's somebody on the ground who's gotten their IFR clearance but hasn't taken off yet. A towered one is less of a problem - approach could call ahead to make sure that the runway is nice and clear for you.

If you can reach ATC on the phone, great (and that would be the first thing I'd try). They may be able to provide you with some assistance, or at least you'll be able to make your intentions known. Failing that, you're on your own, and I would absolutely consider that an emergency.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 2):
I would probably exercise a little better pre-flight planning and find an alternate airport that had a full-procedure approach that my aircraft was capable of.

Definitely a good idea. I'd make sure that I could shoot an approach into at least my alternate if I were to lose communications.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 7:40 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 4):
If so, then you may want to find a published holding pattern and do a few turns there while squawking 7600 so that you can both let ATC know your predicament, and think about what you are going to do.

You can't just decide to hold, ATC is expecting you at a certain time and clears planes out of the way accordingly. Also, if your radio is dead, there is no guarantee that your transponder isn't dead either. In most cases, as I've been told, transponder failure usually does accompany radio failure, so turning around in circles to let ATC see something that isn't there is a waste of your time and fuel.

Quoting Mir (Reply 4):
I don't like the idea of diverting to an airport that's not your alternate without letting ATC know, especially an uncontrolled one - you never know whether there's somebody on the ground who's gotten their IFR clearance but hasn't taken off yet

You don't have a problem holding in a holding pattern just for the heck of it but diverting to an airport thats most likely alot less busy and crowded bothers you? lol... again, like I said above, there's no guarantee that ATC still sees you on radar, so there is no guarantee that they will just automatically follow you and clear people out of the way. I'd much rather get into less crowded airspace any day.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 10:31 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 5):
there's no guarantee that ATC still sees you on radar

ATC will see you on radar as long as the radar is on and you are within the reception area. They may not see your data block, which runs off of information from your transponder, but they will see you, and controllers are trained to deal with such situations.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 5):
You don't have a problem holding in a holding pattern just for the heck of it but diverting to an airport thats most likely alot less busy and crowded bothers you?

Not knowing who or what's going to be there when I break out of the clouds bothers me, yes. I have more confidence in a controlled field being clear than an uncontrolled field. Plus, with regard to diverting to an airport not on your flightplan, suppose there are NOTAMs that would be good to know before trying to land there, a runway closure or a navaid out of service, perhaps. Flight service generally doesn't give you NOTAMs for airports that aren't in your flightplan.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 11:59 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 6):
Not knowing who or what's going to be there when I break out of the clouds bothers me, yes. I have more confidence in a controlled field being clear than an uncontrolled field.

You have alot more chance of breaking out of the clouds to an unpleasant surprise at a controlled field than at an uncontrolled field. Controlled airports tend to be busier, that is of course why they are controlled.

Quoting Mir (Reply 6):
They may not see your data block, which runs off of information from your transponder, but they will see you

Not true. I've had transponder outages before and they cannot see you at all. Be ready to hear an earful if your radio is in fact working  Wink

Quoting Mir (Reply 4):
I'd rather do a non-published procedure turn on an ILS where I knew I had obstruction clearance

You aren't guaranteed any obstruction clearance if you are below the MSA for that area (which in this case just happens to conveniently be 2,400). There's a reason that they don't have a procedure turn there, whether or not you know what it is, be it obstruction clearance or anything else.

Quoting Mir (Reply 6):
with regard to diverting to an airport not on your flightplan, suppose there are NOTAMs that would be good to know before trying to land there, a runway closure or a navaid out of service, perhaps. Flight service generally doesn't give you NOTAMs for airports that aren't in your flightplan.

So then in any other emergency situation where say, you lost your engine, would you still opt not to land at the airport right below you and in a field instead because you don't have the NOTAMs for that airport?

If the toss-up here is between a controlled airport with lots of traffic vs. an uncontrolled airport with little traffic and a possible NOTAM, i'm going to opt with the smaller, less busy airport. You are much more likely to encounter traffic at a busier airport than a NOTAM at a smaller airport. Landing on a runway thats undergoing repairs is much less hazardous than a mid-air collision if you ask me.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2233
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 12:13 pm

I'd still go into IAH. I'd consider radio failure in actual IMC to be an emergency. Since I can't fly the approach at my alternate, I'd stick to IAH. No telling what you would find at the smaller airports you didn't get a briefing on, plus ATC definately wouldn't be expecting it.

I agree with the plan of Mir to get to HUB, fly outbound on a published radial to intercept the localizer, make a procedure turn and fly the ILS down. I can stay above the MSA until established inbound on the ILS, ensuring obstacle clearance. Definately sounds safer then flying an approach into an airport without knowing what you will find at the non-controlled airport. Aircraft could be on the runway, the runway could be closed, approach lights might be inop (important on a really crummy day), the approach could be unusable, etc......
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
Ralgha
Posts: 1589
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 1999 6:20 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 1:17 pm

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 7):
You have alot more chance of breaking out of the clouds to an unpleasant surprise at a controlled field than at an uncontrolled field.

Not if they're expecting you, and they would be at IAH.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 7):
Not true. I've had transponder outages before and they cannot see you at all.

Please explain your circumstances a bit more please, because they can indeed see you without a transponder, they just don't see any data for you. ATC uses two radar systems, primary, which is active radar that sees the reflection of radar energy off your airplane skin, and secondary, which interragates the transponder. Infact, I've flown an airplane with no transponder through the IFR system before (after getting ATC's approval), and they tracked me just fine.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 7):
You aren't guaranteed any obstruction clearance if you are below the MSA for that area (which in this case just happens to conveniently be 2,400). There's a reason that they don't have a procedure turn there, whether or not you know what it is, be it obstruction clearance or anything else.

He stated that he would be above the OROCA, which would guarentee him obstruction clearance. ATC will take care of the rest.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 7):
So then in any other emergency situation where say, you lost your engine, would you still opt not to land at the airport right below you and in a field instead because you don't have the NOTAMs for that airport?

Not the same situation. With a perfectly functioning airplane (aside from comm failure) in IMC, I would not land at an airport for which I had no NOTAMs and ATC wasn't expecting me to arrive at. More important than a broken runway would be a broken nav aid. You arrive at your unplanned airport only to find that the only navaid used for approaches is broken...D'OH! Now what?


You picked a scenario that is not addressed by the regulations, so judgement must be applied to the regs. While it is true that there is no IAF for any of the approaches at IAH, any competent IFR pilot should be able to establish themselves on an approach there. ATC is expecting you to arrive at IAH, can still see you on the radar, barring some unusual events, and will make sure you don't hit anyone.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 2:33 pm

Quoting Ralgha (Reply 9):
ATC uses two radar systems, primary, which is active radar that sees the reflection of radar energy off your airplane skin

I've been told by ATC that because of deteriorated radar reception due to weather and the small size of a Cessna 172 that it makes it hard to pick up as a primary target and that most of the time it won't be picked up as such.

So assuming that's true, how could anyone clear anything out of the way for you?

Quoting Ralgha (Reply 9):
While it is true that there is no IAF for any of the approaches at IAH, any competent IFR pilot should be able to establish themselves on an approach there.

Sure, I'd have no problem giving myself vectors to line up with an approach, but if they go out of the way to write PROCEDURE TURN N/A and RADAR REQUIRED in big bold letters on the approach plate, bigger than any of the other writing on there, don't you think they must be somewhat serious with that rule?
 
Ralgha
Posts: 1589
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 1999 6:20 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 2:51 pm

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 10):
I've been told by ATC that because of deteriorated radar reception due to weather and the small size of a Cessna 172 that it makes it hard to pick up as a primary target and that most of the time it won't be picked up as such.

I suppose it's possible for weather to cause a 172 to disappear, but normally they'll see you just fine. When I did it without a transponder, I was in a 172 and in the clouds.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 10):
So assuming that's true, how could anyone clear anything out of the way for you?

They know where you're going, and what time you're supposed to get there. How they do it is up to them, but it will be done. If they can't see you, and you go somewhere they're not expecting, then you're completely on your own, they won't give you any aid because they don't know what you're doing. Go where you said you're going, and they'll help you.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 10):
Sure, I'd have no problem giving myself vectors to line up with an approach, but if they go out of the way to write PROCEDURE TURN N/A and RADAR REQUIRED in big bold letters on the approach plate, bigger than any of the other writing on there, don't you think they must be somewhat serious with that rule?

They're pretty serious with the "two way communications system required" rule too.

Here are your options:

1) Get yourself on the approach and land.
2) Go somewhere else, forsake any ATC assistance, and place yourself and others in jeopardy all for the sake of following a rule that is meant to be broken when the situation requires it, and this situation does.

It would be quite easy to explain choosing option 1. Option 2, not so much, especially if you hit someone (assuming you survive).
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 3:19 pm

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 2):
I would probably exercise a little better pre-flight planning and find an alternate airport that had a full-procedure approach that my aircraft was capable of. But again thats just me.

No it's not just you. If you are going to pick an alternate you need to be able to actually use the alternate......IMHO....What good is a field you can't land at.

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 3):
Afterwards, he called the tower, and they said, "Are you calling us from your cell phone?" He said, "well, yes, of course..." And they replied, "Is there any reason you couldn't have called us from your cell phone in flight?" He quickly realized the value of having all the ATC telephone numbers published in the A/FD.

Well the tower guys are right, I would have to say that hindsight is 20/20 in this situation. I am sure everyone of us has found ourselves in a situation where 5 minutes later you thinking, "Damm I should have thought of that."

Quoting Ralgha (Reply 9):
you picked a scenario that is not addressed by the regulations, so judgement must be applied to the regs.

You know there are times when I wonder how many people the FAA have hanged becasue they used their judgment because the regs didn't address a situation.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Tue May 09, 2006 3:35 pm

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 7):
So then in any other emergency situation where say, you lost your engine, would you still opt not to land at the airport right below you and in a field instead because you don't have the NOTAMs for that airport?

It seems that you propose a situation in which I could see the airport right below me. Thus I could see the state of the runway, and wouldn't need to do an IFR approach. I'd have no problem with landing at that airport in VMC conditions without all the NOTAMS. An approach in IMC is a different story altogether, since you don't know what's going to be at the other end, or whether you can even use that approach that you want to.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 10):
if they go out of the way to write PROCEDURE TURN N/A and RADAR REQUIRED in big bold letters on the approach plate, bigger than any of the other writing on there, don't you think they must be somewhat serious with that rule?

