Fascination

[Cat Driver]

Reading the different thought process of pilots never ceases to fascinate me.

The poll on the approach ban has me really fascinated wondering why the pilots who like the approach ban think it is good.

Can some of you explain why you think it is a necessary thing, has it improved your cognitive abilities?

Hopefully some of you will respond so when I get up tomorrow morning my day can start with a learning experience.

Thanks....Cat.

[ScudRunner]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvD6maGRh7c

[Lurch]

I’m tired so I’ll bite

People are naturally pack animals and will blindly follow what the leader (TC) leads them to believe. In this case how Regulation of stupidity saves lives.

If they hide the problem we are content with continuing our lives fat dumb and happy. It’s like getting shot, as long as you are drugged up and can’t feel the pain and they put a bandage on the wound so you can’t see the problem you are happy. Unfortunately even though you can’t see it you are hemorrhaging on the inside and the problem is slowly bleeding out until it is so bad no amount of morphine or bandages will hide the problems anymore.

In the case of the approach ban the problem is lack of skill be it pilotage or PDM. The industry has been diluting with unskilled pilots for years, ie 44 page T/O briefings for 172s, and the minor issues are only getting worse.

If you fly the approach as published and at the correct altitude commence the Missed as Published you should be able to fly the approach all day long in 0/0 weather and survive with no issues. Now we have poor pilots who push the minimums aren’t prepared for the missed and get into trouble, like landing ¾ of the way down a 10,000’ rwy and going off the end.

So TC, instead of raising the bar and fixing the root of the problem, proper training, they take the easy way out and patch it up by taking out the possibility of the missed approach.

Over the years with pilots being regulated more and more, like the new taxi restrictions, the need for PDM will be reduced, further diluting the skill level of future pilots. So the new breed of pilots will create new and stupid ways to kill themselves and their passengers and the new regulations continue.

Lurch

[Changes in Latitudes]

., we're collectively getting more ignorant and stupid by the day for some reason. We need directions for everything.

[short bus]

If you're fascinated by the approach ban ., you should check out tc's latest aviation circular in regards to RVOP/LVOP. I can't believe someone's getting paid to come up with this stuff.

[yfly]

How about we turn the table and ask those not in favor explain why there should not be a ban. Keep in mind, that most regulations stem from a proven trend in accidents and are designed to keep the travelling public as safe as possible. Also keep in mind that we have to keep the passengers of less cognizant pilots safe too. Not all pilots are made of superior stuff, especially between the ears.

While we are at it, why do we need transponders? Why do we need elt's? Why do we need EGPWS? Why do we need training in CRM? Why do we need to be told when to de-ice an airplane? Pilots got by for years without all that.

Sometimes mandated changes like the installation of GPWS doesn't even work. The meat up front decides to ignore the warnings and keep on doing their thing. That is when the company has to add another layer of protection for the crew and pax by saying, "when this warning appears, thou shalt stop doing what you are doing and get the hell out of Dodge".

The rules and equipment changes come from statistics. Sometimes we have to strip it right down to "monkey pushes button, monkey gets banana", or at least lives to fly another day. Ideal? No, but it addresses that lowest common denominator.

Why do most jet aircraft have protection for high speed flight excursions and low speed flight excursions? The aircraft can be flown all day within the normal operating envelope. Oh yeah, the meat up front.

Why does Widow fight for change in safety? I don't know but maybe if she and we can save just one life, change or a restriction is just a good idea, even if it requires another regulation or piece of expensive equipment.

Human factors is the last real challenge to flight. Regulations are not ideal but they help. Education helps, but it just doesn't work for all the meat up front.

Good morning ..

[Rockie]

How about we turn the table and ask those not in favor explain why there should not be a ban. Keep in mind, that most regulations stem from a proven trend in accidents and are designed to keep the travelling public as safe as possible. Also keep in mind that we have to keep the passengers of less cognizant pilots safe too. Not all pilots are made of superior stuff, especially between the ears.

