42 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

LSGS, KASE and KSBS are some interesting alternatives if EGLC isn't sufficiently challenging.

I've struggled with KASE in the Fenix earlier. Spectacular approach though. LSGS - one of my favourites! RNP Rwy 25 starting at 17,000', touchdown 1582'. Never get rid of those mountain views 🙂

Other favourites: 

• LFMN VOR B Rwy 22L/R ending in a visual approach with prescribed tracks, requiring a 90 degree turn towards the airport below 1000'
• LYTV NDB Rwy 14 ending in a cirle-to-land with prescribed tracks
• VNKT - any of the RNP approaches are challenging and spectacular (until you smash into the nearby mountains)
• SPZO Cusco RNP Rwy 28 starting at DARKO FL250 with touchdown at 10,702'

And of course the King of all challenging approaches VQPR Paro (already mentioned though).

Edited March 20, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

7 hours ago, El Diablito said:

So are we saying that he is using bad technique under these wind conditions or he is just doing it for the camera?

Considering this was a safe landing under the conditions, I guess the question should be - why is it an "overreaction" if the landing was safe and within limits?

It is from my point of view, because the computers and control surfaces cannot follow these movements anyhow. So why doing them? You can get into PIOs doing it, so it's just not safe.

11 minutes ago, AGuther said:

You can get into PIOs doing

Never understood this acronym. My guess is that in this context it doesn't refer to neither Person of Indian Origin, nor Public Information Officer... Pilot Induced Oscillations perhaps?

1 hour ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I've struggled with KASE in the Fenix earlier. Spectacular approach though. LSGS - one of my favourites! RNP Rwy 25 starting at 17,000', touchdown 1582'. Never get rid of those mountain views 🙂

Other favourites: 

• LFMN VOR B Rwy 22L/R ending in a visual approach with prescribed tracks, requiring a 90 degree turn towards the airport below 1000'
• LYTV NDB Rwy 14 ending in a cirle-to-land with prescribed tracks
• VNKT - any of the RNP approaches are challenging and spectacular (until you smash into the nearby mountains)
• SPZO Cusco RNP Rwy 28 starting at DARKO FL250 with touchdown at 10,702'

And of course the King of all challenging approaches VQPR Paro (already mentioned though).

Try LFKJ rwy 20.

https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/dvd/eAIP_22_FEB_2024/FRANCE/AIRAC-2024-02-22/html/eAIP/Cartes/LFKJ/AD_2_LFKJ_IAC_RWY20_RNP_AR.pdf

https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/dvd/eAIP_22_FEB_2024/FRANCE/AIRAC-2024-02-22/html/eAIP/Cartes/LFKJ/AD_2_LFKJ_IAC_RWY20_VPT_A.pdf

The RNP is already fun but the visual is even more challenging and in the past flown by 747's 

As a quick round trip you could combine it with the visual to LFMN rwys 22L/R. https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/dvd/eAIP_22_FEB_2024/FRANCE/AIRAC-2024-02-22/html/eAIP/Cartes/LFMN/AD_2_LFMN_IAC_RWY22_VPT_D.pdf

 

 

 

 

31 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

based on what you're saying above, would you agree that deviating from glide path in the EGLC example (i.e. sneaking below it) is a sensible thing to do? It seems to me that a reasonable landing is not possible without doing so. I always get nervous by those glideslope and too low callouts...

You would definitely have to check your approaches for details and be mindful of minimum altitudes and obstruction criteria/governance. Normally, once you depart MDA, it's up to you to proceed visually. That airport has the approaches that spell out some issues. For the NDB ILS DME 9, it warns of descending below 1290 before D2. NDB LOC DME 9 warns that the final approach segment crosses high obstacles, do not descend below minimum altitude. A lot of this will depend on what type of approach you are flying as well. If you are flying a precision approach, it's great to follow it all the way down to your DH through your transition point. This ensures you are not going to drag anything. The GS receiver is usually in the nose. When I flew long bodied heavies, the threshold crossing height meant that my nose crossed the threshold at 52 feet, imagine the gear's crossing height lol. This is why we aimed 1500 feet down. So if flying an ILS, you want to be no lower than the DH at that point. Note that these approaches have CDFA calling for a constant descent for the non precision approaches, but we are not diving and driving here either. One thing to mention again is the obstruction criteria governance. I'm FAA based though I operate internationally. I definitely have to consider the governance where I'm operating. So FAA wise, I know my protected area, clear ways and what the protection visual guidance provides. For you sim'n fun, by all means, make your slight adjustments to get accustomed to that airport and then start to adjust to staying 5.5 all the way down once you have that puppy locked😁. But, at any rate, you shouldn't be getting the GS warning even with your slight adjustment lol. Just remember to slow and configure early. 😁. Try using one of those EJETS out there that has those steep approach modes. Also, give KASE a shot in a CRJ. I see them there a lot.    

1 hour ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Pilot Induced Oscillations perhaps?

Yes. When pilots overcorrect on approaches and induce an unstable situation because of that. Pretty common on A320s from what I've heard, some pilots love to move that sidestick continuously like it was a F14 in a dogfight.

24 minutes ago, bigifooti said:

As a quick round trip you could combine it with the visual to LFMN rwys 22L/R

Thanks! Added to my ever-growing list of tricky approaches. Currently loading up at LIMJ, brought 5000kg extra fuel in case I'm in the mood for go-arounds at LFMN. 

