Special Approaches-highly Entertaining

[curt1 79]

I would love to see a list of what many consider the most fun, visually appealing and entertaining approaches in FS. I thought there was a thread on this already, but I couldn't find it. Two that I like a lot are KMDW and KSJC. Both are surrounded by commercial buildings with a lot of visual stuff to see. If someone can point me to a thread that already exists, please let me know. If not, then please note your favorites. Thanks.Curt

[ahuimanu 50]

I would love to see a list of what many consider the most fun, visually appealing and entertaining approaches in FS. I thought there was a thread on this already, but I couldn't find it. Two that I like a lot are KMDW and KSJC. Both are surrounded by commercial buildings with a lot of visual stuff to see. If someone can point me to a thread that already exists, please let me know. If not, then please note your favorites. Thanks.Curt

The LDA approach into Rwy 26L at PHNL is always interesting from both the cockpit and from the ground. I recall watching endless 747s, DC-10s, L1011s, C-5s and C-141s lumber across the sky on this approach in the 70s and 80s. The approach is also a treat in that it is rare - the wind patterns allowing for this approach are only present about 15% of the year.

[michal 44]

In case you equate "fun" with "difficult" this is a thread on another forum on the subject (remove the [xxx] part since Avsim doesn't allow linking to this site).http://www.airl[xxx]iners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/2325/?threadid=2325&searchid=2373&s=difficult+approaches#ID2373This also happens to be a very difficult and quite famous visual approach that requires perfect flying skills (San Juan, Lagoon Rwy 8, Puerto Rico):http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0813/00784LAGOON_VIS8.PDF

[Guest jshyluk]

I am curious what you would consider for "approach appeal". I would think that the rules would be different for small GA-type airports versus large international hubs. I think that CYVR is always good for a large airport, what with the ocean, the mountains, and the city all in close proximity. I would not consider it an overly challenging approach, but if you like lots of varied aircraft, I think it's good.Probably the king of all large airport approaches is the world-famous Checkerboard for the old Kai-Tak airport in Hong Kong. This has water, wind, mountains, and city combined with a technical approach that is positively manic. (Un)fortunately, this approach is no longer used in the real world. I've never flown it myself, but my parents did as passengers in a 747 in the 1980's. They remarked at how you could look straight out the window and see people at work in the office buildings. Crazy!Small airports and airstrips are different beasts altogether. For these, I look for scenic beauty and/or a bit of challenge.Langley airport (CYNJ) comes to mind as it's close to Vancouver, and it has a paved runway, but it's very short, making for some nice challenge.KCEF (Westover ARB, Springfield, Mass.) is the polar opposite of CYNJ. It has a runway that is long enough to be used as an emergency landing strip for the Space Shuttle. You can miss the "numbers" by a very long margin and still have enough pavement to land on, especially in a Piper Cub.If raw mountainous beauty and white knuckle challenge are the call of the day, I would chose Casltegar (CYCG).A far more forgiving approach, but a stunner: CYPS, Pemberton, British Columbia, Canada.Also, anything around Hawaii, Jackson Hole Wyoming, or Vermont (Savage Island VT15 is one of my faves) should give you some scenic thrills.These suggestions are just the tip of the iceberg. Fiumcino in Rome comes to mind as well, and anything in northern Italy or Switzerland... Locarno (LSZL) is a total stunner... there are many, many more!Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

[Mace 1,923]

MHTG - Toncontin -- circular approach onlyThere is a thread on that approach here at AVSIM; I think it is a thread about difficult or dangerous approaches. But as Jeff said, it depends on what your definition of "entertaining" is--visuals, difficulty, both?

[curt1 79]

Hey everybody, thanks for the input. My focus is primarily on unique visuals rather than difficulty. I normally fly heavies and enjoy airports that are within the city limits that have unique visual appeal. That's why I mentioned Midway and San Jose in my initial post. If you haven't landed on 30L at KSJC, give it a look. It's truly fun.Curt

[michal 44]

If you haven't landed on 30L at KSJC, give it a look. It's truly fun.

I have done it in real life too ;)I still think that Mother Nature delivers far more appealing visuals than any man-made objects - so to please my eyes I would take Lugano, Jackson Hole, Aspen or Telluride approaches anytime over San Jose but this clearly a matter of individual preference.

[Guest jshyluk]

Yes, Telluride is an amazing approach -- thank you for bringing that one up! Boy, howdy!Hmm, urban approaches...Well, anything in New Yawk is very urban chic, especialy if you enjoy slide shows. I've always liked Meigs in Chicago, but of course, there's the whole issue revolving around the fact that Meigs is gone...Narita in Tokyo, Charles de Gaulle in Paris at dawn or dusk...McCarran in Las Vegas at night...Boeing Field in Seattle in the clag...Rio de Janeiro... I remember looking up the airport that James Bond and Dr. Holly Goodhead were viewing with binoculars in "Moonraker". SBRJ Santos Dumont, I believe. It's a large airport, but the runways are rather short for large jets. You can always divert to SBGL (Gale