Tips for ifr approaches in the m20c

[M20F]

8 minutes ago, DustinNwind said:

You really don't need be and personal minimum should be adhered to ALWAYS, not a lax "sometimes" sort of way. If you're flying in IMC you should already have an alternate. 

The weather doesn’t consider your personal minimums. 

[Hank]

2 hours ago, M20F said:

You really need to be if you are going to fly IMC and don’t have a chute.  While I hear what you are saying about personal minimums, the weather changes and you need to be able to play all the way to the limit (and 200’ becomes 100’ if you see what I will say is runway environment but realize the FAR’s list specific items).  

Not encouraging anyone to push themselves but the reality is you can’t control the weather, be a Boy Scout. 

I plan to fly places within my personal minimums, and plan an alternate or two if there's a decent chance it'll go below, I try to get an alternate that won't. But I do practice to minimums, because the weather you get is what you see out the windshield. "Weather forecasts are wrong too often to trust, but right too often to ignore." 

[DXB]

2 hours ago, M20F said:

You really need to be if you are going to fly IMC and don’t have a chute.  While I hear what you are saying about personal minimums, the weather changes and you need to be able to play all the way to the limit (and 200’ becomes 100’ if you see what I will say is runway environment but realize the FAR’s list specific items).  

Not encouraging anyone to push themselves but the reality is you can’t control the weather, be a Boy Scout. 

It’s a fair point. For now, I think for me being a Boy Scout may be planning a no flap landing after breaking out less than 500 AGL.  These seem to work just fine.  

[M20C_AV8R]

1 minute ago, DXB said:

It’s a fair point. For now, I think for me being a Boy Scout may be planning a no flap landing after breaking out less than 500 AGL.  These seem to work just fine.  

I’m still working on my ifr, by far the majority of all of my landings are without flaps, no issue at all doing so, normally we have a long runway to work with

[DXB]

11 minutes ago, M20C_AV8R said:

I’m still working on my ifr, by far the majority of all of my landings are without flaps, no issue at all doing so, normally we have a long runway to work with

Its good to fly precisely, but a fat, long runway sure does take the pressure off when destination ceilings are lowish and uncertain.  

[Hank]

11 minutes ago, DXB said:

Its good to fly precisely, but a fat, long runway sure does take the pressure off when destination ceilings are lowish and uncertain.  

So do lots of bright, flashing lights on the ground.

[Janat83]

19 minutes ago, Hank said:

So do lots of bright, flashing lights on the ground.

Oh yeah ALSF II is my favorite

[DustinNwind]

2 hours ago, M20F said:

The weather doesn’t consider your personal minimums. 

I don't even know what that means - If you planned correctly you bug out and go to your alternate. A fool continues as the weather gets worst on approach. Please be mindful of that kind of thought process on tips for IFR, that's how people get killed, and even more so pilots that don't know better and want to be heroes. 

[midlifeflyer]

9 hours ago, M20F said:

The weather doesn’t consider your personal minimums. 

No, but your decision-making does.

 

 

 

...or at least should.

Edited August 3, 2019 by midlifeflyer

[M20F]

6 hours ago, DustinNwind said:

I don't even know what that means - If you planned correctly you bug out and go to your alternate. A fool continues as the weather gets worst on approach. Please be mindful of that kind of thought process on tips for IFR, that's how people get killed, and even more so pilots that don't know better and want to be heroes. 

I would make the point it is the opposite of that. We all plan carefully, review the weather, sometimes though the forecast isn’t correct, equipment breaks, and things happen.  What happens when the weather is bad at your destination and there is an incident at your alternate and that airport is now closed?

 I am not advocating anyone to be reckless.  But you should be capable with an IFR ticket to execute an approach safely to minimums.  If you can’t then to me that is taking a risk and you probably should stick to VMC.   

[midlifeflyer]

16 minutes ago, M20F said:

I would make the point it is the opposite of that. We all plan carefully, review the weather, sometimes though the forecast isn’t correct, equipment breaks, and things happen.  What happens when the weather is bad at your destination and there is an incident at your alternate and that airport is now closed?

 

The exact same thing which happens if the forecast isn't correct, my destination ends up being below published minimums and the alternate I chose for filing is now closed.  Look at the weather and select somewhere else to go.

There should be no difference between the FAA's and ones personal minimums in terms of process.

Nothing requires you to go to your filed alternate.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2019 by midlifeflyer

[M20F]

2 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

 Look at the weather and select somewhere else to go.

 

 

That isn’t always an option either.  We are apparently going to agree to disagree which is fine.   

[midlifeflyer]

Just now, M20F said:

That isn’t always an option either.  We are apparently going to agree to disagree which is fine.   

It is. But let me just ask. In your scenario, do you bust FAA minimums? After all, you have no where else to go.

[M20F]

Just now, midlifeflyer said:

It is. But let me just ask. In your scenario, do you bust FAA minimums? After all, you have no where else to go.