It's a rule that you can break, since you have an emergency situation, so long as you take steps to ensure that it is safe to do so. Like I said before, ATC will want a report from you as to what you did and why, but as long as you can justify what you did, that won't be a problem.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 12:17 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 13):

It seems that you propose a situation in which I could see the airport right below me. Thus I could see the state of the runway, and wouldn't need to do an IFR approach.

If you are flying the approach down to the minimums and are visually looking for the runway environment before deciding to land, you should also be able to see the airport.

As far as not knowing about operable NAV aids, there are many non-precision approaches that involve NAV aids not located on the field (such as VORs) which you should know whether or not they are operating. A perfect example in this case would be the VOR-D approach to West Houston Airport (IWS) which uses the IAH VOR for primary reference and the HUB VOR for cross-reference. DME isn't required. You could very easily fly down to the circling minimums, then assuming you break thru the clouds below, fly over the airport and observe it before executing a landing.
 
Ralgha
Posts: 1589
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 1999 6:20 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 12:54 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 12):
You know there are times when I wonder how many people the FAA have hanged because they used their judgment because the regs didn't address a situation.

Yeah, when not in an emergency.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 14):
If you are flying the approach down to the minimums and are visually looking for the runway environment before deciding to land, you should also be able to see the airport.

Don't know what you're trying to say here. Rephrase maybe?

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 14):
As far as not knowing about operable NAV aids, there are many non-precision approaches that involve NAV aids not located on the field (such as VORs) which you should know whether or not they are operating. A perfect example in this case would be the VOR-D approach to West Houston Airport (IWS) which uses the IAH VOR for primary reference and the HUB VOR for cross-reference. DME isn't required. You could very easily fly down to the circling minimums, then assuming you break thru the clouds below, fly over the airport and observe it before executing a landing.

So you're going to cruise through the IFR system without talking to anyone, going to a place that no-one expects you to go, being able to see nothing, without even knowing if you'll be able to land there and perhaps having to do it all again to get to another place that you don't know if you'll be able to land? Do you know if their approach lights work there? Those may be the difference between getting in and not. What about an external factor that makes the approach unflyable, such as a large crane in a bad spot? More than a navaid can shut down an approach.

The big sky little airplane theory is crap, I've been nearly killed twice by other airplanes. I'm going where they expect me to go and where I know I can land thanks.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 1:00 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 14):
If you are flying the approach down to the minimums and are visually looking for the runway environment before deciding to land, you should also be able to see the airport.

If I had an engine failure, there would be no need to make a decision to land, I'd be forced to land anyway.

I sure as hell would not start an IFR approach with an engine failure, since there's no way my altitude would last long enough to make that runway. If I was already on the approach, different story, but I'd still probably land short of it. If I was in clouds and knew there was an airport nearby, I wouldn't even try for it unless I had GPS that could tell me exactly where it was - searching for something that you can't see would only lead to disorientation, and that's never good. I'd make a brisk but controllable descent to get out of the clouds, and once I could see land again, I'd find the best spot to land and put it down there, airport or no airport.

If it was just the lost comms, I could do a missed approach, but do I really want to go back up into the clouds in an aircraft that isn't airworthy to do so? Not particularly.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:09 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 16):
I could do a missed approach, but do I really want to go back up into the clouds in an aircraft that isn't airworthy to do so? Not particularly.

If worse came to worse, assuming every runway and taxiway was obstructed, you could still put down in the grass next to the runway if you didn't think it was a good idea to go back up into the clouds. You'll have gotten yourself down in one piece, you'll have avoided congested traffic areas, and you wouldn't have broken any FARs by creating procedure turns.

In reality if I were somehow in this scenario (which is highly unlikely, I don't feel comfortable flying IFR with out at least a DME), then I probably would shoot this VOR-D approach and put down somewhere at IWS, whether it be a runway or taxiway or adjacent strip of grass. But of course, that's easy for me to say now after contemplating the scenario and debating it back and forth for a couple days  Wink
 
Ralgha
Posts: 1589
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 1999 6:20 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:27 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 17):
You'll have gotten yourself down in one piece, you'll have avoided congested traffic areas, and you wouldn't have broken any FARs by creating procedure turns.

You didn't avoid congested airspace, you blissfully plowed through it without talking to anyone, without seeing anyone, and without anyone having any idea what you were doing or where you were going. That you didn't run into anyone was pure blind luck. You showed complete disregard for the regs by not continuing to your filed destination as they tell you to do.

I don't know how else to say this, ATC will keep you seperated from others if you go where you said you were going to go and arrive when you said you would. If you go somewhere unexpected, all bets are off.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:29 am

Quoting Ralgha (Reply 15):
The big sky little airplane theory is crap, I've been nearly killed twice by other airplanes. I'm going where they expect me to go and where I know I can land thanks.

I'll give you credit for that. In the end there is no set procedure for exactly what to do here, and there is no solution really that doesn't come without some kind of risk, whether it be self-vectoring into IAH or a full approach into a smaller airport off to the side. No solution thats been given here is really wrong in my opinion, but then again none of them are distinctively right either. In these situations judgement calls have to be made somewhat quickly, and it's very likely that you wouldn't consider every variable in your thought process. That's why I think its beneficial to discuss it like we are here, it makes you think about things you might not have otherwise thought of. Pre-emptive action, so to speak. I know personally that I've never thought about filing an alternate airport that has full approaches that my aircraft is capable of. In fact, being from Houston, I often file IAH as my alternate... doesn't do me much good in this situation!

