conflicting definition of circling approach???

[Guest CRJ700FO]

>I almost was about to write "slip it in" as a joke earlier. >I'd like to see you do that in your CRJ. And do that in a>Cessna in the same situation on an IFR checkride.fwiw i have slipped a CRJ, dead stick into MEM in a simulator.>Yes, I have. Several times. Several places. For real and in>training. One freight run I used to do took me to Ukiah. >Inevitably, there were days when the vis was at or near>minimums and I would not be able to descend straight in to the>runway when I finally saw it. In which case I would simply>enter into a circle maneuver back around to the runway. Dude,>this is basic stuff your CFII should have taught you back when>he introduced circling approaches to you. A circle to land is>not only for a runway that is misaligned with your approach>track. This should not be foreign to somebody like you who is>supposedly a professional commercial pilot. The Navajo was a>great plane, and I've made many space shuttle approaches in>that thing, but space shuttle approaches, and slips, are not>the type of normal stabilized approaches to landing that you>do out of an instrument approach. There's a reason for TERPS>criterias and why some approaches don't qualify as having>straight in minimums. This approach is a good example of>one.again with the one upmanship here....i guess you are SUPER pilot then. once again, i have roughly 5000hrs of 121 time, and not 0.1 has involved a CIRCLE to land. it is extremely rare event, (to use your term) DUDE.there is a concept called a VDP. have you heard of it? your sentence regarding not seeing the runway on an approach until it was too late to descend normally, tells you me you haven't. you see us (again i'll use your term) professional commercial pilots would rather DIVERT and get paid a little extra than circle around at 400-700' agl, i guess.

[Guest CRJ700FO]

>Not defensive. Befuddled by your confusing comment would be a>more accurate word. That's why I decided to speak more>slowly, enunciate better and clarify that other post.>>Normally, on the ERJ, we configure gear down and flaps 22>(which is mid flaps) crossing the FAF and targeting 140kts on>a circle to land. That's the configuration we maintain>throughout. At our option we can also reconfigure flaps 45>(which is full flaps) and reduce our target speed to that for>Flaps 45 at some later point in the circle maneuver. Or we>could also land using Flaps 22 and its associated Target>speed. So yes, we do circle with gear down and landing flap>all set already. Saving gas is good, but as far as our>training department is concerned, conducting a safe,>stabilized approach is better.so in essence what you are doing is what i described minus the gear being up, but i have flown 121 on both a turoprop and a jet and we kept the gear up. i guess we feel the gear coming down, won't destabilize an approach (you know you add a little power/thrust to maintain airspeed, a *basic* private pilot thing....).tell your training department to call the flight academy in dallas, texas. they must not know what they are doing! cmon, dropping the gear and or adding a notch of flaps will destabilize an approach?!?!? who do you fly an ERJ for if I may ask?also, we call it Vapp (approach speed) which is Vref + 5 kts. the minimum manuevering speeds are based on the flap min speeds of which Vref is one (for flaps 45).but then again, i'll tell you what i tell crew scheduling when they call me for a functional flight check, mtx ferry, etc., "You need chuck yeager to do that, and I'm about one quarter that."Edit: while we're "battling" wits, i think i just saw Dwight Howard make a great dunk in the dunk contest! Michael Jordan is the russian judge! Howard was robbed!

[Guest CRJ700FO]

to bring this discussion back on topic (rather than how i or someone else flies a circle) this is an interesting article and videos. needless to say, an approach plate (a bland one at that) does not do it justice.http://www.airliners.net/articles/read.main?id=8http://www.flightlevel350.com/aviation_vid...php?airport=TGUi hope to try it one day, be it in a sim or real life. good post mace, i learned somethings.

