JasonC wrote:
The pilot just has to add power.
Its the same in my Cirrus. The approach is flown with a fully coupled A/P to DA. The cirrus has a TOGA button on the throttle which is pressed then add power, A/P remains engaged the whole time. This give 7.5 DEG pitch up and wings level (STD ROLL and PITCH on the GFC700) The missed approach is sequenced and the CDI automatically changed back to GPS. Yaw damper is also still engaged. It will then continue to climb to the missed approach altitude that has been selected. One can then select a lateral mode on the A/P, either NAV, in which case it will follow the full missed approach procedure or HDG for vectors.
Will the yaw damper have enough authority to deliver the boot-full of right rudder needed?
It probably does at a 7.5 degree pitch up, but normally (in light GA) one flies a go-around much steeper than that, especially in the initial stages.
Peter wrote:
Will the yaw damper have enough authority to deliver the boot-full of right rudder needed?
From my ‘limited’ experience in this Manoeuvre, it does. Pedals are rock solid when the YD is engaged.
I assume a certification requirement for a coupled MAp would be that the ball could be kept centered. TO/GA commands 10 degrees nose up on takeoff and 8 degrees on a missed approach.
Peter wrote:
My main thought, approaching the DH and seeing nothing, is to not screw up the go-around
Same for me. TBMs had many accidents caused by insufficient speed and rapid application of throttle causing aircraft to bank left and get out of control.
RobertL18C wrote:
The 1230 m is to the touchdown zone using Timothy’s geometry and 3 degree stabilised slope, the REIL is closer to DA or am I missing something?
I don’t know. But what I know is that I am the person in charge (or “technical representative” or whatever that is called now) of the FNPT of “my” flying school. In that function I have to perform quality checks (“QTG”) four times per year to satisfy our aviation authority that this training device is performing according to specs (like the annual inspection of an aeroplane). One of those "QTG"s is to verify that the visual ground segment is displayed correctly at the CAT I minimum under defined conditions.
This is a screenshot of the projected image (taken from the graphics card directly, not photographed off the projection where it looks even much worse) of a standard CAT I approach light system at daylight with 550m/200ft minima once 200ft are reached (Pa44, landing configuration, Vref). This is really all you must be able to see. I would not know how to fly from there to the runway without looking back inside at my instruments.
what_next wrote:
This is a screenshot of the projected image (taken from the graphics card directly, not photographed off the projection where it looks even much worse) of a standard CAT I approach light system at daylight with 550m/200ft minima once 200ft are reached (Pa44, landing configuration, Vref). This is really all you must be able to see. I would not know how to fly from there to the runway without looking back inside at my instruments.
I have never actually made an approach in such low visibility, but what I have been taught is that you use the visible crossbar as a roll reference. You mean that doesn’t actually work? Then what is the point of having the crossbars?
This is a screenshot of the projected image (taken from the graphics card directly, not photographed off the projection where it looks even much worse) of a standard CAT I approach light system at daylight with 550m/200ft minima once 200ft are reached (Pa44, landing configuration, Vref). This is really all you must be able to see. I would not know how to fly from there to the runway without looking back inside at my instruments.
A great lesson for all – many thanks for posting that pic.
I would certainly leave the autopilot on, on seeing just that.
Airborne_Again wrote:
but what I have been taught is that you use the visible crossbar as a roll reference. You mean that doesn’t actually work? Then what is the point of having the crossbars?
It works to some degree if you are perfectly lined up as in this picture. But if you are crabbing into the wind (or fly with one wing low to compensate for the wind) and are not exactly on centerline, than that little crossbar is of little use. And there is no precise pitch indication to be gained from that visual picture either (on many aircraft you must maintain pitch to within +/- 3 degrees or so to stay on glidepath and speed).
Impressive, what_next, thanks. Is that RVR 550 or 800?