Thanks again everyone for the insightful responses so far! Keep them coming if you still have them.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:29 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 17):
you wouldn't have broken any FARs by creating procedure turns.

But you would have broken FARs by deviating off your route without authorization. Not that I'd fault you for that if I were the FAA, but to me it seems pretty much impossible to operate within the FARs in this case - mostly because they don't specify what needs to be done.

Also, doing what I mentioned in my first reply, is, from the way I read the FARs (91.175.j), not expressly prohibited. It says:

In the case of a radar vector to a final approach course or fix, a timed approach from a holding fix, or an approach for which the procedure specifies "No PT", no pilot may make a procedure turn unless cleared to do so by ATC.

I'm not being vectored to final, since I've lost communications (even though I may have been in the process of recieving vectors at the time communications were lost). I'm not doing a timed approach. "No PT" is not written anywhere on the approach plate. Thus, I don't see where a procedure turn is expressly prohibited in this case.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:37 am

Quoting Ralgha (Reply 18):
That you didn't run into anyone was pure blind luck. You showed complete disregard for the regs by not continuing to your filed destination as they tell you to do.

How does creating a procedure turn for an approach that doesn't have one not fall into this too? Especially if it's written in giant bold letters on the approach plate, larger than anything else on there "RADAR REQUIRED" as well as "PROCEDURE TURN N/A." Personally I think that they put that there specifically for planes that have lost their COMs, otherwise why else would you consider doing a procedure turn there? If they wanted you to attempt that approach, I don't think they would be so blatant about warning you against it. So to say that theyre expecting you at IAH doesn't click with me.
 
xjramper
Posts: 2318
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:10 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:43 am

Thats why I always underestimate my ETA times.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Thread starter):
however IAH has no full approaches published.

Every approach on a plate is a full approach, plain and simple. How ATC directs you into it depends on if you complete the full approach or do a radar guided approach.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 17):
If worse came to worse, assuming every runway and taxiway was obstructed, you could still put down in the grass next to the runway if you didn't think it was a good idea to go back up into the clouds. You'll have gotten yourself down in one piece, you'll have avoided congested traffic areas, and you wouldn't have broken any FARs by creating procedure turns.

Remind me not to fly with you in a 7600 emergency.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 17):
which is highly unlikely, I don't feel comfortable flying IFR with out at least a DME

While a DME is a nice addition, a plain ILS is enough. Throughout my instrument training, I never once had any instrument telling me distance. All that you are doing is following both the vertical guidace from the GS and the horizontal guidance from the localizer. Making sure you have your markers unmuted, you can shoot the approach (and time it as well).

Keep in mind, im well aware that GPS will basically tell you the distance into the airport. But if I say that the distance given by GPS and a DME are going to be two different things, that will open another can of worms.

Quoting Ralgha (Reply 18):
I don't know how else to say this, ATC will keep you seperated from others if you go where you said you were going to go and arrive when you said you would. If you go somewhere unexpected, all bets are off.

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 

XJR
Look ma' no hands!
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:55 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 20):
Thus, I don't see where a procedure turn is expressly prohibited in this case.

The "RADAR REQUIRED" is what prohibits it. It would be like trying to shoot an NDB approach without an operating ADF even though the approach plate says "ADF REQUIRED." The approach requires radar, no matter how important you think it is in this case or not. They bothered to stick it on there in very large font, so I think they're serious about it.

Quoting Mir (Reply 20):
"No PT" is not written anywhere on the approach plate.

The "No PT" designation is used on approaches that do have IAFs, meaning that to fly the full approach from that IAF doesn't require you to have any kind of course reversal. It isn't used to prohibit a procedure turn for that whole approach. The ILS 9 at IAH does not have any IAFs, so the No PT designation couldn't be used on here anyway.

AIM 5-4-9 b. 10 states that "the absence of the procedure turn barb in the plan view indicates that a procedure turn is not authorized for that procedure."

You may say that creating a procedure turn is fine as long as you are above the MSA, but think about how some approaches have holding patterns in place of procedure turns and the very minimal difference that makes in terms of the area you fly over, and obviously they want you flying the holding pattern and not the procedure turn when the holding pattern is what's published, despite the fact that you still might have obstruction clearance. I would think that they are equally as picky, if not more, when there is no course reversal published at all.
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 4:14 am

Quoting Xjramper (Reply 22):
Every approach on a plate is a full approach, plain and simple. How ATC directs you into it depends on if you complete the full approach or do a radar guided approach.

A full approach is one in which you are not given radar vectors to intercept it, but instead intercept it via an initial approach fix. The ILS approaches at IAH all require radar vectors and none have a designated IAF.
 
Ralgha
Posts: 1589
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 1999 6:20 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 4:42 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 21):
How does creating a procedure turn for an approach that doesn't have one not fall into this too?

ATC is expecting you to get yourself on an approach. How they clear the airspace is not your concern, it will be cleared.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 21):
Personally I think that they put that there specifically for planes that have lost their COMs, otherwise why else would you consider doing a procedure turn there?