While we are at it, why do we need transponders? Why do we need elt's? Why do we need EGPWS? Why do we need training in CRM? Why do we need to be told when to de-ice an airplane? Pilots got by for years without all that.

Sometimes mandated changes like the installation of GPWS doesn't even work. The meat up front decides to ignore the warnings and keep on doing their thing. That is when the company has to add another layer of protection for the crew and pax by saying, "when this warning appears, thou shalt stop doing what you are doing and get the hell out of Dodge".

The rules and equipment changes come from statistics. Sometimes we have to strip it right down to "monkey pushes button, monkey gets banana", or at least lives to fly another day. Ideal? No, but it addresses that lowest common denominator.

Why do most jet aircraft have protection for high speed flight excursions and low speed flight excursions? The aircraft can be flown all day within the normal operating envelope. Oh yeah, the meat up front.

Why does Widow fight for change in safety? I don't know but maybe if she and we can save just one life, change or a restriction is just a good idea, even if it requires another regulation or piece of expensive equipment.

Human factors is the last real challenge to flight. Regulations are not ideal but they help. Education helps, but it just doesn't work for all the meat up front.

Good morning ..

Excellent post. Pilots are not worse today than they were 50 years ago. They have more to deal with for sure, which is a function of vastly more planes out there and increasing sophistication in equipment. But with improvements in training, procedures, regulations, and the much scorned CRM we are in fact better than we were before.

It's funny but the same people here whining about the approach ban being too restrictive are the same ones whining that the flight and duty time regulations aren't restrictive enough. Approach ban regulations keep the company off your back for not landing in lousy weather, so get over this percieved slight on your decision making ability and get used to it. If you stop taking it as a personal affront you might even start to view it as a good thing.

[2milefinal]

Rockie,yfly
Dont get me wrong here. BUT
How many years have you guys been flying IFR.
I am betting its about 2 or 3.
Just wondering.

[Rockie]

Rockie,yfly
Dont get me wrong here. BUT
How many years have you guys been flying IFR.
I am betting its about 2 or 3.
Just wondering.

Several months longer than that.

[2milefinal]

I have noticed that pilots can not stand change. if you start out with these rules (app ban) its just the way things are done so whats the big deal. If you have to change the way things are done then it IS a big deal.

For the record I dont like the approach ban. I have seen it busted and abused (and nobody seemed to care) and in my opinion it just makes it SOME WHAT difficult on the pilots that are already following the rules.
i guess...i dont like change

[bronson]

You pass up an approach at your destination because the wx doesn't look good to someone on the ground.
You proceed to your alternate.
It's closed.
Yer fecked.
Wx at destination was fine.
This is going to happen.

[foxmoth]

bronson has it right.
as mentioned some while back, we are not really trained or experienced at going to alternates, so it is like a new experience.
How many approaches are succesful? 99.9999%?
Since the first inst approach, 60 + years ago, how many millions have beeen succesful? What is the percentage of bad ones. Maybe 0.00001%?
approach ban is just one step towards total ban on flight . Now that is really safe.

[Rockie]

You pass up an approach at your destination because the wx doesn't look good to someone on the ground.
You proceed to your alternate.
It's closed.
Yer fecked.
Wx at destination was fine.
This is going to happen.

bronson has it right.
as mentioned some while back, we are not really trained or experienced at going to alternates, so it is like a new experience.
How many approaches are succesful? 99.9999%?
Since the first inst approach, 60 + years ago, how many millions have beeen succesful? What is the percentage of bad ones. Maybe 0.00001%?
approach ban is just one step towards total ban on flight . Now that is really safe.

Your alternate is just another airport, and yes you are trained and experienced enough to go to it. If you personally missed that in your training you should hand in your instrument rating immediately until you learn the stuff you're supposed to know. When you pick an alternate I hope you make sure it's going to be open if you need it, the weather meets alternate criteria and you monitor that weather throughout the flight. Especially if the weather at your destination is anywhere close to minimums. I know I do all of the above.

Furthermore I hope you monitor the fuel you have on board and include that in your decision making process along with the air traffic you may have to fight on your way to the alternate if it comes to that.

I would respectfully submit the approach ban is specifically designed for pilots like you.

[trey kule]

The two issues I have with the approach ban are why it only applies to the southern part of Canada. That leads me to think it is a little less a safety issue and more a political one, though I can see by some of the posters adamant defense of it as a safety issue, they disagree.

Just a personal opinion from experience. I think the good pilots may just ignore the ban and get away with it...the bad pilots might ignore it and well......

Part of the real issue is training. Amazing the number of IF rated pilots that have never flown in a cloud, or done a real approach. Despite us old guys off hand comments, the transition to the missed when in real cloud is not something taught. Instead, students are taught that on every missed approach they should expect an engine failure. As to going to the alternate, Rockie is quite correct, but again, the transition phase is not taught...students are typically taught to go to a hold and.....are you ready...expect an engine failure...there is just so much emphasis on this engine failure thing that students are not taught the very basics. It is something that could easily be taught in a simulator but that does not seem to be enough fun for alot of instructors.

The real question is the approach ban necessary.. Personnally I dont think so, but maybe we do not have enough NPAs left to give pilots the experience they need.

[yfly]

Rockie,yfly
Dont get me wrong here. BUT
How many years have you guys been flying IFR.
I am betting its about 2 or 3.
Just wondering.

I have a better idea. How about you send me your name and we can address your question when I interview you?

[yfly]

Just a personal opinion from experience. I think the good pilots may just ignore the ban and get away with it...the bad pilots might ignore it and well......

And thus the reason for the approach ban.

[yfly]

bronson has it right.
as mentioned some while back, we are not really trained or experienced at going to alternates, so it is like a new experience.
How many approaches are succesful? 99.9999%?
Since the first inst approach, 60 + years ago, how many millions have beeen succesful? What is the percentage of bad ones. Maybe 0.00001%?
approach ban is just one step towards total ban on flight . Now that is really safe.

Print this out and re-read it in 20 years foxmoth. My only response to you is WOW!

[Cat Driver]

Allow me to comment on this Rockie, and lets see where it goes.

Your alternate is just another airport, and yes you are trained and experienced enough to go to it.

Agreed.

If you personally missed that in your training you should hand in your instrument rating immediately until you learn the stuff you're supposed to know.

I got that part.

When you pick an alternate I hope you make sure it's going to be open if you need it,

One night I did exactly that, using the best information I had, the aviation weather forecast.

the weather meets alternate criteria and you monitor that weather throughout the flight. Especially if the weather at your destination is anywhere close to minimums.

Unfortunately it didn't work out that way for me because when I was advised my destination had gone below limits I asked what my alternate was like....it also had gone below limits.

Further checking showed that every airport within my fuel range was below limits.

By now both me and Vancouver center were both wide awake and in a state of grave concern over where me and my ten passengers were going to end up. I tried the approach at my destination which was an NDB in the mountains ( Kelowna) my best chance was Penticton where there was at least an off set ILS localizer approach.

The closer I got to Penticton the worse their weather became and as I passed the FAF they advised me the visibility was zero and they lost the light on the balloon at one hundred feet. Fortunately in my younger years I had a mentor who taught me to land zero zero until I could do it every time ...I owe that pilot not only my life but the lives of my passengers because that was how I did the landing.

I know I do all of the above.

You and I are alike Rockie but one can never take anything for granted when flying airplanes and we should strive to think and train ahead of the common herd who think rules and regulations are the be all and end all of how to stay alive.

The point I am trying to make is blind faith in rules and SOP's are limiting your fate to dummies who dumb down everything in the quest for safety.

[trey kule]

And thus the reason for the approach ban.

Perhaps I did not explain clearly. The point I was trying to put forward is that the approach ban is not really going to make a difference. Ask yourself this simple question..Why is it OK to do it based on geography???

