Approach Red Flags | How to Spot Risks on an Approach Plate | Approach Briefing

[@flightinsight9111]

Edit: approach categories are determined by indicated airspeed, not ground speed as mentioned towards the end of the video.

[@Treadstone7]

As far as I know, approach categories are also determined by the minimum approach speed in landing configuration at max. landing weight. Meaning you don't just fall into another approach category because you fly faster or slower. An Airbus A320, which is normally category C, doesn't become category B only because it is empty and approaches at 120kts. The minimums according to your category are tied to the aircraft you are flying. They don't change mid-flight.

[@flightinsight9111]

@@Treadstone7 That's true that the Cat C won't qualify as Cat B if it flies slower, but the opposite is different, a Cat B aircraft flying 121 knots or more will need to follow cat C mins

[@Treadstone7]

​@@flightinsight9111 ok then this is probably a difference between FAA and EASA.

[@benderaviation]

Aircraft approach category is a grouping of aircraft based on a Vref (reference landing speed), if specified, or if Vref is not specified, 1.3 Vso. If it becomes necessary to operate at a speed in excess of the upper limit of the speed range of an approach category, the minimums for the higher category should be used if available. This may occur with certain aircraft types when operating in heavy/gusty wind, icing, or non-normal conditions. For example, an airplane that is certified as category C, but is circling to land at a speed of 145 knots, should use the approach category D minima. www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/InFO23001.pdf

[@HI-SiteAerials]

This is exactly what we covered in our safety review/ EAA IMC Club meeting last Thursday. We were looking at the accident involving the Cessna 208B Caravan in Burley, Idaho where the pilot crashed into the potato factory stacks on a second approach attempt. The stacks, which are right in the approach path of Runway 20, put out a huge amount of steam, especially problematic on cold IMC days. I’m going to share this video for follow-up discussion. Thank you, Flight Insight!

[@AirSafetyInstitute]

Excellent topic, Dan. Those are some serious "gotchas".

[@andrewking777]

That's some generous language 😅 It's scary that some of these approaches were approved and published at all. The idea of a final approach course with obstacles in the visual glidepath is horrifying. I can't imagine popping out of clouds at minimums then immediately having to begin evasive maneuvers like something out of star wars.

[@mikepaganelli5835]

Loving all of these IFR topics.. As a relatively new IFR pilot... I really enjoy all of this content and appreciate all of your effort to bring them to us,.

[@josepina8793]

Same here

[@technicalactivity]

Welcome to the Gang Paganelli.

[@mrkc10]

This is one of your best videos

[@Jacob-qu8kj]

Reading obstacle notams are normally something like unlit tower 9nm from field 100agl. So lots of people don't even read them. But recently, I had such a red flag at my home airport: SUS 26R RNAV added a 245agl crane 0.6nm from centerline and didn't rase to mininums with a second notam to avoid it. 4 days after I complained to STL, they issued a new notam for the approach raising DA from 292 to 457 agl.

[@someguyontheinternet7165]

Recognized that river and offset approach immediately. Just shot the LDA RWY 2 into HFD about a week ago. Love the instrument info!

[@IzzyFlys1]

Good ole Brainard

[@renemedinajr4218]

You are the greatest human being on this planet!! I'm starting my IR and I feel like a 5 year old kid in a candy store! ✈️

[@bogatua5745]

Approach category is not a factor of ground speed, it is determined by indicated.

[@flightinsight9111]

Very right. Our mistake!

[@jimjernigan3670]

Very useful, life-saving stuff here.

[@jonconner3019]

I wish there was a service that would review these types of details for many approaches

[@mwp1088]

Really good stuff here, I’m keep these in mind during my ifr training.

[@ahmadsamadzai8255]

Thank you sir. You're amazing.

[@JustMe00257]

Great video. When I look at the SBS chart, I notice that the minimums are labelled CIRCLING. I'm from the other side of the Atlantic but what this tells me is that this is a cloud break procedure followed by visual maneuvering. I wonder if the VDA of 7.75 Deg is published as a guidance or as a deterrent from attempting a straight in landing! When I see such an extreme angle, I certainly don't want to land straight in, particularly in WXR below VMC... I would also certainly not fly a circling with a 2000m visibility... BTW, The MDH is 1300' which would practically require about 8000m of visibility to spot the runway when reaching the minimums... I'm thankfully flying large jets for a living and we hardly ever flying circling approaches except in the SIM but I would be extremely wary of flying one anywhere below VMC conditions. With a slow flying aircraft, I would still think hard before shooting a circling approach with 2000m of visibility!

[@joesanchez2465]

This video is vital. Shame on the FAA for not clearly indicating when the descent angle changes in the glideslope.

[@aldohattonduran5227]

Excelente excelente 👍🏻

[@LocoGringo111]

Love your videos , HFD is my home airport!

[@Kevinmaino]

One thing I don’t understand is you said that since at high altitude our TAS is much higher than our IAS. We are basically putting ourselves in cat B approach minimums. I thought those speeds (60-90 for example) are based off IAS and not TAS or GS.

[@TridentCapital]

Great info.

[@MichaelLloyd]

The was pretty good. The young lady that hit the steam stack on approach to KBYI in a Caravan could have used this info. Even better, design safer approaches where possible

[@cyrouskhavari969]

Perhaps, this question might be very elementary, that said, how one determines, they have reached a fix, or have passed it? Let say, you only have your VORs, and no up to date technology to assist you ?

[@flysport_tedder]

TIL "green meatball"

[@vfx7t]

You speak fast ;D