You really think that? An aircraft with lost comms in IMC is an emergency you don't have to follow crap in an emergency.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 21):
So to say that theyre expecting you at IAH doesn't click with me.

Why do you think you file a flight plan? For giggles? They're expecting you at IAH because that's where you said you'd show up.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 23):
You may say that creating a procedure turn is fine as long as you are above the MSA, but think about how some approaches have holding patterns in place of procedure turns and the very minimal difference that makes in terms of the area you fly over, and obviously they want you flying the holding pattern and not the procedure turn when the holding pattern is what's published, despite the fact that you still might have obstruction clearance. I would think that they are equally as picky, if not more, when there is no course reversal published at all.

If you're above the MSA, you're safe from obstructions. It doesn't matter what the procedure is, where the procedure turn takes place, or whether you're talking to anyone, you will not hit an obstruction. That's the entire point of the MSA.

You seem to be mixing the emergency situation (lost comms) with normal operations. If you can't talk, pick an approach at your destination, get on it, and land. ATC is expecting you to arrive there, and will make sure you don't run into anyone else.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 4:54 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 23):
You may say that creating a procedure turn is fine as long as you are above the MSA

I didn't say it was fine and dandy, I said it was safe, and would reliably get you re-established inbound on the ILS. Your alternative isn't fine either, you're deviating off your course without anyone knowing where you're going. In fact, nothing you can do in this situation is going to be legal, a product of poor preflight planning that resulted in you having no way to shoot an approach at your destination or your alternate in case of comm failure. That's where I'd go after you if I were the FAA.

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 23):
The "RADAR REQUIRED" is what prohibits it.

A radar requirement does not prohibit a procedure turn, according to the regulations - being vectored to the approach does.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 5:06 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 26):
In fact, nothing you can do in this situation is going to be legal, a product of poor preflight planning that resulted in you having no way to shoot an approach at your destination or your alternate in case of comm failure.

This is where I totally agree with you.

Quoting Ralgha (Reply 25):
ATC is expecting you to arrive there, and will make sure you don't run into anyone else.

OK let's assume for a moment that I concede this point to you. You have no option that best fits, so you establish yourself best you can on an approach at your original destination. Assume for a second that you did in fact have a DME. Would you still opt for the makeshipt approach at IAH, or would you proceed to your alternate, HOU, where you can shoot the VOR/DME 35 full approach without a problem?
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 5:59 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 27):
Assume for a second that you did in fact have a DME. Would you still opt for the makeshipt approach at IAH, or would you proceed to your alternate, HOU, where you can shoot the VOR/DME 35 full approach without a problem?

I'd head to HOU and shoot the approach there. No need to mess around with non-charted stuff if you have an alternate airport that you can land at. I'd probably do a few turns in holding either over LEIGH (the IAF for the VOR 35 approach) so that ATC could be sure of my intentions, and then shoot the approach.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
xjramper
Posts: 2318
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:10 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 6:13 am

Quoting FlyMeARiver (Reply 27):
You have no option that best fits, so you establish yourself best you can on an approach at your original destination. Assume for a second that you did in fact have a DME. Would you still opt for the makeshipt approach at IAH, or would you proceed to your alternate, HOU, where you can shoot the VOR/DME 35 full approach without a problem?

Keep in mind when you file, alongside your aircraft model (ie C172) you add what you are capable of, aka "slant golf, or slant Uniform, etc". This tells ATC what you are capable of shooting approach wise. This is also why you add in a STAR at airports that it would be good to do so at.

But im still not sure what you are not getting about flying into IAH. Unless you cancel your IFR plan, you are arriving at IAH, communications or not (unless there is another type of emergency). Going off your logic, why not shoot the VOR/DME 33R at IAH?

XJR
Look ma' no hands!
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 6:23 am

Quoting Xjramper (Reply 29):
Keep in mind when you file, alongside your aircraft model (ie C172) you add what you are capable of, aka "slant golf, or slant Uniform, etc". This tells ATC what you are capable of shooting approach wise.

I know this. My first post said C172/U and now in this changed scenario i'm saying to assume that instead of /U you are /A.

Quoting Xjramper (Reply 29):
But im still not sure what you are not getting about flying into IAH. Unless you cancel your IFR plan, you are arriving at IAH, communications or not (unless there is another type of emergency). Going off your logic, why not shoot the VOR/DME 33R at IAH?

Because DME or not, there is no approach at IAH that is not "RADAR REQUIRED." The VOR/DME 33R still requires radar vectors. At your alternate, HOU, you can shoot the VOR/DME 35 with a procedure turn, no radar vectors needed.
 
ThirtyEcho
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:21 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Wed May 10, 2006 3:35 pm

Just to put one point to rest: I used to fly into Dallas Love before there was such a thing as a transponder and Dallas approach could find me on radar just fine. All aircraft flying under the control of Dallas approach were primary targets and they would ask you to make a turn to a heading for positive identification.

Most definitely, a 172 would show up as a primary target in this case.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9922
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Thu May 11, 2006 1:55 am

Dont have time to go into a detailed reply to this today.

I cut to the chase, everyone who has posted above needs to review the procedures, no one has listed the correct procedures.

