Jump to content

Question about hornet's ILS system


Pamenchan

Recommended Posts

HUmmm! I have flown lots ILS approaches to min (300-400') in P2/P3/S2 and T28 a/c. Sure the approach of choice is GCA!

The "needles" in the FA 18C are a bit "Off"!

 

The approach of choice is definitely ILS, not GCA. If the ICLS was a bit off, it was because of the ship, and not the Hornet. If the Hornet were able to receive civilian airfield ILS, it would be fine. Not to mention that the GCA introduces another human in the loop and the success of the approach now depends on the performance of two humans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opinions. everybody has one!

 

My unwarranted 2 cents - it depends. If we didn't plan to shoot an instrument approach (weather goes to crap and we have to pick up a clearance), I'd rather do a GCA. All you have to know are the mins and do what ATC tells you. So long as you don't go lost comm, you're good.

 

If it's an IFR flight and we know well in advance we're shooting an approach to a full stop, and there's ample time to plan the approach you're likely to get (to include feeder fixes, IAF to FAF arcs, etc.), I'd rather shoot an ILS or LNAV/VNAV. Best case - you ask for radar vectors and get that ATC guidance, but when safety really matters (on the glideslope) you're flying raw data. Worst case - you have to do the full procedure yourself, but it's not so bad because you've planned for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

areas which are NOT covered by ATC radar, and their are LOTS of those!

 

Can you tell me where those are in the US? I know overseas there are some places, but where in the US? Because there are definitely NOT “lots” of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you tell me where those are in the US? I know overseas there are some places, but where in the US? Because there are definitely NOT “lots” of those.

 

 

I would assume that he's referring to airports without either a PAR or ASR, not areas without radar surveillance of controlled airspace outside the terminal area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would assume that he's referring to airports without either a PAR or ASR, not areas without radar surveillance of controlled airspace outside the terminal area.

 

I believe he is talking about places without surveillance radar because he mentioned it in the context of needing to do full Approach procedures and procedure turns, as opposed to getting vectors (which you can only do in a surveillance radar environment).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take vectors to the ILS over the PAR 9/10 times. Most of the time you're backing the PAR up with the ILS anyway if your A/C has the capability. Plus the PAR doesn't get you any lower then the ILS due to the CNAF 3710 single pilot absolute minimums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The par can be used when navigation instruments are degraded, EPs etc. Or simply used as a "pilot relief" approach given another *brain* is QAing your flying in real time.

 

This changed a bit if i was leading a section as it help to have each aircraft tuned to the ILS for SA if anyone went "blind".

 

Each approach has their place.

 

Technique: if i ever needed a quick approach and was not ready for shooting one, and needed to expedite, if the PAR was available, "request PAR to active runway, full stop". No digging for approach plates, setting up a system, just fly what they tell me.

 

This was the "go to" philosophy when i was in the fleet.

 

It is interesting to see preferences change between peer groups. And what new aviators choose to take away from flight school.

 

.... not trying to validate any one over the other


Edited by Lex Talionis

Find us on Discord. https://discord.gg/td9qeqg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...