Pitch and Power on the ILS

[cforst513]

when shooting ILS approaches, just to be safe, do you guys usually fly it down above the glideslope a bit? i've asked this before regarding PAPI's and VASI's, but how about ILS's? or since it's a 'precision approach', you don't have to add in that extra saftey factor?

 

[taters]

As stated by an examiner that I did most of my rides with:

"When people say pitch for airspeed, power for altitude, I tell them on takeoff not use any power, just give me some pitch. If your theory is correct, then pitching us down the runway should give us all the airspeed we need for takeoff!"

I got a kick out of that.

This guy wants to fly for g-0 jets,,,,,,scab

 

[minitour]

when shooting ILS approaches, just to be safe, do you guys usually fly it down above the glideslope a bit? i've asked this before regarding PAPI's and VASI's, but how about ILS's? or since it's a 'precision approach', you don't have to add in that extra saftey factor?

Center it up if possible...


-mini

 

[WMUchickenhawk]

With a glideslope, the FAA has already built in the fudge-factor for you. Just keep it centerd, but higher IS better than lower.

As for our approaches, We have been taught to put flaps to 10 in either in the base leg if being vectored (or close to it) or on the full procedure once the procedure turn inbound is completed, maintaining 90 knots. At glide slope intecept throttle back to 1700 rpm to 1900 rpm to maintain 90 KIAS down it, then at DH throttle back to decresae airspeed to 85 and dump in flaps to 30, or if prefereable leave them at 10, its your option.
They are pretty picky about having 10 degrees in before the FAF.

 

[Lead Sled]

Center it up if possible...

OK, I'm going to both agree and disagree. Flying it centered is the way to go PROVIDED that you're not following something large enough to create a wake turbulence issue for you. For example, lets say you're sliding down the ILS in a light jet and you're following something like a B777. I'm going to want to be a dot high to keep out of his wake. If I'm going to do it in a small jet, you really ought to seriously condiser doing it in your trusty 172. I'm also going to make sure I land down the runway a bit. Remember, when you're dealing with truly low minimum approaches you're also frequently dealing with fog and when you're dealing fog you don't have a lot of wind - those pesky wingtip vortices can hang around for a while. The key to flying IFR is being aware of the big picture - situational awareness if you please.
'Sled

 

[Pedro]

OK, I'm going to both agree and disagree. Flying it centered is the way to go PROVIDED that you're not following something large enough to create a wake turbulence issue for you. For example, lets say you're sliding down the ILS in a light jet and you're following something like a B777. I'm going to want to be a dot high to keep out of his wake. If I'm going to do it in a small jet, you really ought to seriously condiser doing it in your trusty 172. I'm also going to make sure I land down the runway a bit. Remember, when you're dealing with truly low minimum approaches you're also frequently dealing with fog and when you're dealing fog you don't have a lot of wind - those pesky wingtip vortices can hang around for a while. The key to flying IFR is being aware of the big picture - situational awareness if you please.
'Sled

Everytime I'm behind a 757 or anything larger I fly one dot above, I hate riding the wake...

 

[Bernoulli]

Perhaps many of us use two different techniques because we are only looking at one side of the coin. When you think about trying to hold the glide slope, we often only think of two situations (above GS or Below GS)... when in reality there are four situations, each of which should be controled differently regarding pitch and power.

1. below glide slope and fast (pitch for glide slope and leave power alone)
2. Below glide slope and slow (Use power to get back on glide slope and get airspeed back up by holding pitch the same)
3. Above glide slope and fast (Reduce power to get glide slope and get speed back to approach speed while holding pitch the same.
4. Above glide slope and slow (pitch for glide slope by increasing pitch down a bit and leave power on approach power setting.

Of course every approach will not be the same due to the velocity of the winds and therefore tweeking both pitch and power is required.

 

[Lead Sled]

Perhaps many of us use two different techniques because we are only looking at one side of the coin. When you think about trying to hold the glide slope, we often only think of two situations (above GS or Below GS)... when in reality there are four situations, each of which should be controled differently regarding pitch and power.

1. below glide slope and fast (pitch for glide slope and leave power alone)
2. Below glide slope and slow (Use power to get back on glide slope and get airspeed back up by holding pitch the same)
3. Above glide slope and fast (Reduce power to get glide slope and get speed back to approach speed while holding pitch the same.
4. Above glide slope and slow (pitch for glide slope by increasing pitch down a bit and leave power on approach power setting.

Of course every approach will not be the same due to the velocity of the winds and therefore tweeking both pitch and power is required.

It seems to me that you're still making it way too difficult - 4 scenarios for Pete's sake! Keep it simple. Pitch for glide slope, power for airspeed. Everything thing else resolves itself without a bunch of mental analysis and it works just fine in every airplane you're likely ever going to fly from a Cessna 150 to a B747.

'Sled

 

[NYCPilot]

According to the FAA Instrument Handbook, the proper technique for flying the ILS is to pitch for glideslope and use power for controlling airspeed. This has been the technique I've used and it seems to work pretty well. It also seems more intuitive when making the corrections. Pitching for the glideslope needle seems more visually logical as well as adjusting power with the throttle to regulate the airspeed.

I also think that you will find that the corrections can be made more quickly and more accurately. The ability to pitch for the glideslope gives you more control as to the rate of pitch movement that allows you to get back on the GS.

Although pitch and power must both be manipulated in order to remain on speed and on the GS, it is much easier to think in terms of using pitch for the GS and power for the airspeed.

 

[Foxcow]

According to the FAA Instrument Handbook, the proper technique for flying the ILS is to pitch for glideslope and use power for controlling airspeed. This has been the technique I've used and it seems to work pretty well. It also seems more intuitive when making the corrections. Pitching for the glideslope needle seems more visually logical as well as adjusting power with the throttle to regulate the airspeed.

I also think that you will find that the corrections can be made more quickly and more accurately. The ability to pitch for the glideslope gives you more control as to the rate of pitch movement that allows you to get back on the GS.

Although pitch and power must both be manipulated in order to remain on speed and on the GS, it is much easier to think in terms of using pitch for the GS and power for the airspeed.

What page is that on?

 

[Tarzan]

Don't worry. There's one for the other side also. Pull the power to idle while in the air pull the yoke all the way back and and show me how you pitch up to gain alitiude.

I have no problem pulling back on the yoke with the thrust levers at idle and gaining altitude. When I did stalls, the thrust levers went to idle and when you get Flaps 9, you had to give foward pressure to keep from climbing. Must have been a thrust thing huh?

Pretty lame attempt at the proverbial "flip side of the coin."

 

[A Squared]

Pretty lame attempt at the proverbial "flip side of the coin."

yes, precisely the same lameness quotient as pretending that an airplane on the ground is a relvant comparision to one in flight.

 

[Tarzan]

I'm not the one who made the quote but at least his was amusing. Yours was not. And if you're going to start using big words to try and impress us, capitalize, Tool.

 

[A Squared]

Yours was not.

mine? you obviously aren't too terribly observant. not real surprised. just speculating, but i think perhaps the reason you think one is breathtakingly original and an downright knee-slapper and the other is soooo *lame* as to require comment is that one agrees with your somehat narrow and dogmatic view of things and the other doesn't. the fact that *neither* actually sheds any relevant light on the discussion is completely lost on you. incidentally, both pointless arguments have been around about as long as the pitch/power debate, which is to say about as long as airplanes have been around.

 

[Tarzan]

You're still a tool.