When to go missed?

[Jester119]

I have been teaching for about 6 months just started with my first Inst student. I am looking for where in the FARs/AIM does it talk about when to go missed for the point of tracking a NDB,ILS,LOC,and VOR. I know about the reaching the DA and MDA with the time expired as well as not seeing the runway and all the jazz. The real question is where in there does it talk about for example going missed with a full scale CDI deflection on the GS and LOC for the ILS? and other approaches?

 

[Joe Jet Pilot]

I may be mistaken, but I don't recall anything "in writing" that says that. I think you should present as "the stabilized approach" concept, being that if the things you listed were to happen, we GO AROUND!

 

[avbug]

14 CFR 91.175(e) provides the requirement for a missed approach under certain conditions, as stipulated. The regulation refers back to (c)(1) of the same subparagraph, which requires that the aircraft must continuously be in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers.

If you're full deflection, you're outside of the normal maneuvering and bracketing ranges; you've not no positive way to identify the course once full scale.

More than that, however, you're teaching now. You are not required to teach, nor accept, any minimum standard. Legally, an arguement may be made that you could bracket the glideslope of localizer, or course for other approaches, especially at farther distances...perhaps by making large cuts back through the course, or by other means. However, your mission in life and your reason for drawing breath in this world during the time that you are acting as an authorized flight instructor is to provide an example of a higher standard of living and thinking, to your student. Don't preach a syllabus. Teach and practice safety, judgement, wisdom, and understanding.

Don't let the student get away with anything less than a higher standard. The student may be permitted 100' either way; hold him or her to fifty feet. When the student asks where it's written that you may hold him to that standard, stand up and say nowhere; you require it because you expect more of that student. You don't accept the minimum performance level in yourself, and certainly not in your student, and you will not permit your student to accept a lesser standard of performance either.

Explain to your student that the goal in any checkride, any practical test, any evaluation is not to pass. Anybody can do that. The goal is to impress. Set a higher standard and let the student know you believe, you know, the student is capable of achieving and maintaining it. You won't accept less, you won't permit the student to accept less, and you will help the student make and hold that standard.

 

[Kream926]

i was always told 3/4 scale deflection....

 

[PropsForward]

Another point of concern if what is on the other side of the airport. If you fly the "perfect" approach and at DH or DP you do not have the field in sight, you would be smart to immediately start the missed approach instructions, to delay the missed may run you into some towers or other obstructions.

 

[Swerpipe]

PTS provides different values

i was always told 3/4 scale deflection....

The PTS provides different values depending on the rating you are seeking. 3/4 for the instrument rating, 1/4 for ATP.

AVBUG is absolutely right. Criteria for failing an applicant (PTS) is not guidance for what constitues acceptable flying. Whenever a pilot comes to me for help regarding his instrument flying and scan, I ask him a question for which I usually know the answer in advance...

Question,
"How much altitude, heading, airspeed, localizer/GS dots can you be off and find it acceptable?"

Answer,
"100 ft, 10 deg, 10 knots, 3/4 deflection"

"No .... 0 ft, 0 deg, 0 knots, 0 dots"

"Well, that's impossible..."


Then I take him and show him that you can fly with alt+-10ft heading +-1deg, airpeed +/- 1 knot LOC/GS right on on the aircraft or simulator. Once you do your student will see what he can realistically demand of himself and do it. Students often never get to see someone flying instruments with a high level of precision. As instructors it is important to show student what the level of performance they are striving for.
PTS describes failure criteria, not acceptable flying criteria. As an instructor, it is important to show students what this is. A pilot that demands perfection of himself will achieve a high degree of skill while he'll never be close to being perfect.

 

[Tinstaafl]

I agree. As an instructor I always emphasised to my students the idea of setting precision goals for their flying just hard enough to challenge themselves a bit on each flight. Sometimes the precision lapses when a higher priority tasks is due but otherwise the goal sits in the background for whenever the pilot has the resources to attend to it. When, over time, that level of precision no longer challenged them then they should tighten the tolerances until they were once again challenged.

I do for myself.