747s into 22L/R?! 😮

LFMN VOR/visual into 22R wasn't the easiest one I've tried. Biggest challenge was actually maintaining visual contact with the runway while doing the final turn along the beach. Also, judging the needed descent rate was very hard, without seeing the PAPI lights until short final. Also - "forgot" to properly flare again, resulting in a 600fpm touchdown, auch!

It took quite a few practice runs to nail it. Landing could have been better though. I'll blame it on the tailwind 😉 Video here. 

EDIT: I think it could be possible to use the yellow arc on the ND for judging where descent will take you. Maybe someone can comment on this.

Edited March 21, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

I'm having some trouble understanding NAV managed mode during go-arounds. On last attempt the aircraft didn't turn to follow the GA track, it just continued straight ahead on rwy heading. 

Edited March 21, 20242 yr by Cpt_Piett

1 hour ago, Cpt_Piett said:

I'm having some trouble understanding NAV managed mode during go-arounds. On last attempt the aircraft didn't turn to follow the GA track, it just continued straight ahead on rwy heading. 

For the scare bus, you have to ensure the flight plan sequenced, hit TOGA  and push in the heading button to engage the NAV mode to follow the armed (GA TRK) missed approach track. Probably not automatic because you may have missed approach instructions other than the full procedure. Such as ATC giving you specific instructions for the miss.

2 minutes ago, G550flyer said:

For the scare bus, you have to ensure the flight plan sequenced, hit TOGA  and push in the heading button to engage the NAV mode to follow the armed (GA TRK) missed approach track. Probably not automatic because you may have missed approach instructions other than the full procedure. Such as ATC giving you specific instructions for the miss.

Thanks! Was just gonna edit my post as I figured it out 30 secs ago. You beat me to it 😄

Also, I can wholeheartedly recommend turning on the Flight Path Vector (a.k.a the "bird") when flying non precision approaches manually 

AFAIK, it's fed by the Inertial sensors and will continuously display your flight path on the artificial horizon, making it very straightforward to fly a constant descent angle.

The "bird" is standalone from the Flight director.

Edit: FPV has also found its way to some of the GA I fly. And it's such a cheat mode. That alongside VNAV means no excuses whatsoever to bust altitudes.

Edited March 21, 20242 yr by SAS443

14 hours ago, Cpt_Piett said:

"forgot" to properly flare again, resulting in a 600fpm touchdown, auch!

This is a great example approach of what I was saying about making unusual approaches normal if possible. In your approach, they list the obstacles and the mandatory altitudes. As long as you meet those and stay clear of obstacles, you have some space to work with. Note that the max airspeed during the turn and final is 180KTS minimizing flight time and spill out. You should have a limiting speed in mind even when they are not listed. Some aircraft have you circle/maneuver with maneuvering flaps, which could kick you into the next category, which may impact your circling mins and obstruction criteria. Other aircraft have you circle/maneuver at landing flaps. This is why it's important to know the obstruction criteria and the governance. If you are on a offset approach or using an instrument approach to get visual for another runway, you don't want to break off too late or too early. You want to get inside the obstruction criteria and then break off and depart MDA once you can make the approach normal. Depending on the criteria, you may want to over fly the field before commencing the circle. Another important thing you mentioned is judging the descent rate.

Approaches will usually have a ground speed and descent table on them. You can also find the table in the FLIP or use equations to figure out the descent for the runway's glide path angle. This is an item we mention during the approach brief. Normally you will SMOE your approach speed to make it TAS and then add tail wind or subtract headwind to get the ground speed. Once you have the ground speed and path angle, you can calculate a target descent rate. On your approach, if you had a ground speed of 140, your target would be 743 FPM for a 3 degree path. The PAPI has a 5 degree offset and gets you 3.2NM of obstacle clearance. Even if you can't see the PAPI initially, you can calculate a descent point and a target rate and you will be close. At that point, it's a normal landing. Another thing that I learned flying jets in the VFR pattern, coming off downwind at pattern altitude when the runway is 45 degrees off your shoulder, 500 to 600 FPM works great at capturing the PAPI on a 3 degree slope. Half way round, half way down. If you are higher than your target sink rate, you either started down late or may be a bit aggressive. with 600 to 800 FPM, you should be able to apply your text book flare procedure for your aircraft without issue.      

@SAS443 and @G550flyer thanks both of you for the excellent advice! I’ll bring out the bird on my next non-precision approach. 

Re: flare, I find that I usually mess that up when too many things are happening at once. E.g. not properly lined up with the runway (Nice example) and crosswind that requires de-crabbing during the flare. 

43 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Re: flare, I find that I usually mess that up when too many things are happening at once. E.g. not properly lined up with the runway (Nice example) and crosswind that requires de-crabbing during the flare

Keep that scan going! Approach pitch is good too! If you know the rate should be 700 FPM and 3 degrees pitch on a 3 degree slope at approach speed,  a glance at approach pitch will tell you give you a clue. If it's high on the path, you are slow. If it's low on the path, you are fast. Center on the ADI and then star out to speed, VVI, etc. Just remember to fix one thing at a time😝. I have found that flaring between 20 and 30 feet in the PMDG and FENIX has given me good consistent landings.

 

Edited March 21, 20242 yr by G550flyer
Edit