Is this a difficult landing, or something that's routine and not a big deal..............flying when you can't see during a descent?
http://www.chonday.com/Videos/pilotnewzdalnd1
http://www.chonday.com/Videos/pilotnewzdalnd1
Routine. this is an IFR approach through a layer of clouds. They are in contract with ATC the entire time and flying on instruments to keep the plane on the flight path to the runway.
Beautiful. but not terribly dangerous for a skilled pilot.
Beautiful. but not terribly dangerous for a skilled pilot.
Not really difficult. You just have to pay attention to the instruments and ignore what your inner ear is trying to tell you about which way up is. Many airports have certain procedures for getting to the runway during periods of limited visibility. It is possible in an appropriately equipped aircraft, and going to certain airports to take off, navigate and land and not see the ground.
Of course there is more to it than that, like minimums, and decision height, etc. but you wanted a simple answer
It can be very common if you have an instrument rating and are flying an aircraft that has the proper equipment. To make a flight that you can not follow visual flight rules, (See the Ground) you have to be instrument rated, current with your "practice" and file an instrument flight plan so the aircraft control system knows where you are in relation to other aircraft.
Most airports have one of more various procedures for landing in overcast conditions where you can come down to 400, 500, or 600ft above the runway elevation depending on the airport and the equipment installed in your aircraft. At that point off the end of the runway you have to have visual sight of the runway to land or fly somewhere else. This is the same requirements for large and small private aircraft, again depending on the equipment installed in your aircraft. At many major airports used by airliners there is usually more precise equipment installed, and the minimum altitude is generally 200ft above the surface.
Navigation aids for aircraft are very precise, you have to learn to fly your aircraft with that precision also. That is why there is so much training required to get an IFR license and there is a lot of ongoing practice required to keep you current to be safe. Flying a precise path while descending on a precise sloped course to put you at a point just off the end of the end of the runway at the correct elevation with only the instruments in front of you is a challenge. Popping out of the clouds seeing that you are lined up with the runway to sit down on is your only option in mind.
Most airports have one of more various procedures for landing in overcast conditions where you can come down to 400, 500, or 600ft above the runway elevation depending on the airport and the equipment installed in your aircraft. At that point off the end of the runway you have to have visual sight of the runway to land or fly somewhere else. This is the same requirements for large and small private aircraft, again depending on the equipment installed in your aircraft. At many major airports used by airliners there is usually more precise equipment installed, and the minimum altitude is generally 200ft above the surface.
Navigation aids for aircraft are very precise, you have to learn to fly your aircraft with that precision also. That is why there is so much training required to get an IFR license and there is a lot of ongoing practice required to keep you current to be safe. Flying a precise path while descending on a precise sloped course to put you at a point just off the end of the end of the runway at the correct elevation with only the instruments in front of you is a challenge. Popping out of the clouds seeing that you are lined up with the runway to sit down on is your only option in mind.
Agree, pretty routine for an instrument rated (and proficient) pilot. Back in my flying days in socal it was common to have a solid low overcast layer that was only about 500' thick with severe clear above. Does require you to develop a trust in your instruments and the folks who designed the departure and approach procedures.
That being said, there were an awful lot of rocks sticking out of the clouds in that video. If that had been my first approach to that airport in those conditions it would probably take me a day or two to unclench my sphincter.
That being said, there were an awful lot of rocks sticking out of the clouds in that video. If that had been my first approach to that airport in those conditions it would probably take me a day or two to unclench my sphincter.
Flying while you can't see during a descent is very routine. Every instrument rated pilot is taught to do it (it's an amazing feeling when you are descending through clouds, trusting only your instruments...then pop out of the clouds perfectly lined up with the runway). The interesting part about that particular approach is that he seems to be in a turn throughout the descent...it doesn't appear he's following a localizer or VOR course, as those are straight lines. He may just be on ATC vectors, but I don't know how forthcoming they'd be giving vectors in mountainous terrain like that. Suppose he could be flying some type of GPS approach.
Lots of rocks. Be pretty freaky if you were not familiar with the airport.
this.........
I fly by the seat of my pants, none of that instrument crap that these so-called "professional" pilots depend on. Just get in the air and yanking and banking...yup, just me and the sky.... but then I'm not a pilot so I don't actually know how to use that stuff and, technically not even allowed to do such things, which is why I don't.
Similar threads
