Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land"

On Jan 18, 9:37 pm, "Robert M. Gary" <N70...@> wrote:
> On Jan 18, 6:32 pm, "danm...@" <danm...@> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The A56 drag coefficient is a bit more than a Lear and an F-104, so
> > it's pretty slippery.
>
> True, but its still a truck compared to a Mooney.
>
> > But I think teaching this particular method as the only way for every
> > airplane is a mistake, as it will eventually lead to overly fast
> > landings when the student climbs aboard his/her faster airplane.
>
> I think anyone who teaches either technique and claims its good for
> all aircraft is probably full of . I wouldn't teach flying
> approaches w/o flaps in a 767. When I'm giving training in the Mooney
> or occasionally in the A36 people are looking for type specific
> training. Showing them how its done in other aircraft (like a 767) is
> not what they are looking for. In both those aircraft I find the no
> flap approach best. Add to that that I live in a fog valley and
> finding nothing but 0/0 at mins is not uncommon so shooting approaches
> to mins in actual is not theory around here and neither are missed in
> actual.
>
> -Robert

So, you are able to:
Apply full flaps
Reduce speed from 90-100 K to 70 K
Continue descending to the touchdown point
Stabilize the approach at somewhere near 1.3-1.4 Vso
All beginning at 200' AGL?

Dan

"Robert M. Gary" <N7093v@> wrote in message
news:a4f267c7-2c28-49dd-af70-e10c33b78a34@v29g2000hsf..com...
On Jan 15, 11:15 am, kontiki <kont...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>
>> Flight instructors should at least tell their students
>> about what IFR fixes are and where they are (at that airport).
>> Its not rocket science and it will help the student in the long run.
>>
>
> That would require students to purchase IFR charts for every airport
> they visit.
>

I took "at that airport" to mean the home field, where most of the student
instruction takes place. But the purchase of IFR charts wouldn't be
required for any airport, they're available free online. Once the fixes are
identified the student can use a site such as AeroPlanner or SkyVector to
plot them on his VFR chart, which he should be purchasing anyway.


>
> They would not only need approach charts but enroutes as well.
>

Why would they need enroute charts?


>
> Its much simplier to just tell the IFR pilots that they need to
> use VFR friendly phrasing. Instead of saying "I'm at FOOBAR" they
> could just say "I'm 5 miles out on the the ILS straight in runway 12".
> Its not very hard.
>

How is that VFR friendly phrasing? It uses IFR terminology.

"B A R R Y" <beech23pilotm> wrote in message
news:P%7jj.87941$YL5.66669@newssvr29.news.prodigy. net...
>
> I was taught, and it was reinforced by the DE, to use distance and
> direction over waypoints.
>
> If you think about it, it's not difficult to do, as the distance from the
> named point to the airport is usually right on the plate.
>

But unless you state that your position was determined by GPS other pilots
cannot be confident of the accuracy of your report.

"Robert M. Gary" <N7093v@> wrote in message
news:abd52571-9afe-4f42-be32-9bb6bf39d9aa@d21g2000prf..com...
>>
>> If an instructor can't explain to a student (with a simple diagram)
>> what the fixes are for the common instrument approaches at the airport
>> they are doing their students a disfavor.
>>
>
> There is no requirement for VFR pilots to visit an airport with an
> instructor before they first fly to that airport. Likewise there is no
> requirement for VFR pilots to purchase approach plates and enroute
> charts for cross country airports.
>

A good instructor will go beyond what is required and explain pertinent
things like approach fixes to his student.

"Hamish Reid" <hamishxyz@panxyzdemoniazyx.invalid> wrote in message
news:hamishxyz-E6D193.12321102022008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
>
> No -- you know where he says he is. That may not even be where he thinks
> he is, let alone where he actually is (said from personal experience).
>

He will be and say where his instruments indicate him to be.


>
> Ditto for the IFR case.
>

Wrong.

In article <13qbmmar4fa5ce0@corp.supernews.com>,
"Steven P. McNicoll" <roncachamp@> wrote:

> "Hamish Reid" <hamishxyz@panxyzdemoniazyx.invalid> wrote in message
> news:hamishxyz-E6D193.12321102022008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
> >
> > No -- you know where he says he is. That may not even be where he thinks
> > he is, let alone where he actually is (said from personal experience).
> >
>
> He will be and say where his instruments indicate him to be.

How so?

>
> >
> > Ditto for the IFR case.
> >
>
> Wrong.

How so?

Hamish

"Hamish Reid" <hamishxyz@panxyzdemoniazyx.invalid> wrote in message
news:hamishxyz-1E7812.08160504022008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
>>
>> He will be and say where his instruments indicate him to be.
>>
>
> How so?
>

Read FAA-H-8083-15 and FAA-H-8261-1A