question for a piedmont pilot

Reply Subscribe

Page 2 of 9

Last »

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

02-13-2007, 06:57 PM

#11

Puppyz

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2006

Posts: 367

nevermind. post deleted. thanks for the clarification guys.

Last edited by Puppyz; 02-13-2007 at 07:09 PM.

02-13-2007, 07:00 PM

#12

bintynogin

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2006

Position: FO

Posts: 290

I'm not defending this guy and wasnt there but which approach was he doing. That airport doesnt have an ILS approach and I dont know if Piedmont doest RNAV with their dash. The airport does have a VOR/DME A which is a circling approach that bring you in at almost a 90 degree angle. Maybe thats what he was doing..

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0701/05709VDA.PDF

02-13-2007, 07:02 PM

#13

racers2207

Line Holder

Joined APC: Mar 2006

Position: EMB 145 FO

Posts: 62

Visibility is the controlling factor on an approach, not ceiling. As long as you have the visibility to shoot the approach, you can try. There is always the possibility that the pilot's had the runway in sight at minimums and continued the approach. I wouldn't go hauling off and passing judgment if you don't have all the facts. No one besides the pilots on that plane knows what they saw.

02-13-2007, 07:05 PM

#14

bintynogin

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2006

Position: FO

Posts: 290

looking at the metars for the pass couple of hours... It look like the winds were favoring runway 3 which only have a circling approach. Low ceilings but that doesnt matter. As long as he had the vis he could do it it. I doubt piedmonts dash 100's have RNAV capabilities. Just a thought

KHXD 132118Z 08004KT 09SM SCT005 BKN021 18/17 A2975
KHXD 132050Z 07004KT 7SM BKN002 BKN020 16/16 A2976
KHXD 131950Z 06005KT 4SM BR OVC002 16/16 A2981
KHXD 131850Z 08005KT 8SM OVC004 16/16 A2986
KHXD 131830Z 08006KT 7SM BKN003 OVC022 17/17 A2987
KHXD 131750Z 04004KT 6SM BR SCT002 BKN032 OVC050 16/16 A2990
KHXD 131647Z 06005KT 11/2SM ZL BKN002 0VC023 16/14 A2994

02-13-2007, 07:07 PM

#15

fosters

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2005

Posts: 1,425

Quote:

Originally Posted by bintynogin

Before people go calling the sheriff re-read this guys post. Keep in mind, airline pilots get paid by the hour, if we have to divert no skin off our backs. PDT is no different. I don't think anyone 121 pilot would drop down another 300' below mins, that's more reserved for the 135 world.

02-13-2007, 07:13 PM

#16

350pilot

On Reserve

Thread Starter

Joined APC: Aug 2006

Position: Air King 350 Left

Posts: 22

the pilot reported that he was on the gps approach and told the tower he was crossing the gps final approach fix. the tower questioned his position when he was over town doing this circling maneuver. what he did was reckless and against the rules, but I guess you guys think it's ok so I will not say anything else about it. i would expect to to see this kind of thing from a weekend pilot flying a bonanza but it was a suprise to see a professional airline pilot doing that with passengers in the back. excuse me for making the assumption that you airline pilots are professionals that follow the rules.

02-13-2007, 07:19 PM

#17

bintynogin

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2006

Position: FO

Posts: 290

I was just giving this guy the benefit of the doubt. You could be right and if you are what he did was wrong. I agree with you but maybe he was doing the VOR and not the GPS... Just maybe, nothing to get mad about.

If there are any PDT pilots reading this, do you guys have RNAV and GPS in you dash's?

02-13-2007, 07:22 PM

#18

ToiletDuck

Che Guevara

Joined APC: Aug 2005

Posts: 6,408

Quote:

Originally Posted by racers2207

Visibility is the controlling factor on an approach, not ceiling.

Say what?!? You aren't allowed to descend from the circling minimums until you have the airport insight AND are within the landing environment which is a 30 degree angle from the centerline of the approach end of the runway. Just because you have visual doesn't mean you get to drop below mins on a circle. You're still on a published part of the approach.

Quote:

Pilots should remain at or above the circling altitude until the aircraft is continuously in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers.
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...504.html#5-4-7

I can't find the 30 degree bit but I know I read it just the other day on what defines the landing environment. I'll keep digging.

02-13-2007, 07:26 PM

#19

racers2207

Line Holder

Joined APC: Mar 2006

Position: EMB 145 FO

Posts: 62

I no longer work for Piedmont but did up until the middle of January. They have RNAV, but are not approved to do GPS approaches. This story sounds kind of fishy to me. You have no way of knowing what those pilots saw without being up in that cockpit. Just because something looked unsafe to you, doesn't necessarily mean it was.

02-13-2007, 07:29 PM

#20

racers2207

Line Holder

Joined APC: Mar 2006

Position: EMB 145 FO

Posts: 62

I was referring to beginning the approach. You don't know whether they actually ducked below minimums to get below the deck. That is illegal, but I doubt they did that. Someone else has perceived that they did, but I highly doubt they would break an FAR rather than just divert to Savannah.