A little ill-prepared for this instrument flight

[@morgidvmw0mdv]

I'm a MSFS nut and Lydd is one of my favourite Airports. I have bought both Lydd and Redhill airports for MSFS. I use Lydd when I fly to the continent. Another great video from you. Thanks. Dave M.

[@Rodhern]

So I guess from now on you will bring a bucket of wet dirt next to your computer for maximum realism? 😁

[@ktron684]

Jon, given you were in essentially VMC in uncontrolled airspace but presumably with your head down in the instruments following the procedure, do you not worry about having to keep a good lookout also? There was no radar and therefore no traffic service. There could easily have been VFR traffic not talking to Lydd. I ask because I am unsure about practicing these myself without a safety pilot. The rule of having a safety pilot is unclear to me.

[@thomasdalton1508]

There is only a rule to have a safety pilot if you are practicing under a hood, surely?

[@SimonHollandfilms]

good one

[@Captain_Al_320]

Very nicely flown, and good resilience when presented with a hold.

[@marcusreed2]

Holds are so satisfying to watch and fly!

[@nigelcaughey2119]

A well flown procedure and a pleasure to watch your video as always. Keep up the good work.

[@kevchilton908]

Very well handled, Jon 👌🏻 Made for an enjoyable, entertaining video 👏🏻👏🏻

[@paultchaikovsky8878]

Great video as usual.

[@richarddempster9804]

Hi John, any chance you could do a video or touch on the price increase which HIAL have put in place from today. At least see if they have anyone who would be willing to speak about the reasons behind the massive price hike!!! Makes you wonder if they are interested in GA!! Cheers

[@barclaac]

Beautiful job! The results didn't support your feeling unprepared.

[@JacobDlougach]

Have you spotted the fact that one fix on the missed approach is a fly-over point?

[@mikedash3968]

My interpretation is even though this is designated as a RNP approach with a calculated descent path and a published OCA in terms of approach procedures it is actually a baro VNAV with a published MAPt and hence a MDA and not a DA as the approach path is not aligned with the R/W C/L. It is normal to add an amount to the MDA appropriate to the A /C performance (typical 20-50 ft) The MDA is only penetrated when appropriate visual reference is gained. In the G/A the addition ensures the MDA is not penetrated. All vertical manoeuvres can be undertaken in a G/A prior to the MAPt but no horizontal manoeuvres until at or beyond the MAPt. As in actual VMC non of the above is applicable, however, the Difference between a DA and MDA should always be understood. Ex IR examiner hence my experience may be out of date!?

[@barclaac]

That was my understanding too. My friend busted his initial FAA IR on an MDA. Tolerance is -0+100 with no do over possible. I've not seen the altitudes listed like that before but they seem to be advisory only. My old IR instructor (ex-B52 pilot) always wanted me to get down to the MDA quickly to give time to spot the runway.

[@fpt9694]

Your MDA/DA assessment is correct, although offset approach has nothing to do with it. All RNP approaches are non precision and all have MDAs instead of DAs (with the exception of LPVs which no longer exist in the UK). This RNP was a straight LNAV approach with no vertical guidance at all. Although there is a recommended descent profile published this is purely advisory. Some avionics will also display advisory glidepath indicators too, but this does not affect the MDA and is for situational awareness only.

[@JacobDlougach]

In EASA it’s legal to treat MDA as DA for CDFA approach without any increment - it’s explicitly clarified in the regulations now. In UK it’s slightly gray area (it’s not illegal but some documents mention it).

[@rodeogon]

Just a quick comment. You went to MDA of 440 as per chart. As an ir(r) do you not follow the recommendations of +600’ for non precision approach or in this case 640’ (440 +200) should has been your personal MDA

[@TheFlyingReporter]

When in recent practise, no. When in VMC, no. If I’m at all unsure in IMC, out of practise or it’s blowing a gale, yes.

[@gcorriveau6864]

I notice how you are hand-flying this trip (I think I do see some level of AFCS equipment on your panel). I commend you! I'm seeing too many accidents recently from pilots who don't understand the limitations of their AFCS (auto-flight) and at the same time have lost their manual flying control (hand flying) skills. We 'carbon based units' easily underestimate the amount of constant training and recency we need on BOTH types of flying to remain fully competent.

[@Pisiorek6]

You did well, Jon. "Ill-preparedness" didn't really show.

[@smsfrancis]

I need to watch less of these vids. Last week, I actually called G-IV (instead of G-IZ) on final to rwy 06 at Redhill 😂

[@TechnikMeister2]

Some pilots forget to fly the aeroplane when trying to navigate. The best method is looking out the window with a map on your lap. Thats what you get taught at flight school in Australia. And in a Tiger Moth for your first 50 hrs.

[@Robinbamv]

The flight looked quite good but you are not helping yourself with the chart from the AIP, this is not optimal for cockpit use, The easiest charts to use are those published by Jeppesen, with the Navtech a close second. Also the GNS 430 is by modern standards a bit clunky , add to this a HSI that has not got a servo driven course bar and you have a high workload environment. Think back to your Cirrus flight a few weeks back with a well integrated navigation package with the ADC giving the info for wind speed / direction and VNAV. Your workload would decrease and your situational awareness increase. That having been said another well produced video and I expect when you get enough subscribers we will see a video about upgrading the avionics on your aircraft.

[@douglasb5046]

Sure John would comply given his resources. ha ha ha. The only thing I would suggest for John is a working auto pilot, at least heading mode to help with the workload

[@zacdingal]

great video and very informative on procedures,it’s good to practice in vmc but when you get court out in the bad stuff it’s a different thing altogether! the IMC rating/restricted IR was design to help pilots to make a 180 turn and get back into vmc! 10,000 pilot 8,000 single crew in medium twins and jets,my first thought befor any departure was my destination Approach and my destination alternative! keep up the good work that you are doing.

[@TheFlyingReporter]

The privileges of the IR(R)/IMC rating allow for flight with a minimum visibility of 1500m , and allowing pilots to make an approach to published minimums. So quite a lot more than just a 180 turn.

[@thomasdalton1508]

Making a 180° turn back to VMC is what the instrument training as part of your PPL is for, isn't it? The IMC rating is so you can actually fly in IMC if you need to.

[@evanscm3]

hard disagree with the notion that the IR(R) is *just* about getting back into VMC. these are skills which need to be worked on regularly, including time in actual IMC. people who have the rating and then keep it in their pocket for 23 months without doing anything with it are going to get bitten when the actuals != the forecast.

[@evanscm3]

@@thomasdalton1508 or want to...

[@zacdingal]

exactly my point👍