alioth wrote:
the Bonanza’s got a high enough gear down speed to do it, and with the gear down you can get rid of the speed pretty handily in the last stages of the approach,
That works well until you forget to put the gear down 
because your attention got distracted…
Aviathor wrote:
That works well until you forget to put the gear down because your attention got distracted…
I don’t think this is a big danger, as when you arrive at ~4NM at ~140kts, you need everything you have to slow you down, so you quite naturally think about extending the gear.
Low drag approaches are taught here extensively, and I’ve never heard about a gear up landing because of this.
No wonder GA gets thrown out of the busier airports with lots of CAT if people think it’s a great idea to extend gear before FAF and slide down the ILS with 85kts…
Peter wrote:
However, for some magical reasons, ATC has no apparent problem dealing with the same aircraft flown by holders of the full IR
What I meant was that except from the very few airports with very high traffic density, like some major airline hubs, there is no problem for the ATC to handle all kinds of aircraft simultaneously; Airlines, helicopters, VFR (microlight and GA) doing circuits and flying to and from etc. It’s done here all the time, it’s just a matter of organizing things. If “discrimination” against GA somehow would be a result of this new IR proposal, then the someone, somewhere has a much bigger and very different problem to solve in any case before anything worth while can be done.
tomjnx wrote:
I don’t think this is a big danger, as when you arrive at ~4NM at ~140kts
The Annecy gear up landing with the TB20 may not be a prime example since there was no intent to do a low drag approach, but still. And I am not sure how much time is really saved by doing 140 kts for 1-3 NM before slowing down at 4 NM from touch-down. Of course if you have a 10 mile final, it might be worthwhile. And if IMC, then this could bring us back to the discussion about stabilised approaches big-time!
In September I kept high speed on final to EDDK (fixed gear, VMC) and was asked to slow down to minimum safe speed to allow an airplane to depart.
Aviathor wrote:
And I am not sure how much time is really saved by doing 140 kts for 1-3 NM before slowing down at 4 NM from touch-down.
Late lineups are not often available at the airports I frequent – mainly due to topography
Aviathor wrote:
And if IMC, then this could bring us back to the discussion about stabilised approaches big-time!
The same discussion could be had for late lineups…
It requires to get used to do the config change, but I get it done within roughly a dot (GS), so I’m comfortable doing this in any non-convective weather.
tomjnx wrote:
Late lineups are not often available at the airports I frequent – mainly due to topography
What came to mind yesterday was the approach to Strasbourg where the FAF is at 13 NM IIRC. In that case is certainly makes sense to keep speed up. But keeping the speed up may also take the controller by surprise because he was planning to let a couple of airplanes depart while a light airplane is on final at 85 kts. If they really need you to keep the speed up, they can ask for it. Doing it unsollicited may screw up their plans.
Aviathor wrote:
But keeping the speed up may also take the controller by surprise
That has not been my experience, and I do pretty much all of my approaches as low drag approaches (because by now I’m more comfortable that way)
Aviathor wrote:
If they really need you to keep the speed up, they can ask for it
But they won’t, most of the time. I guess it’s because if an accident happened, they could get some heat for talking somebody into doing something he’s not comfortable with. I can’t remember I’ve ever been asked, but at the busier airports they were often happy with me doing it.
It is becomng more and more difficult arranging these things with controllers.
Ages ago, Biggin Tower would ask you to vacate at A3 if possible when they needed you off the runway quickly (about 600 metres from the threshold, next viable exit to the left is at 1,700m).Then they stopped doing that, but when I asked them where they would like me to vacate they would give an answer. Now they don’t even do that – too afraid of causing an incident – which is annoying, since if I come down the ILS and change the frequency on final I do not have the awareness of what is going on in the circuit or on the taxiways to make a sensible decision myself. And it isn’t a no-brainer – vacating early can get me in the way of opposite direction traffic to the taxiway, and vacating late can cause delays to circuit traffic. Now, I just vacate at the end unless there is somebody at the hold waiting for departure, which is obvious enough, especially since ATC has gotten worse and worse over time squeezing in departures, and for all I know the poor sod has been at the hold for ages.
In a fast single, the speed range for an approach is between 80-160kt, if one has speed brakes (proper ones, or those with wheels at the end and a high Vle) and practice, down to less than two miles if visual… shame if ATC don’t want to work with that.
Fitting in with jet traffic at large airports requires “can do” attitude on both sides, and a dialogue, I find it unfortunate that the attitude goes towards ’doesn’t follow the standard, let’s keep them out’ in Europe.
The full article from Flight Training News (a UK ATO business mag) is here – we will take it down if they complain but it is good publicity for the mag.
They claim only one EIR was done in the UK and only one in France. And the CB IR is said to have excessively hard exams.
The BIR will have minima of 500ft DH absolute, or 200ft above the published DH. Min vis of 1500m.
This is very similar to the UK IMCR stuff, on which the min vis is 1800m (yeah, funny considering that after 2012 you can VFR in 1500m) and only this vis figure is a legal limit; the DH increase is a recommendation.
The key to the BIR getting anywhere will be in the usual stuff which makes the FAA IR so accessible in the USA
The EIR / CB IR did not address any of the above at all.
This is really a “European IMC Rating” which was always thought to be totally impossible, outside the UK and possibly a few other countries. What has changed? EASA appears to be in favour but the individual countries will still have the same objections.
Also this sub-ICAO IR opens a route to BIR holders being blocked from some airspace and/or some airports.
In the Fliegermagazin there was an article written by a pilot who recently got his EIR, so there is one in Germany too, and in the RT class I’m in right now are at least four EIR candidates. They should give it some time, my ATO is a couple of months away of getting their syllabus approved.