7600, keep transmitting using "TRANSMITTING BLIND" prefix, listen out to voice modulated aids (ATIS on a VOR can be replaced by a controllers voice, same with an NDB).

In my view this is NOT an emergency, the old saying aviate, navigate, communicate, flying the aeroplane, keep to your flight plan/clearance, and let other people worry about getting other aircraft out of the way.

Its not complicated.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
xjramper
Posts: 2318
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:10 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Thu May 11, 2006 3:31 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 32):
In my view this is NOT an emergency, the old saying aviate, navigate, communicate, flying the aeroplane, keep to your flight plan/clearance, and let other people worry about getting other aircraft out of the way.

It is an emergency. If you lost all of your communications, that would constitute an emergency. You lose not only your communitcations, but your navigational aids as well. I would consider that an emergency.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 32):
I cut to the chase, everyone who has posted above needs to review the procedures, no one has listed the correct procedures.

Every one has listed the correct procedures.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 32):
7600, keep transmitting using "TRANSMITTING BLIND" prefix, listen out to voice modulated aids (ATIS on a VOR can be replaced by a controllers voice, same with an NDB).

Um...if you lost your communications you cannot talk or can you listen. So explain to me how you can transmit saying that or listen out. Before you flame, check what youre saying.

XJR
Look ma' no hands!
 
bri2k1
Posts: 952
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:13 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Thu May 11, 2006 11:02 am

It's the PIC who has final say regarding the operation of the aircraft. If the PIC determines it's an emergency, he or she can bend a FAR to the extent necessary to ensure a safe outcome. A report will likely be requested and submitted to the FAA who will determine if the PIC acted appropriately, and if not, possibly take action against the PIC. But, if a safe outcome was assured, and the thought process was clear and made with knowledge of the FARs and of the options available, that will be considered.
Position and hold
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9922
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Thu May 11, 2006 12:58 pm

Quoting Xjramper (Reply 33):
Um...if you lost your communications you cannot talk or can you listen. So explain to me how you can transmit saying that or listen out. Before you flame, check what youre saying.

The question above was for communication failure. The PIC should always assume that they are able to transmit, just unable to receive.

Should broadcast all intentions by the prefix "TRANSMITTING BLIND" on the appropriate frequency.

For US people, the FAA AIM chapter http://www.faa.gov/ATPUBS/AIM/Chap6/aim0604.html outlines the correct procedure.

Considering this question, the aircraft is inflight flying as per flight plan (therefore no terrain considerations if flight planned correctly), continue as plan, if you get into VMC, change VFR and land at the nearest suitable.

The first ILS chart I looked for KIAH, the ILS LOC 08L can be flown without a DME. http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0604/05461IL8L.PDF

I would upgrade to an emergency if terrain clearance was in question, encounter ice and not certified for ice etc, or for a loss of communication AND navigation whilst in IMC, i.e. you are in danger. I dont consider loss of communication and navigation whilst in VMC an emergency, still have a perfectly serviceable aircraft, a watch, and a compass.

My experience includes flying IFR internationally for many many years. I would have loss of communications at least once a year, normally from ATC not passing me from one sector to another correctly. We will try HF/CPDLC/ACARS/SAT COM/121.5 etc etc, however we would not declare an emergency for loss of communication.

Its a big wide world out there, it would pay to be a little more open to what others say.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
ThirtyEcho
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:21 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Thu May 11, 2006 4:48 pm

"...all of your radios have died..."

Not my handheld. You DO have a handheld for single engine IFR, right? Just go to the last assigned freq using your handheld and tell them all about it. If nobody answers, use 121.5.

If all of your radios are dead, something far more serious is happening and that ought to get your attention. You have, for example, also lost your NAV functions, unless you have GPS.

You have probably lost your alternator and battery juice isn't enough power for transmission. Look for a bright red light on your panel as a clue. Run your finger over the breakers and find the one that might be popped. Shut down everything non-essential and reset the breaker, provided that alternator function is normal. If the breaker pops again, leave it alone.

I assume that you have the brains to fly single engine IFR to ONLY ckimb through a local cloud deck to VFR enroute or to fly VFR to a local IFR descent, right?

It isn't just the one fan out front but the one alternator and one vacuum pump that add to the problem of single engine IFR. Losing your altimeter is less serious, in a complex aircraft, because you can always use the Manifold Pressure gague as a crude subsitute.
 
sphealey
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 12:39 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Fri May 12, 2006 3:11 am

This would be a good question to pose to Dan Brown (an Atlanta controller) over at avweb.com.

sPh
 
flymeariver
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Fri May 12, 2006 1:18 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 35):
if you get into VMC, change VFR and land at the nearest suitable.

situation states total IMC

Quoting Zeke (Reply 35):
The first ILS chart I looked for KIAH, the ILS LOC 08L can be flown without a DME.

DME isn't the issue with the IAH approaches, it's the fact that they're all radar required, as most of the above posts point out

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 36):
You DO have a handheld for single engine IFR, right?

It's been on my Christmas list for the past 2 years but still no luck  Sad

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 36):
You have probably lost your alternator and battery juice isn't enough power for transmission. Look for a bright red light on your panel as a clue. Run your finger over the breakers and find the one that might be popped.