I am not sure exactly what the trend is, but it seems pilots do not want to make any decisions anymore...mother TC should make them all. If you are not capable of executing an approach to the MDA and then executing a missed properly, I am of the opinion that you should not be I rated. If you need TC to regulate that decision then you probably should not be in the cockpit at all.

It is not about resistance to change. It is about a politically motivated regulation being passed off as a safety issue.

[yfly]

Perhaps I did not explain clearly. The point I was trying to put forward is that the approach ban is not really going to make a difference. Ask yourself this simple question..Why is it OK to do it based on geography???

I am not sure exactly what the trend is, but it seems pilots do not want to make any decisions anymore...mother TC should make them all. If you are not capable of executing an approach to the MDA and then executing a missed properly, I am of the opinion that you should not be I rated. If you need TC to regulate that decision then you probably should not be in the cockpit at all.

It is not about resistance to change. It is about a politically motivated regulation being passed off as a safety issue.

I agree with your comments on geographic location TK, but fail to see the politics involved.

It is not letting TC make your decisions at all. It is TC supplying a premise or base line for the decision you make.

[Cat Driver]

It is not letting TC make your decisions at all. It is TC supplying a premise or base line for the decision you make.

Please forgive me for maybe being from a by gone era where I did not have someone to wipe my ass for me after I had a crap but what was wrong with flying the airplane to MDA and then flying the missed approach if we could not see the runway clear enough to land?

Maybe they should bring back PAR.

[Rockie]

Allow me to comment on this Rockie, and lets see where it goes.


You and I are alike Rockie but one can never take anything for granted when flying airplanes and we should strive to think and train ahead of the common herd who think rules and regulations are the be all and end all of how to stay alive.

The point I am trying to make is blind faith in rules and SOP's are limiting your fate to dummies who dumb down everything in the quest for safety.

Couldn't agree more .. Despite the best laid plans occasionally it all turns turtle and we have to be the best that we can be to get it on the ground safely. No one has suggested blind faith in the regulations to keep things safe, regulations help keep things safe and there are at least two blokes on here who may have their ass saved by the approach ban some day before they learn what they should.

[yfly]

It is not letting TC make your decisions at all. It is TC supplying a premise or base line for the decision you make.

Please forgive me for maybe being from a by gone era where I did not have someone to wipe my ass for me after I had a crap but what was wrong with flying the airplane to MDA and then flying the missed approach if we could not see the runway clear enough to land?

Maybe they should bring back PAR.

Cat Driver, If you live long enough, maybe you will have the chance to revisit someone wiping your ass for you.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with your approach as suggested. That is what we are supposed to do.

The problem that arises is people not missing, but attempting to land, when they do not have adequate visual reference. Thus the need for a ban. A few of us make the problem, and the rest of us have to live with the repercussions. As I said, it isn't perfect, but if human factors are the cause, they have to be addressed.

[Cat Driver]

Cat Driver, If you live long enough, maybe you will have the chance to revisit someone wiping your ass for you.

True, I may live long enough to end up in a bed dependent on someone wiping my ass but not really looking forward to it.

Your world of aviation no longer really affects me as a pilot because I managed to survive my career without the ass wipers.

However I still fly on the odd airline trip and when getting on some of the small feeder airline airplanes I must confess I wonder if I have aviators or a procedures monkeys up front flying it.

[Blakey]

[quote="Cat Driver"]

I tried the approach at my destination which was an NDB in the mountains ( Kelowna) my best chance was Penticton where there was at least an off set ILS localizer approach.

The closer I got to Penticton the worse their weather became and as I passed the FAF they advised me the visibility was zero and they lost the light on the balloon at one hundred feet. Fortunately in my younger years I had a mentor who taught me to land zero zero until I could do it every time ...I owe that pilot not only my life but the lives of my passengers because that was how I did the landing.
[quote]

You landed in zero vis weather off an OFFSET localizer approach? Just how would you do that? I've done it lots of times with an ILS but how would you transition from the Localizer to the runway IMC?