Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

PA-34-200T T7-RAR Seneca II down into the Bodensee lake in low vis

Emir wrote:

Flying approach on any autopilot requires readiness to switch to hand flying at any moment and flying to DH. I had AP failure in IMC and 200-300 feet above DH once in TB20 and once in DA42. Besides the feeling the actual safety was better with glass cockpit due to moving map and geo-referenced approach plate. Although the airports were not exactly comparable (Belgrade LYBE in flatlands with TB20 with 200’ DH and Sarajevo LQSA in mountains with DA42 with 450’ DH), I believe that actual safety was higher with glass cockpit

I guess nothing beat the enhanced situational awarness from glass, I try to keep current in both but not having wind magneta diamond on steam is too disorietating

On AP use, either I am 100% hand-flying all the way from FAF or AP ON in clouds and OFF once visual
AP disconnect by itself in clouds means go-around, it’s unfair to leave the hard bit for me
Of course, if too high I may ask the AP to think and try again by pressing APR

Which AP was it in TB20 and DA42?

Last Edited by Ibra at 22 Feb 12:43
ESSEX, United Kingdom

Ibra wrote:

Which AP was it in TB20 and DA42?

KFC150 in TB20 and KAP140 in DA42.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

AeroPlus wrote:

Nice! Do you still regularly visit?

Not as much as I would like to. Even though it is only 45 minutes away from where I live.

LSZH, Switzerland

Ibra wrote:

At DH with 1km-2km visbility, G1000+Synt-Vision may make some difference to the state of the landing gear after landing
At DH with visibility less than your landing roll, nothing beats a go-around and pulling the chute…

Talking of synth vision in an LPV approach, which appears to have a higher accuracy than ILS, in the absence of a shute, what would the outlook be to use the synthetic vision to either gain visibility or actually complete a landing?

Personally I think it would be quite difficult to judge and also I have no experience with the accuracy of the synth vision (I don’t have it on my Aspen but plan to activate it once I start flying IFR)

But would it present an option in an emergency?

Or even more provokatively, could there be a direction where Synth vision could bring CAT II or even III to GA eventually, possibly via head up display? I mean this in a hand flown way, such as some airlines do handflown CAT II/III with a HUD.

LSZH, Switzerland

With a friend we have tried 6 landings each one of us 100% on his G1000+SV, I think it’s “doable” to complete landing on a very long runway but it’s not smooth, it does glitch and it’s hard to resist fast ground sights and to keep straight after touchdown (you will have to keep some power and roll on long runway, you just can’t make STOL landings on SV )

To gain visibility, it would be useful I guess but again one has to have ground & obstacles in-sight or sit on protected paths (bellow DH it’s visual manoeuvring anyway and may not be protected), to do approach, I have no idea how SV is useful but hopefully I can soon try Flight-Path-Vector (usually it’s Flight Director)

To judge accuracy, it’s easy to try in VMC or watch it while someone else is doing the job either old school or watching for him, like any piece of equipment used beyond it’s intended purpose, one has to try it and see if it works !

Last Edited by Ibra at 22 Feb 23:41
ESSEX, United Kingdom

I find the synthetic vision useful to find the runway environment in very low visibility situations. If there is crosswind for example, the position of the runway on your PFD is where you should find it. I see it also as an extra confirmation when on the ILS that I am approaching the runway. :-)

In the SR22T with the Garmin FFC700 AP I will disconnect the AP no earlier right at DH.

Last Edited by AeroPlus at 23 Feb 03:31
EDLE, Netherlands

I must have posted that picture here before, but once at DA I did see some light coming from below which was the high intensity runway lights and was able to land ok (more trouble taxiing after that).

@AeroPlus I think here the North American practice of including the approach landing system in the approach brief is useful. I say North American, but you don’t hear it often in Europe.

At CAT 1 minima on an un coupled ILS approach single crew system minima is 800 metres with a full ALS, the extra 250 m RVR should give you sight of the lead in approach lights and two horizontal bar lights (only one horizontal bar on multi crew system minima of 550 m), you would only establish the runway edge intensity lights at around 150 feet AGL with this visibility. The first set of approach lights would allow you to continue on instruments, the REIL, or REL would trigger the transition to visual, bringing in visual cues into the scan. There is specific lighting which needs to be identified at DA, a glow from below could also be a heavenly, intimation of mortality to paraphrase Wordsworth :)

Oxford (EGTK)
27 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top