[KevinAu 441]

>>fwiw i have slipped a CRJ, dead stick into MEM in a>simulator.>Right after you 410'd it right? I'll bet you had to deadstick it!>>again with the one upmanship here....>>i guess you are SUPER pilot then. once again, i have roughly>5000hrs of 121 time, and not 0.1 has involved a CIRCLE to>land. it is extremely rare event, (to use your term) DUDE.>You don't get around much, do you then? That is amazing. Not even once? Don't you go to Midway? Don't you go to LaGuardia? Don't you go to Newark? Don't you go anywhere in Mexico in that thing? Reacquaint yourself with non-radar procedures, procedure turns, DME arcs, and "quasi-charted-circling-visual approaches" if you ever have to go south. Where the heck do you go in that thing anyways? ORD-DEN and back only?>there is a concept called a VDP. have you heard of it? your>sentence regarding not seeing the runway on an approach until>it was too late to descend normally, tells you me you haven't.>you see us (again i'll use your term) professional commercial>pilots would rather DIVERT and get paid a little extra than>circle around at 400-700' agl, i guess.Actually, I am familiar with that term. And you should know that if you did calculate a VDP, you'd know that the MDA's VDP into Rwy01 at MHTG is outside the FAF and you shouldn't have made the assertion that a straight in is possible. Secondly, if you looked up the Loc Rwy15 in Ukiah, you would see that both straight in and circling minimums on that approach are the same, which allows the approach to be flown as a circle to land even if you weren't intending on it due to the constraints of the vis minima and distance from MAP to threshold. Thirdly, steep gradients are one of the reasons why an approach would be labelled Circle to Land even if the approach track is perfectly lined up with the runway. You need to circle to lose altitude.That sounds real professional right there at the end, dude. Boondoggling extra pay does not qualify you as a professional. Doing your job safely, efficiently and comfortably does.

[Cessnaflyer 56]

Didn't say I was disregarding anything but if you can make a safe and stable approach by yourself you feel comfortable with then it should be ok. Why I would differentiate would be because passengers don't like to slip down to the runway for landing.

[Cessnaflyer 56]

>make no mistake, 91.175© is written generic (ie "normal>manuevers") for a reason. what is a "normal" manuever? a>normal for me, might be extreme for someone else.Exactly, thanks for understanding my flawed logic ;)If I took my father up and slipped to put the Bonanza down on the first third of the runway he would be fine with it because he knows the basics of how an airplane flies. If I took my mother up and did a slip to landing then she wouldn't be to happy about it and I would be cleaning this mornings breakfast from the interior.

[KevinAu 441]

>>so in essence what you are doing is what i described minus the>gear being up, but i have flown 121 on both a turoprop and a>jet and we kept the gear up. i guess we feel the gear coming>down, won't destabilize an approach (you know you add a little>power/thrust to maintain airspeed, a *basic* private pilot>thing....).>>tell your training department to call the flight academy in>dallas, texas. they must not know what they are doing! cmon,>dropping the gear and or adding a notch of flaps will>destabilize an approach?!?!? who do you fly an ERJ for if I>may ask?>You do it whichever way your people want you to do it. I do it whichever way my people want me to do it. That's all we can ever do.

[Guest CRJ700FO]

>Right after you 410'd it right? I'll bet you had to deadstick>it!it's actually pretty easy to get to 410 in a CRJ if done properly. nope mine was a simple, dual engine failure into MEM in the sim. it slipped fine.>You don't get around much, do you then? That is amazing. Not>even once? Don't you go to Midway? Don't you go to>LaGuardia? Don't you go to Newark? Don't you go anywhere in>Mexico in that thing? Reacquaint yourself with non-radar>procedures, procedure turns, DME arcs, and>"quasi-charted-circling-visual approaches" if you ever have to>go south. What the heck to you go in that thing anyways? >ORD-DEN and back only?what part of REGIONAL jet do you not understand? i fly in chicago a lot. never heard a circle done at ORD or MDW. LGA/EWR nope, we went to HPN (ils to both runways), although our ERJ's are at LGA. with GPS here to stay, circling will be limited to those that need it. about as exotic as it gets for us in ORD is NAS and FPO and weather down there is usually not too big of a problem.>Actually, I am familiar with that term. And you should know>that if you did calculate a VDP, you'd know that the MDA's VDP>into Rwy01 at MHTG is outside the FAF and you shouldn't have>made the assertion that a straight in is possible. Secondly,i did that already, do you not read? and also it's inside the FAF.2400/3 = 8nm from RWY VDP1.7+5+1.3=8 which is 0.7nm inside the FAF.>if you looked up the Loc Rwy15 in Ukiah, you would see that>both straight in and circling minimums on that approach are>the same, which allows the approach to be flown as a circle to>land even if you weren't intending on it due to the>constraints of the vis minima and distance from MAP to>threshold. Thirdly, steep gradients are one of the reasonswhere is Ukiah? am i supposed to know where it is? letme google here......it's in CA.as far as the TERPS thing. i have said what you are saying already, again do you not read this? i will quote me from an earlier answer."also note that even though only circling mins are published, you can still land straight in. this is why they have the note about steep descent rate if you see the runway at the MAP on the approach. the circle simply is a tool for them to increase the minimums. the AIM states 5-4-20©:">That sounds real professional right there at the end, dude. >Boondoggling extra pay does not qualify you as a professional.> Doing your job safely, efficiently and comfortably does.no complaints on my flying from the paying public. as far as circling, again it is not allowed at my company from the right seat, so the condescending, know-it-all tone is noted. my guess is Continental diverts if weather is marginal at Tegucigalpa, you must think that is boondoggling too. i'll ask my friend at Continental what their procedure is there and report back.again, who do you fly an ERJ for where you "get around"?

