Don’t overestimate the thoroughness of German engineers. I once bought a D-reg that had been under German CAMO where the oxygen bottle mysteriously disappeared from the annuals after when it had to be replaced. Given the German’s affection for documenting everything, it was pretty easy to track down when the bottle disappeared and compare that to the required replacement date. Bottle was still there, btw. and ended up being very expensive to replace.
Do your pre-buy very very carefully
JasonC wrote:
But regardless who ever would voluntarily circle to land?
To save fuel when the IAP is pretty much on your direct track and minimas are high?
I saw it first hand (fresh PPL before I had an IR) on a (nordic) commercial flight where the crew let me jumpseat. They explained that the reason was to save time & fuel.
I’ve requested it a couple times. If nice visibility and ceiling not super low, why not? It can easily save 15 min.
Noe wrote:
If nice visibility and ceiling not super low,
That is essentially a cloudbreak followed by a visual approach. I am talking about circling at or near the minima ie 500-600ft AGL. It is a very dangerous procedure IMHO.
Agree on both
Peter wrote:
In that case you are in the same position I was in – until I got this done.
I didn’t know you had this done Peter.
I will dig this out again, and try to solve it.
The SOCATA KLN90 AFMS forbids the use of the gps in approach….
Thank you
Thomas
I didn’t realise you had a TB Thomas. Your profile is empty.
OK, yes, mine did too – for the KLN94. It was BRNAV ENROUTE only.
To be fair to Socata, there were only partially arrogant in this case. My plane was new in 2002 and at that time there were few if any GPS approaches in Europe.
And for TBs sold to the USA (which had loads of GPS approaches in 2002) the US dealer would knock up a quick field approval + 337… well he would for the customers who asked for it, which was about 1.543% of customers because the other 98+% had/have no idea what an AFMS is 
So one way or another Socata managed to sell $300k planes which were mostly useless in the USA (well, not useless, just illegal for proper use 
) and on which no European customer would even know what to look for.
However the DGAC were also rather militant as to what they would approve. They blocked the stormscope display rotation on the grounds that the pilot might use it to avoid TS, and they forced the fuel totaliser to be installed at a location whee it would read some 20-30% out. The former would be “fixed” by the dealer (if the customer noticed) and the latter has no fix unless you go N-reg (but most customers never noticed anyway).
I wonder if perhaps one route is for you to find a US based plane with a KLN90 which got the field approval, obtain the FAA records (on a CD) for something like $20, and use the field approval data to obtain an EASA AFMS. I do know EASA accepts FAA Major mods done as Field Approvals (other threads here on that) but I don’t know if that is only of a registry transfer (where that would obviously matter a lot) or whether it is more generally applicable.
And your KLN90 is from an even earlier era… when did GPS approaches arrive in the USA?
Until I got that AFMS done I used to fly NDB or VOR approaches, but actually using the KLN94 GPS. Most people would just ask for the GPS approach on the radio but you can’t do that if you have a “profile” e.g. run a pilot forum
Ok Thank you Peter.
Yes the place si from 1998, I don’t know about the GPS approaches in the USA.
So first I have to try to see if EASA would accept such a FAA major mod…. Even if I manage to find someone who has the answer, I don’t have so much hope in this…
Thomas
JasonC wrote:
I am talking about circling at or near the minima ie 500-600ft AGL. It is a very dangerous procedure IMHO.
Any procedure that isn’t trained for can be hazardous. Key to safety with circling is to maintain the altitude while your attention is split outside. You are 100% safe if you remain at the circling altitude and inside the circling area. I use a procedure and my autopilot in altitude and heading modes when circling. If I am straight in to the runway opposite to the landing runway, I am already on altitude hold and heading mode. Once inside the circling area and with the runway in sight, I command a turn 45 degrees to the downwind, time 25 seconds for spacing, and then command the turn to downwind. This allows me to always have the airport (if not the runway) in sight and allows a 180 degree turn to final without an overshoot. I normally fly the circle at around 105 Kts to stay inside the category B area.
NCYankee wrote:
I use a procedure and my autopilot in altitude and heading modes when circling. If I am straight in to the runway opposite to the landing runway, I am already on altitude hold and heading mode. Once inside the circling area and with the runway in sight, I command a turn 45 degrees to the downwind, time 25 seconds for spacing, and then command the turn to downwind. This allows me to always have the airport (if not the runway) in sight and allows a 180 degree turn to final without an overshoot. I normally fly the circle at around 105 Kts to stay inside the category B area.
And in the sim I use the same. That makes it as stable as possible but still usually a dive to get down. Never a good option IMHO.
As part of the EASA IR syllabus, circle to land procedures are trained pretty much like NCYankee describes it. The breakout turn is 30° I believe. Circling with a C172 isn’t very difficult — you can stay very close to the runway and you don’t need a lot of space for the course reversal. With a faster turbine aircraft or even a jet, it’s an entirely different thing and should probably be avoided.
I have recently spoken to somebody with a jet where the insurance contains a limitation for circling approaches.
