C-135 Backer
Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 21
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
ifly4food said:No, no ,no. You misunderstand me. I'm saying it's best to make part 91 approaches meet the requirements of part 121 and 135 where you must have the weather reported above minimums before beginning an approach.
I didn't mean we should ban all approaches, I meant we should ban cowboy "go take a look" approaches where you can shoot it even though it's zero-zero.
JetPilot500 said:If that is the case, what would be the point of all of those approaches to airports that don't have a tower or weather reporting?
ifly4food said:That is a good point. Commercial ops must have weather reporting on the field, but part 91 ops don't. Maybe all fields with an approach should have ASOS installed.
Agreed. But more rules isn't the answer in most cases.pireps said:For some people, creating more FARs won't matter.
So no more GPS apchs either, huh. OOOOOOK.Anyways, I believe we need to get rid of non-precision approaches altogether. The possibility of prematurely going below MDA, accidentally missing a fix, not going around when the time's up, etc is just too high. And let's get rid of NDB's while we're at it. They're nice on an ILS for situational awareness but that's about it.
Why? Where are all the GA planes falling out of the sky?Oh and let's totally ban zero-zero takeoffs for part 91. How can someone in a C-172 with one vacuum pump believe it is safe to go when the "big boys" with dual EFIS and all the bells and whistles can't go?
yes, they can be quite safe in G airspace clear of clouds at 80 or 90-kts. Done it many times. you've forgotten that the little bug smashers fly a lot slower and lower quite safely in most instances. something about approach categories are coming to mind... Also, you've also not considered the fact that light GA planes (usually operating pt 91) aren't carrying 19 or so pax in the back. It's apples and oranges.And how about those ridiculous VFR weather minimums that are learned for the written and then forgotten? Let's see:Class G: take off with one mile visibility and clear of clouds... yeah that's real safe. We'll just stay below that overcast layer at 600 feet and we'll be alright!
Nothing will ever be 100% safe. Flying is safer than driving, and that's a pretty good standard for comparison. At some point it isn't the FAR that makes you safe, its YOU that makes you safe.pireps said:But all too often I read in an accident synopsis that a "legally" current and qualified pilot attempted an approach in low IMC and then somehow mysteriously crashed. And I am so sick and tired of it! So what can we do about it? Preventing poor judgment is an awfully daunting task. Stricter guidelines for training? Tighter rules? More enforcement? I don't know the answer.