AFAIK, speeds given by ATC are estimates of Mach or Knots indicated speeds, they get these based on radar or reports plus some ATC wind adjustment…the adjustments are not accurate to get GS/ASI numbers tied up to 1kts but they are fine to keep separation based on MACH or KIAS as the same adjustment is applied to all aircraft !
Sometimes ATC ask to confirm (magnetic) heading and (indicated) speed if you are the first guy entering their show and they have no clues yet on speed & heading adjustments, obviously, ATC can see true tracks and ground speeds on radar screens but they are not direct inputs for traffic separation (they are outputs with position & altitudes)
I assume “You are number two to a PA46T currently on a 7 mile final, 70 knots”, means ‘70KIAS estimated’ along LOC axis?
When I get ‘keep 140kts’ from ATC, it’s what I need to keep on my ASI as KIAS
Yes, even if we did have accurate GS, that would still leave a big margin for question on actual IAS being operated due to wind and other factors.
Definitely not!
This would be ok in no wind conditions, over the hedge, aiming for a short runway, period.
Though admittedly I know very little about the PA46, one would never be at 7NM, not even at 3NM, in calm conditions, at minimum approach speeds. In whatever aircraft.
The more so in blustery conditions, hanging on the thread at 1.3Vs0 for the remainder of the approach to a runway that is more than twice of what is required.
Anyone remembers anything at all about increments in certain conditions?
I don’t know the wind that prevailed, but in calm conditions, IMC, why not configure and fly a stable approach from >1000ft AGL at Vs0*1.3 (which will be most probably published for MTOW in this category plane, so even faster than required for actual lower weight)?
Peter wrote:
ADS-B won’t contain your TAS either, unless your avionics are emitting that data, which on a PA46 is possible but not very likely.Also most ATC doesn’t see ADS-B data.
Why “not very likely”? I went to Flight Radar and filtered on PA46 – two showed up. D-ETIC and I-TABS. Both were showing Ground and True Airspeed. D-ETIC also showed IAS.
@Snoopy, what I hear them say is “approaching LESIX”, which means they have not overflown it. Now it is another 6NM to the FAF at a minimum of 2800’, and another 3.1NM to SATAK. And another 4.8NM to the threshold.
The wind is given as 050/17-22 for runway 08.
Not sure about what the winds were higher up, but probably stronger and from a slightly different direction. Flying this “long” approach in IMC, with a 6NM level segment followed by a 3° slope, one would avoid to loiter on the approach, and add some increments for wind and gusts.
Again, I have only flown bigger or smaller airplanes, but my guess is that the PA46-350P is an easy machine to slow down, so why fly so slow? CDAs work best for the airlines (at least at the ones I flew for 
) but should also be the standard for GA, VFR or IFR.
@Dan,
he did report SATAK, that was the last report if I get the recording right.
Coordinates given by the tower later are N53 16 52 W060 30 14. That is pretty much near a place called “old crow farm” on google maps, a bit north of it. can’t measure distances on google maps (at least I don’t know how) but it appears to me that this may be about 2.5 to 3 NM west of the THR but north of the centerline.
well, that’s probably all correct @Mooney_Driver
But the only point I’m trying to make is that, AFAWK, N5EQ was flying at what appears to be a very low speed in those conditions. And we have no clue if that has anything to do with the accident.
The stabilised criteria, 1000/500’ as used by the airlines have been introduced by themselves (or rather their insurers…) in order to prevent runway overruns. For aircraft having a Vapp of say 130-150kts.
CYYR 08 has a total runway length of 11’052’ or 3’300m, which should be more than enough for a PA46, even with deduction of the TDZ. If it was the case, I don’t think flying the approach at minimum approach speed, with no increments, in this kind of weather (anybody mentioned ice yet?), is a good idea.
I don’t think flying the approach at minimum approach speed, with no increments, in this kind of weather (anybody mentioned ice yet?), is a good idea.
Yes slow speed is usually not good in IMC with any extra add-ons gusts, ice, convection…automation hates it and hand flying is disorientating…the ILS/LPV in weather need some speed, you point aircraft by pitch and it flies there is plenty of room to slow down in air or on runway
I think STOL technique & IFR technique don’t mix very well? maybe slow flying workd better when one has Synthetic-Vision and AoA? only then one can PIT = +10deg with AoA = +13deg with FPV = TDZ while tracking 3deg GS on HSI !
My bad I didn’t read the previous posts correctly, I thought they were on final and shortly before touchdown.
Longer audios and presentation by Flight Records:
