QX sim ride - What would you have done

[MarineGrunt]

He was pretty adament that I had to do exactly what was published (45 degree barb), and I wasn't going to agrue.

You were definately not wrong in your type of course reversal. The AF teaches it just the way you did it.

 

[Singlecoil]

Good catch on the altitude to lose, I didn't notice that at first. It seems to me that even if you do the procedure turn, you are still going to have to dive for the glideslope. You can't decsend below 4800 until you are procedure turn inbound. Since you have to stay within 10nm throughout the maneuver, you'll be what, 6 miles out when you intercept the localizer, with 1900 feet to lose?
I agree that they probably have you do this approach to see if you'll catch that, but I think it is lame of them to set you up like that. You'll definitely have a better chance if you turn outbound and do the full procedure turn, but to say it is required is not correct and you can tell LaMar some dude on the internet said so!

 

[QXbuzzard]

Drew,


I would have probably flown the published PT because of how close the LOM is and the steep angle to be flown to intercept the glide slope. If you run in to any trouble intercepting the localizer coming off the turn in the hold it could make for a bad approach. Your instructor should never have told you that you have to fly the published PT when not in radar contact though. I flew single pilot 135 freight before coming to QX and the workload can be high when holding and then being cleared for an approach. I did actual scenarios like you did in the sim and by just doing the published PT on the chart made the workload a lot easier, trust me. You have 10 miles from the LOM (approx 18.8 miles on the DME from the VOR. Use it for situational awareness.) Did they give you a tailwind on your outbound leg in the hold? They have been known to do that when you are doing a PT as well. They want to see if you go past the 10 NM limit.
I am not telling you what to do but if I was in that same situation flying the Dash 8, I would intercept the localizer outbound and do the PT just for simplicity. Hope this helps

 

[rgnlwannabe]

Would you mind backing that up with an FAR or AIM section?

I was always under the impression that if you were holding at the OM and you were cleared for the approach (with a procedure turn depicted), you still had to go out for the procedure turn. However, after digging into it more deeply, I found that I was wrong, and it is not required. I found this in the Instrument flying Handbook:

Procedure turn:
"A barb indicates the direction or side of the outbound course on which the procedure turn is made. Headings are provided for course reversal using the 45 degree type procedure turn. However, the point at which the turn may be commenced and the TYPE and rate of turn is left to the discretion of the pilot. Some of the options are the 45 degree procedure turn, the racetrack pattern, the tear-drop procedure turn, or the 80 - 260 degree course reversal."

I guess this would have been okay, but it would have been better to do the procedure turn to lose altitude, and to be better positioned for the approach, and not to mention to get the job! I guess maybe they were seeing if you would opt for the procedure turn to be better positioned.

 

[DrewBlows]

I'm not sure I made the senario clear. When I was cleared for the approach I was already inbound on the LOC, which is why I chose to do the hold in lieu of the depicted procedure turn. I couldn't think of a way to turn around on the LOC to do the PT. I would have had to, in affect to two procedure turns, one to reverse course on the LOC and another to turn back inbound. I suppose this is possible, I just can't think of a good way to do it.

My biggest mistake (I now realize) was not realizing that I needed to lose so much altitude, there was no way that one minute outbound in the hold would have worked. I don't know if one minute outbound doing the depicted course reversal would have helped either. If I get to do it again I will make sure that I go outbound far enough to intercept the GS from below (of course staying within the prescribed 10 nm).

In all honesty, I don't know if I had a tailwind or not. I was concentrating on holding altitude and heading so hard everything else was a blur, I'll look next time, good information to have.

It's been a while since I've gotten any useful information from flightinfo, but this thread is helping. Thanks.

I'll ask again, if you were inbound on the LOC and wanted to do the published procedure turn, how would you go about accomplishing it? Would you do a teardrop between the LOM and the airport? I am not trying to argue, I just can't think of a good way to do it. The more opinions the better.

 

[DrewBlows]

I guess this would have been okay, but it would have been better to do the procedure turn to lose altitude, and to be better positioned for the approach, and not to mention to get the job! I guess maybe they were seeing if you would opt for the procedure turn to be better positioned.

Ha ha! I don't know if the procedure turn would have gotten me the job or not, like I said before the whole performance was pretty miserable. I'm more concerned with what will get me the job next time (assuming they are nice enough to interview me again, I think they are).

 

[Rotate140]

...I'm still amazed you didn't know where the VOR was located in Walla Walla. That part of the sim eval should have been a no-brainer. Additionally, you should have better prepared for the interview. If you really want a job with Horizon then spending some money/time would have paid off during your sim eval. Quit pointing your finger at the person who did your sim eval and whether they were right or wrong about flying the approach. Nobody is going to be holding your hand when your flying that exact approach into Pendleton at night, IMC with 37 people on board.


From what I've read you fell short of the 'bar' that horizon has set for potential pilot candidates. Learn from YOUR mistakes, get some real life experience and training and see if they will let you try it again.

 

[Singlecoil]

I'll ask again, if you were inbound on the LOC and wanted to do the published procedure turn, how would you go about accomplishing it? Would you do a teardrop between the LOM and the airport? I am not trying to argue, I just can't think of a good way to do it. The more opinions the better.

At the LOM, turn right to a heading of 115 and intercept the loc outbound.

 

[Flooder305]

Bottom line here is, you don't. Period. It will never happen in real life. You do your turn at your discretion on the protected side of course. It's legal it's simple you land. End of story. Anything else is a waste of gas, time etc. You've got an airline to run.....

The AIM reference is 5-4-8 a.1.

 

[turbodriver]

I'll ask again, if you were inbound on the LOC and wanted to do the published procedure turn, how would you go about accomplishing it? Would you do a teardrop between the LOM and the airport? I am not trying to argue, I just can't think of a good way to do it. The more opinions the better.

You're making this a LOT more difficult than it has to be. If you're already inbound on the LOC but not yet at the FAF/Outer marker when cleared for the approach, pass the OM and do a 180 (on the protected side) and reintercept the LOC at a 30 degree angle and track it outbound. Fly for a minute or so and fly the 45 degree procedure turn as depecticed on the plate. Then you should be able to intercept the GS without having to dive for it.

In real life, do whatever course reversal you want. However, this being an interview situation, do everything as stated on the plate. That way, the person conducting the ride wont be surprised. You don't want them thinking "what is he trying to do?"

And by the way, if you had that hard of a time just holding heading and altitude, that did you in a lot more than which course reversal you performed on the ILS. We do a lot of IFR stuff in the NW with the cascades and the ice that goes along with it and they don't want anybody who can't fly on the guages.