Both the 2 radio failures I've had were due to this and turning the alternator off then on again did solve the problem. Pretty nerve-wracking, but relieving none-the-less.
 
xjramper
Posts: 2318
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:10 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sat May 13, 2006 3:09 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 35):
Should broadcast all intentions by the prefix "TRANSMITTING BLIND" on the appropriate frequency.

I have never heard of that. Never.

And i looked at the AIM procs in that site, gotta tell ya, everything we all said was consistant with what they say, except for what you said.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 35):
Its a big wide world out there, it would pay to be a little more open to what others say.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 32):
everyone who has posted above needs to review the procedures, no one has listed the correct procedures.

-----------

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 36):
You DO have a handheld for single engine IFR, right?

Haha...no. I am graduating from college in 8 days lol. I have no money to purchase a handheld radio.
-----------

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 36):
You have probably lost your alternator and battery juice isn't enough power for transmission. Look for a bright red light on your panel as a clue. Run your finger over the breakers and find the one that might be popped. Shut down everything non-essential and reset the breaker, provided that alternator function is normal. If the breaker pops again, leave it alone.



Quoting FlyMeARiver (Thread starter):
You lose communication and you have determined after going thru all the troubleshooting steps that your radios have died.

Reading the entire post usually helps before you speak like this.

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 36):
I assume that you have the brains to fly single engine IFR to ONLY ckimb through a local cloud deck to VFR enroute or to fly VFR to a local IFR descent, right?



Quoting FlyMeARiver (Thread starter):
Because it's total IMC, you must continue on your flight plan to your destination and shoot a full procedure approach

Again, Reading the entire post usually helps before you speak like this.

XJR
Look ma' no hands!
 
ThirtyEcho
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:21 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sat May 13, 2006 2:07 pm

Haha...no. I am graduating from college in 8 days lol. I have no money to purchase a handheld radio.

Like most aviators, you will have a closed casket. I'll just drop my handheld into your grave. Try 121.5.
 
727EMflyer
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:22 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sat May 13, 2006 8:11 pm

Ok, here are some questions from a non-instrument rated, non-avionics tech guy.
1. We lost both radios, but isn't it typical that your NAV radios are integrated with your COM radios... Hence the COMNAV name we give them? If you lose communications you have also lost your VOR and ILS indications, right, so how are you going to fly any sort of ILS approach?

2. Of the three 172's (all "N" models) I regularly fly, two have an "Avionics Master" switch, which tells me all the radios, including the transponder, plus any GPS (unless you have handheld equipment) are on the same circuit. The third bird doesn't have the avionics master but I assume the wiring is generally similar and the radio stack is again all on one circuit. So, in this aircraft I would assume the transponder is also dead, and any other avionics I had that could help me get down safely are also dead... How are you going to navigate???

3. This question is key to the safe landing here. The original post says we are flying in complete IMC. What kind of minmum RVR's and ceilings are we talking here? Full CAT III can't see crap??? I understand there is a published minimum safe altitude, but we also should know the forecast sky conditions at our primary and alternate airports... and our sectional should tell us actual terrain and obstruction heights (I assume you've kept up with where you were on the sectional). Why not get below the weather into VMC, continue on the planned route as best we know how, and then put the aircraft down at the first safe airport we can visually identify? Even if it is an uncontrolled field there are procedures (well, best practices may be a better way to phrase it) that can maximize the chance of a safe landing.

Thanks for not flaming me, I'm not trying to shoot holes this hypothetical situation, it just sounds like everyone is trying to fly procedures this novice thinks can't be flown.
 
chksix
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:16 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sat May 13, 2006 8:36 pm

Aren't IMC rated planes equipped with dual "busses" just to prevent a total blackout in case of a burned fuse or something?
The conveyor belt plane will fly
 
bri2k1
Posts: 952
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:13 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sat May 13, 2006 9:41 pm

There are two different things being confused here.

Quoting 727EMflyer (Reply 41):
"Avionics Master" switch, which tells me all the radios, including the transponder, plus any GPS (unless you have handheld equipment) are on the same circuit.



Quoting Chksix (Reply 42):
dual "busses" just to prevent a total blackout in case of a burned fuse

The avionics master switch controls power to the entire bus. From the bus, different circuits power different radios. Each circuit has its own fuse. The bus is powered by the battery which is kept full by the alternator (or generator). If there is an alternator problem, the battery can continue to power the avionics, but only for a short time.

Not all planes, especially GA planes, have much redundancy. Two NAV/COM radios is about the extent of it on a C172. That's why a handheld is such a good idea.
Position and hold
 
xjramper
Posts: 2318
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:10 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sun May 14, 2006 1:23 am

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 40):
Like most aviators, you will have a closed casket. I'll just drop my handheld into your grave. Try 121.5.

Or i just follow the regs and get myself down safe. Not that hard.

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 43):
Not all planes, especially GA planes, have much redundancy.

The skyhawk is littered with redundancy. Two vacuums, two mags, two pumps, a backup system for your pressure system. That is really all you need to fly a small plane like the skyhawk.

XJR
Look ma' no hands!
 
bri2k1
Posts: 952
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:13 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sun May 14, 2006 2:23 am

There's only one vacuum pump on my Skyhawk. What do you mean by backup for your pressure system? There's only one pitot tube. There can be an alternate static source, but you can get that in any plane by breaking the glass in the face of the VSI.

