Technique

Basic altimetry is well covered in various texts, but some aspects can be confusing. Theres not enough material for a full article, but here are a few basics. To my knowledge, the only reason that a speed restriction would be used on an ODP is to reduce the turn radius. Since this procedure has a defined route, thats probably whats happening here. Regardless of their ability to actually see the airport, they were flying under IFR in weather below VMC.

How does your GPS navigator handle a leg to a specific heading or to a specific altitude? Do you fly these with the confidence of Captain Picard of the Enterprise, or of Doctor Who pushing a button to see what happens? These legs are common, particularly as the first step on a missed approach: Climb runway heading to 1300, then ...

It seems pretty obvious-start the procedure turn (PT) past the remain within fix and dont exceed the specified distance. But, there are other considerations such as having enough time and distance to make the FAF altitude inbound. Then, theres the Buchannan Field VOR Runway 19R approach at Concord, CA (KCCR). Here, the chart clearly shows that the procedure turn begins after HUKVI. Or does it?

Lessons came from all around the world. The instrument flying I learned applies almost 1:1 overseas. Yet, subtle nuances-often procedural-coupled with psychological perceptions of difference, did come to light. For example: While its one thing to be between stations over the Rockies, what about in Bangladesh?

Most approaches of the same type, particularly RNAV (GPS) approaches, seem essentially the same. The fixes and the minimums are different, but just about everything else is similar enough to other approaches to give a proficient pilot a been there, done that feeling. This thinking can lead us to simply check that the weather is good enough before departure, rather than actually studying the entire procedure before launching.

On the heels of the controversy about logging time in a simulator, the FAA has given us an InFO that unequivocally provides clear guidance about when we can log an approach. Thats guidance that weve been lacking, so were glad to see it.

For the moment, well begin with a nickel tour of both the ATC and the national aviation weather systems. Naturally, theres some overlap between them. The FAA air traffic control system is one big ol network. The chain of command begins with the ATC System Command Center in Virginia, which provides oversight and coordination between the biggest ATC facilities, the Air Route Traffic Control Centers.

Within the IFR community, there has been much confusion over how and when to log instrument approaches. The FAA extended that confusion to logging approaches in a simulator as we wrote in the December issue, Need a Sim Instructor?

Loss of control in-flight (LOC-I) is the leading killer in GA, with more fatal accidents than the next six causes combined. The Colgan 3407 and Air France 447 crashes brought LOC-I to the forefront. Were forced to ask how we can lose control of perfectly good airplanes. The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics identified LOC-I as the most significant cause of commercial aviation fatalities worldwide.

There are some things that you never expect to see together, and they surprise you when used in the same context: West Texas referred to as alpine, Donald Trumps name beside front runner, and hashtags on approach charts, I cant explain that second one, but the first and last make sense when digging into the RNAV (GPS) Rwy 19 approach at E38, a.k.a. Alpine, Texas.

IFR reader feedback from January's issue. Covers ICAO flight plans, Class D airspace handoffs, TSO requirements, and runway approach authorization.

I am tired of the rant: These technologically advanced cockpits-these GPS toys-are making us lazy idiots, slave to the magenta line. Next comes the back in the day bit about how we used to fly full-procedure NDB approaches in the rain with quartering tailwinds-both ways. If these computer kids would just turn off those screens and fly VOR needles and a mental map, theyd be such better pilots.Gimme a break. Thats like saying nobody drives a stick any more, so we ought to manually shift our automatic transmissions to be better drivers. Given that in some cases now the only possible navigation is by GPS, its like saying manual shifting would make better Prius drivers when they dont even have 3, 2, and L to select.