question for a piedmont pilot
02-13-2007, 07:33 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: FO
Posts: 290
Originally Posted by racers2207
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, 07:35 PM
#22
Che Guevara
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
Originally Posted by bintynogin
There you go.. so that mean there as a strong chance he was doing the VOR/DME A which only requires 1sm to start the appoach. Dash-8 100, 200, and 200 are approved from cirling approaches so maybe thats what they were doing. I doubt a captain allowed it to go so far then again anything is possible
02-13-2007, 07:36 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by ToiletDuck
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.
02-13-2007, 07:37 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,425
Originally Posted by ToiletDuck
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.
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.
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.
I've never hear the 30 degree thing before, that's a new one. FAR 91.175 says nothing about this "30 degree landing environment" you speak of, however it does stipulate 121 guys touch down within the touchdown zone.
02-13-2007, 07:58 PM
#26
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by captchris
Probably a new Piedmonster FO... he probably just graduated from UND or Purdue---give him a break. 
Clever. While it may have been a brand new FO from a school like UND or Purdue, the reality is that each happen to be two of the top collegiate aviation programs in the country. We all have a starting point. So like you said...give him a break. If the approach was in fact that of the FOs doing (which would have been the case if the circling approach was made to the right), the captain should ultimately be held responsible if he/she neglected to either hit the TOGA or resume control of the aircraft altogether. Again, none of us (other than 350pilot) were there to witness the occasion, so make your own conclusions.
As for descending from a circling only if you're within 30 degrees of the runway.....you got me there. Care to share where you found this?
02-13-2007, 08:05 PM
#28
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 64
350pilot:
How in the world do you know what their altitude was? Was it what you perceived while looking out above the trees? Seeing an airplane at a distance skimming the trees near you doesn't equate to him skimming the trees where he is. I doubt anyone at PDT would do something as foolish as you are suggesting given the number of narks out there willing to blow a guy in to the FAA or company for something they think they saw, let alone the high level of professionalism they possess. The very fact that you heard them speak of a GPS approach when a PDT 100 is neither equipped nor approved to perform such an approach leads to question your perception. Ruin these guys' lives for a week if it floats your boat, otherwise worry about your own ship.
How in the world do you know what their altitude was? Was it what you perceived while looking out above the trees? Seeing an airplane at a distance skimming the trees near you doesn't equate to him skimming the trees where he is. I doubt anyone at PDT would do something as foolish as you are suggesting given the number of narks out there willing to blow a guy in to the FAA or company for something they think they saw, let alone the high level of professionalism they possess. The very fact that you heard them speak of a GPS approach when a PDT 100 is neither equipped nor approved to perform such an approach leads to question your perception. Ruin these guys' lives for a week if it floats your boat, otherwise worry about your own ship.
02-13-2007, 08:35 PM
#29
Che Guevara
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
The FAA while maybe not on everyone's nice side has to backup a decision. They'd contact the tower, possibly get radar recordings if they have them there. They'll find out. If he's innocent then no biggie. If he's not then you just saved several people.
02-13-2007, 08:38 PM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by lear24
350pilot:
How in the world do you know what their altitude was? Was it what you perceived while looking out above the trees? Ruin these guys' lives for a week if it floats your boat, otherwise worry about your own ship.
How in the world do you know what their altitude was? Was it what you perceived while looking out above the trees? Ruin these guys' lives for a week if it floats your boat, otherwise worry about your own ship.
Exactly. When this guy can pull the tapes from the flight and prove to me that this aircraft was flown at the measly 150 feet above the ground (that he claims) on a circling approach, then we'll talk. Until then, spare the crew.
Last edited by flyguy8307; 02-13-2007 at 08:43 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AirWillie
Flight Schools and Training
10
02-05-2006 08:37 AM