[KevinAu 441]

>>what part of REGIONAL jet do you not understand? i fly in>chicago a lot. never heard a circle done at ORD or MDW.>LGA/EWR nope, we went to HPN (ils to both runways), although>our ERJ's are at LGA. with GPS here to stay, circling will be>limited to those that need it. about as exotic as it gets for>us in ORD is NAS and FPO and weather down there is usually not>too big of a problem.>You never did ILS31C circle 22L at MDW? And never heard of it?You never did the Long Island Visual to 31 at LGA?You never did the 22L or 4R circle 29 at EWR?>>i did that already, do you not read? and also it's inside the>FAF.>2400/3 = 8nm from RWY VDP>1.7+5+1.3=8 which is 0.7nm inside the FAF.>Stepdown, I should have said stepdown. At 8 miles out, you are at 6700'msl. Which is 4400' above tdz. You need a VDP about 13mi out for that. With your VDP of 8 mile calculated from the MDA height, your VDP is outside the stepdown fix... According to the rules you present, the approach is impossible. You must go-around and make extra money on this one everytime since you'll never make your VDPs, ever.I don't know it all. But some of your assertions are incorrect and untenable, that's all.

[Guest CRJ700FO]

>You never did ILS31C circle 22L at MDW? And never heard of>it?nope. >You never did the Long Island Visual to 31 at LGA?nope. do you mean expressway visual to 31?>You never did the 22L or 4R circle 29 at EWR?nope. the only two circles i have heard performed was the ILS 32 circle to land 28L at PIT and ILS 1 circle to 33 at DCA. these were both on VFR days.the circle we always did in the sim was the ILS 22L circle to land 31L at JFK and the ILS 28 circle to land 18R at MEM.at ORD, they don't want circles, they figure you can land with a 25kt xwind. sometimes they'll even give you the *cough cough* 9kt tailwind. they don't even want you looking at airport diagrams and stopping, simply keep moving and figure it out on the fly.>Stepdown, I should have said stepdown. At 8 miles out, you>are at 6700'msl. Which is 4400' above tdz. You need a VDP>about 13mi out for that. With your VDP of 8 mile calculated>from the MDA height, your VDP is outside the stepdown fix... >According to the rules you present, the approach is>impossible. You must go-around and make extra money on this>one everytime since you'll never make your VDPs, ever.i agree and now your talking with the cha-ching (its a jetblue thing). i make my VDP's all the time, just not at Tegucigalpa, Honduras.>I don't know it all. But some of your assertions are>incorrect and untenable, that's all.please show me where i asserted a straight in was possible here? i simply showed an AIM reference that a circle need not circle. i asserted a cessna could do it.and the ERJ colors you fly for are....?

