No, i never refuel the aircraft in the morning before a flight. I do that when i have less than 30 gallons, on a Sunday afternoon, or sometimes upon my return.
And i do an abbreviated preflight check from memory: Oil, left gear, left wing, aileron, flaps, ststic ports, antennas, elevators, rudder, unlock right door …. finished in 2 minutes.
Why do you feel an ILS is necessary? Certainly, I prefer an ILS over other approach aids, but typically NPA minima are 2-300 ft above ILS minima and does that really make that much a difference to the dispatch rate for a light GA flight?
An ILS probably improves despatch rate from 90% to 99% – certainly at the UK end, warm front weather, etc.
I agree with Peter that the availability of a precision approach like the ILS increases dispatch rates. If the airport even has high intensity approach lights, then it will be very difficult to have to do a missed approach due to missing part of the runway environment due to bad visibility.
AeroPlus wrote:
I agree with Peter that the availability of a precision approach like the ILS increases dispatch rates.
Of course it does. The question is how much it matters. When discussion dispatch rates for “well-equipped” light GA in this forum, figures like 80% are frequently mentioned. I can’t imagine that light GA can achieve 99% dispatch rate like Peter suggested even with WX radar and FIKI. The lower the dispatch rate, the less marginal differences (like the lack of ILS) will matter.
With radar, deice, FL270 ceiling and the systems competence you have 99%.
That is what say a TBM gives you, or say a 421.
It is very expensive. And oxygen is not viable.
I think very high dispatch rates are possible with the PA46s, TBMs and pressurised twins. Cirrus a bit less but still good – altitude, no radar and O2 a bit restrictive.
With FIKI I think having that in conjunction with a good climb rate is the key and an airframe that can cope with a bit of ice. Even though in practice I had very little meaningful ice, knowing you can cope with it helps a lot.
Being able to climb high means enroute weather is much less of a concern particularly in Europe. In the US there is much more high altitude convective weather.
However if you are looking for 99% or more, “much more” loses its meaning. You have to do the lot.
Southern Europe gets impressive CBs to FL450 too 
A 737 etc gets to perhaps 99.9% via CAT3 ILS.
Peter wrote:
A 737 etc gets to perhaps 99.9% via CAT3 ILS.
Unless you’re talking Lufthansa, then you can beat the dispatch rate with a C150…
achimha wrote:
Unless you’re talking Lufthansa, then you can beat the dispatch rate with a C150…
Yes, a high dispatch rate also requires a pilot prepared to actually fly the aircraft…
achimha wrote:
Unless you’re talking Lufthansa, then you can beat the dispatch rate with a C150…
Sometimes I feel this forum needs the “rolling on the floor, laughing” smiley.
AeroPlus wrote:
And I do not have to wear a suit :-)
That’s a priceless advantage.