Where did I ever say or suggest that.  I said a person with an IFR ticket should be able to fly an approach to minimums.  

[midlifeflyer]

48 minutes ago, M20F said:

Where did I ever say or suggest that.  I said a person with an IFR ticket should be able to fly an approach to minimums.  

But that's not what I'm reading in your posts. I absolutely agree that one should train to the level that they can fly an approach to minimums.  But that is not the same thing as setting personal minimums and treating them as minimums. 

You keep coning up with these scenarios where supposedly you "have to" fly an approach to minimums and "bust" personal minimums, like, 

1 hour ago, M20F said:

 What happens when the weather is bad at your destination and there is an incident at your alternate and that airport is now closed?

All I'm really doing is pointing out that the answer is exactly the same whether the applicable minimums are your or the FAA's. It involves realistically assessing one's capabilities, making good decisions and situational awareness. Not, what I see in most of these discussions, a knee-jerk, "if the FAA says we're allowed to go this far, I must be willing to go this far every single time or I'm not a real pilot, and you better get a chute (your words)."

Edited August 3, 2019 by midlifeflyer

[M20F]

7 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

You keep coning up with these scenarios where supposedly you "have to" fly an approach to minimums and "bust" personal minimums, like,

What I have said I feel clearly is that planning and personal minimums clearly have a place in aviation. Weather is however unpredictable and while you may set X as a minimum personally you need to be prepared for worse or shouldn’t be in IMC.  

One can also make a situation worse by being overly committed to a personal minimum.   Weather is below my minimums but within the confines of the approved IAP, let’s go to the alternate, weather is now worse at alternate, I don’t have enough gas to hold or divert further, I run out of gas and crash. 

[M20F]

19 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

"if the FAA says we're allowed to go this far, I must be willing to go this far every single time or I'm not a real pilot, and you better get a chute (your words)."

And it is fairly disingenuous to construe that sentence and imply it is something I said because it isn’t. 

[midlifeflyer]

Just now, M20F said:

What I have said I feel clearly is that planning and personal minimums clearly have a place in aviation. Weather is however unpredictable and while you may set X as a minimum personally you need to be prepared for worse or shouldn’t be in IMC.  

One can also make a situation worse by being overly committed to a personal minimum.   Weather is below my minimums but within the confines of the approved IAP, let’s go to the alternate, weather is now worse at alternate, I don’t have enough gas to hold or divert further, I run out of gas and crash. 

...which, as I also pointed out,  is also a good scenario to going below FAA minimums. Problem with the scenario is, like most "you will crash and die" scenarios, it involves a chain of poor decisions and getting behind the flight.

 

[DXB]

I think @M20F was mainly trying to say that one should know how to fly the approach to ILS / LPV minimums from an aircraft configuration  perspective, even if one choses to avoid situations that require it.  I hadn’t adequately considered how I would handle the flaps if I break out at 200. Now I have considered it, so the discussion was helpful.

In the real world,  if the forecast ceiling is under 500 at the destination, I ain’t goin’.    If it’s at 800-500, I’m going only if it’s a big runway with an ILS or LPV AND there’s multiple outs if things aren’t going right.  But what if I get there, and I’m perfectly on localizer and GS, and not breaking out at 500?  I’m probably going to continue until  closer to minimums.  Then I’d better be confident in handling the aircraft all the way to the pavement, which I first saw at 200 AGL.  

[PTK]

1 hour ago, M20F said:

...I don’t have enough gas to hold or divert further, I run out of gas and crash

 This is easily solved. Simply land at your destination, fuel up and then fly to your alternate. 

[Jerry 5TJ]

Just for information how low do you feel comfortable flying a fully-stabilized LPV approach?  

In practice with a CFII I’ve flown down to 30-40’ AGL and the guidance is still perfectly valid.  

Not recommending this for any but emergency procedures here — But in some circumstances rather than go around I would go down to 50’ AGL on an LPV.  

Better still — Be at home relaxing in a comfortable armchair rather than flying in such wx. 

[ilovecornfields]

53 minutes ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

Just for information how low do you feel comfortable flying a fully-stabilized LPV approach?  

In practice with a CFII I’ve flown down to 30-40’ AGL and the guidance is still perfectly valid.  

Not recommending this for any but emergency procedures here — But in some circumstances rather than go around I would go down to 50’ AGL on an LPV.  

Better still — Be at home relaxing in a comfortable armchair rather than flying in such wx. 

I’m not an advocate of busting minimums, but I recently had a CFI do this with me during an IPC and with the LPV and green dot I’m pretty sure I would “crash right on the centerline” as certain people are fond of saying. ;-)

I tend to tanker fuel so I doubt this will ever happen to me but faced with multiple missed approaches and running out of gas (like the Arrow in the AOPA video)  an LPV slightly below minimums is probably more survivable.