My point, as I think you see, is that it's not much redundancy, compared to airliners. One airspeed indicator, one usable altimeter, one eletrical source... It's all you need to fly safely, but it's not much redundancy.

That being said, I've had numerous situations where I've rented a plane and ATC has reported poor reception when transmitting with COM1, but using COM2 I was loud and clear. There are benefits to any amount of redundancy.

While a dual ignition system has benefits in terms of redundancy, you shouldn't continue a flight with a known bad magneto or set of plugs. Contrast that with an airliner with dual airspeed indicators; it may well be within SOPs to continue a flight with erroneous readings from one or the other.
Position and hold
 
xjramper
Posts: 2318
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:10 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sun May 14, 2006 2:39 am

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 45):
compared to airliners.

You can't compare a skyhawk to an airliner. For the Skyhawk type, it is sufficent enough to get you down safely.

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 45):
While a dual ignition system has benefits in terms of redundancy, you shouldn't continue a flight with a known bad magneto or set of plugs

Again, that is checked out prior to flying in the run up phase, and if worst comes to worst in the air, the back-up mag is enough to get you down safely.

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 45):
There can be an alternate static source, but you can get that in any plane by breaking the glass in the face of the VSI.

I would call that a redundant system. While it doesn't quite fit the description, it still has a standard of redundnacy.

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 45):
There's only one vacuum pump on my Skyhawk.

You must have an older skyhawk. The fleet at my FBO consists of 2004+ models. And all of these have two vacuums.

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 45):
one usable altimeter,

True. But again, if worst comes to worst you have your pressure altitude readout on your squawk box (yes the skyhawk that i fly has it).

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 45):
Contrast that with an airliner with dual airspeed indicators; it may well be within SOPs to continue a flight with erroneous readings from one or the other.

Again, we are not flying the general public from spoke to hub and vise versa.

XJR
Look ma' no hands!
 
chksix
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 6:16 pm

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sun May 14, 2006 8:00 am

Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 43):

Thanks for the clarification Bri.
The conveyor belt plane will fly
 
ThirtyEcho
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:21 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Sun May 14, 2006 6:17 pm

The skyhawk is littered with redundancy.

Not at my local airport. I went out to the ramp and counted the number of props on the 172s and divided by the number of 172 airframes and came out with an average of one engine per 172.

You have no business flying this airplane, outside the traffic pattern, at night. At that, only if your instructor taught you how to cut the throttle mid-downwind and not touch it, again, until you taxied off the active. And do you know the safe altitude from which you can initiate a 180 and return to the departure runway? Have you practiced that? It will shock you.

Have you sworn on a stack of Bibles to never fly VFR on top until you are instrument rated and the weather below you has some really high bases and flat land, below?

And you will never, of course, use that instrument rating in a single to do other than punch through a high cloud deck to VFR enroute or shoot an approach unless you have high bases below you and lots of flat farmland. There must be no sensation in the world quite like being outside the marker at Love Field, in IMC, and watching that fan stop over downtown Dallas.

Lets dont even talk about ice.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Radio Failure Hypothetical Situation

Mon May 15, 2006 1:26 am

Quoting 727EMflyer (Reply 41):
This question is key to the safe landing here. The original post says we are flying in complete IMC. What kind of minmum RVR's and ceilings are we talking here? Full CAT III can't see crap??? I understand there is a published minimum safe altitude, but we also should know the forecast sky conditions at our primary and alternate airports... and our sectional should tell us actual terrain and obstruction heights (I assume you've kept up with where you were on the sectional). Why not get below the weather into VMC, continue on the planned route as best we know how, and then put the aircraft down at the first safe airport we can visually identify? Even if it is an uncontrolled field there are procedures (well, best practices may be a better way to phrase it) that can maximize the chance of a safe landing.

This wouldn't be CatIII weather, but I have done an ILS down to CatI minimums, and I would pretty much classify that as "can't see crap", since 200ft AGL gives you about twenty seconds to see the runway at approach speed in a light single. As far as I'm concerned, "complete IMC" as intended by the original poster means that you're in the clouds, and that the weather on the ground is below 1000 feet ceilings and 3 miles visibility, which would make getting below them and trying to find an airport pretty much impossible. The only way you'd do be able to (reliably) find an airport is to shoot an instrument approach. Even if the clouds were high enough to allow you to descend to VFR conditions, I'd be pretty wary of doing so, since even if you know what's below you, you don't know who might be.

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 48):
You have no business flying this airplane, outside the traffic pattern, at night.

Nothing wrong with single-engine flight outside the traffic pattern at night. Sure, you need to be aware of where you'd land if your engine quit, but you have to do that during the day anyway.

Quoting ThirtyEcho (Reply 48):
And you will never, of course, use that instrument rating in a single to do other than punch through a high cloud deck to VFR enroute or shoot an approach unless you have high bases below you and lots of flat farmland.

Nothing wrong with single engine flight in IMC either, so long as you take appropriate precautions. Is there a level of risk involved? Sure there is, but flying itself is risky - as long as you can manage the risk, know what you would do in a particular situation, and stay situationally aware, there's nothing wrong with doing the things that you mentioned. If you want to be 100% safe, stay on the ground. But I'd avoid crossing the street if I were you.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 767333ER, Bing [Bot], CPierre, DouglasDC9, lucce and 19 guests