[KevinAu 441]

>>please show me where i asserted a straight in was possible>here? i simply showed an AIM reference that a circle need not>circle. i asserted a cessna could do it.>...by slipping. Seriously, on an instrument approach? Hey, I used to have a good time in the pattern in a little Cessna 140 flying tight approaches where I'd slipped through a curving final all the way to just about touchdown too. But to assert that it is normal to break out of the clouds and fog and then use a forward slip as your "normal rate of descent" to touchdown? I'm looking through the chart and I can't find a category or minima here for use with a slipping descent. If a slip is what they considered normal, why isn't this a straight in? The problem was that you disagreed that a circle is used to land from a high gradient approach. There are approaches out there, where you do have to circle all the way back around to land on the runway. VOR-A to Hayward (California), another one of those. Did it on my ATP ride. Same deal. Steep descent, then circle back around. They're out there. Just not at O'Hare. "a CIRCLE to runway 1 on a VISUAL is indeed a local procedure in which i stated. make no mistake this is no "normal" circle to land. have you EVER done a circle to land where you fly an approach to mins, fly over the runway then do a 180 to reenter a downwind and then proceed to do another 180deg turn to land? i do not think so, this is a LOCAL situation dictating this and it is not *basic*."That's what you wrote, just in case you forgot what we were bickering about.>and the ERJ colors you fly for are....?What difference does it make? I don't care what your real name is. Is it going to make a difference in your level of respect or disrespect? Just treat everybody with the same level of respect or disrespect on these forums and debate the merits of the argument, not who or what you think somebody is.

[Mace 1,904]

>>The MHP1 area is a military base which is right on the field>>on the east side. MHP4 must be another mil base because the>>city is N and W of MHP4.>>if you knew this before you should have told us. :-)>I did not know it. :) Your mention of "MHP" as a mil restricted area was the first I knew of that acronym. I am familiar with the term "MOA" on sectionals, Military Operations Area...but not MHP. Don't know what the large MHP circle on the se side is.But since you mentioned it, there are military a/c on the east apron of the airport. There's also a DC-6 sitting there, that was supposedly used to re-supply the Contras in Nicaragua in the 1980's...>based on the information you provided i would say a straight>in to 1 on a VISUAL basis is ok per this SOLE plate. the>circling you are describing is NOT part of the instrument>approach, but is rather a local procedure for landing, and>evidently any landing, on runway 1.>Maybe in a smaller aircraft. Or cargo aircraft. ?? But I wouldn't think any big jet pax operators do that, unless they want to clean their cabins a lot. Let-410's (small turboprops) fly into there too, maybe they do the straight in? But I doubt it.>FYI, 180KTS on a circle seems a little fast in an A321. I will do it slower then. That will help on the turn radius too.>on all the information i have read here, i would fly over the>MAP to the runway, fly the runway staying out of MHP1 and then>simply fly a left traffic pattern to runway 1 staying within>the basin, or whatever it is.>I will fly further down the runway, to give me more room to do the turn. That, coupled with a slower speed, maybe 160 KIAS, I should have enough room in the valley to do it. You should look at the geography there in FS. You need a 76m mesh to really appreciate it though. Default mesh won't show everything.>i will check with some freight dogs i know that fly to central>america and see what their procedures are for this airport.That would be great to hear what they know about that approach.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

[Mace 1,904]

>Didn't say I was disregarding anything but if you can make a>safe and stable approach by yourself you feel comfortable with>then it should be ok. Why I would differentiate would be>because passengers don't like to slip down to the runway for>landing.One time, about 15 years ago, I was a pax going into ORD in a MD-80, and it seemed like the pilot did a big slip on short final. I don't know if that's what was done, but it felt like a slip to me. It was a heavy crosswind situation. I didn't really like it, but I at least knew what was going on. Some people didn't, and kind of "freaked out" as they say.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

[Mace 1,904]

I learned a lot too! I got more info than I thought I would get, thanks to all.If you do that approach in the sim, I'd suggest you get 76m terrain mesh for your sim. It makes the approach so much more real. There is freeware 76m mesh available in the AVSIM library, you can find it by search for the author Jozef Kusters. Jozef made mesh for Central America.I plan to attempt to code this approach into FS for the AI to use, but I don't know if it will be do-able due to the unusual config.And if you or anyone gets wind of any info from cargo (or pax) pilots that fly into that place, feel free to post about it.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

[Murmur 3,941]

>I learned a lot too! I got more info than I thought I would>get, thanks to all.I found this whole thread very interesting, I'm gonna try the approach in X-Plane at minimums. Thanks for bringing it up!Marco