Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Landing mins

  1. #1
    Registered Aviator
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    48
    Flown:
    C-172, C-152, PA-44, PA-28, B1900, CL-65
    Civ/Mil:
    Civilian
    Ratings:
    ATP CL-65

    Landing mins

    121 guy here. Flying to an airport the other day with poor weather. The ILS required 3/4, but the field was reporting only 1/4. A "dotcom" flight accepted the approach and flew in. How is this legal? Thanks

  2. #2
    Registered Aviator dustrpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    543
    Flown:
    Pitts,AT5,6,802 Ag Cat, Turbo Thrush SF340 J31, sideways 727and a CRJ like 15 gazillion other pilots
    Civ/Mil:
    civilian
    Ratings:
    yep

    Landing mins

    If the .com is part 91 he can try it, you can't.
    As you know, if you or the . Com flight gets to mins and sees the approach lights, it/ you can continue to 100' above mins and land if certain criteria is met.
    I recently bought a single engine piston plane, and I've been watching flightaware to see what kind of weather single engine pilots fly in.
    I watched a pilot try a approach to a airport reporting 1/8 vis in a airplane similar to mine, he missed and diverted to a airport reporting 1/4 mile visibility and apparently landed.
    My nerts are solid, but not that big


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by dustrpilot; 01-21-2017 at 01:12.

  3. #3
    Registered Aviator
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    48
    Flown:
    C-172, C-152, PA-44, PA-28, B1900, CL-65
    Civ/Mil:
    Civilian
    Ratings:
    ATP CL-65
    Thanks. I guess 91 has no restriction on needling a minimum to accept an approach attempt. Yikes unless you're CAT2 or higher less than 1/4 doesn't sound safe.

  4. #4
    Registered Aviator dustrpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    543
    Flown:
    Pitts,AT5,6,802 Ag Cat, Turbo Thrush SF340 J31, sideways 727and a CRJ like 15 gazillion other pilots
    Civ/Mil:
    civilian
    Ratings:
    yep

    Landing mins

    Someone else may chime in with more specifics, but basically that's probably true. I should review it, but in a single engine piston plane, my personal mins will be higher than that. In other words, nice to know but won't apply.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Registered Aviator pilotyip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    13,618
    Flown:
    T-34, T-28, S-2, C1A, C-47, C-54, P-3, P-2, L-188, DC-8, DC-9, CV-580, C-46, B-17G, CA-212, DA-20, NA-265, LJ, CE-550, DHC-6, AC-690, BE-200, BE-90
    Civ/Mil:
    Both
    Ratings:
    ATP, CFI, CFII, CFMEI B-17, CA-212, CE-550, DC-3, DC-9, DA-20, L-188
    maybe RVR for that runway was 4000, that make the approach legal. RVR overrides tower vis.
    Fly because you like to, if you are in it for the respect, prestige, recognition or money you may be disappointed.

  6. #6
    Registered Aviator
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    48
    Flown:
    C-172, C-152, PA-44, PA-28, B1900, CL-65
    Civ/Mil:
    Civilian
    Ratings:
    ATP CL-65
    Quote Originally Posted by pilotyip View Post
    maybe RVR for that runway was 4000, that make the approach legal. RVR overrides tower vis.
    Smaller airport, there was no RVR

  7. #7
    Registered Aviator Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    189
    Flown:
    BE-90, 100, 200 DA-10, DA-20, FK-28, B737-200, 300, 400, DC-9-30, MD-80, AB319/320/321
    Civ/Mil:
    Civil
    Ratings:
    lots
    Sorry, edited duplicate
    Last edited by Groucho; 03-03-2017 at 16:05.
    "Now don't get mad and leave in a huff. Stay for a minute, if your still mad you can leave in a minute and a huff."

  8. #8
    Registered Aviator Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    189
    Flown:
    BE-90, 100, 200 DA-10, DA-20, FK-28, B737-200, 300, 400, DC-9-30, MD-80, AB319/320/321
    Civ/Mil:
    Civil
    Ratings:
    lots
    [QUOTE=dustrpilot;2544779]If the .com is part 91 he can try it, you can't.

    As you know, if you or the . Com flight gets to mins and sees the approach lights, it/ you can continue to 100' above mins and land if certain criteria is met.

    I was just reading this older thread and I had a friend get busted by the FEDS on this one. It's a stinker... If you read FAR 91.175 closely you will see the following: 91.175 (3) i -

    (3) Except for a Category II or Category III approach where any necessary visual reference requirements are specified by the Administrator, at least one of the following visual references for the intended runway is distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot:
    (i) The approach light system, except that the pilot may not descend below 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation using the approach lights as a reference unless the red terminating bars or the red side row bars are also distinctly visible and identifiable.


    The kicker is that Red Terminating Bars AND side row bars are only a part of the ALSF II landing light system. That's what are on CATII and CATIII runways. Red Terminating Bars are on the ALSF I system. If the runway under discussion has minimums of 3/4 it may not have an ALSF I or II light system.


    My friend got dinged by the FED's on this when he tried to talk his way out of this. He didn't read the fine print. It was a CAT I high mins runway with an MALSR system that didn't have the red side or terminating bars.
    Last edited by Groucho; 03-03-2017 at 16:06.
    "Now don't get mad and leave in a huff. Stay for a minute, if your still mad you can leave in a minute and a huff."

  9. #9
    Registered Aviator dustrpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    543
    Flown:
    Pitts,AT5,6,802 Ag Cat, Turbo Thrush SF340 J31, sideways 727and a CRJ like 15 gazillion other pilots
    Civ/Mil:
    civilian
    Ratings:
    yep
    I meant to say 100' "below" mins, but that specified criteria had to be met.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    Registered Aviator rettofly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    8,776
    Flown:
    CE560, EMB110, DO228, P180 and lots more
    Civ/Mil:
    civ
    Ratings:
    ATP/CFI;CE500, EMB110, DO228
    Quote Originally Posted by dustrpilot View Post
    I meant to say 100' "below" mins, but that specified criteria had to be met.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'll bet you meant to write "above TDZ elevation".
    LiberTEA! EgaliTEA! FraterniTEA!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •