How to Brief an Approach Plate | Our Best IFR Briefing Tips | IFR Approaches Made Easy

[@dactel2]

Great video. I also like to brief what kinds of “threats” are present for the arrival and approach BEFORE diving into briefing the approach plate. (e.g. terrain, weather, my fatigue level, any inop equipment that might require special procedures, any other unusual situations, etc., etc.) When you do this, the law of primacy tends to work in our favor in keeping better situational awareness.

[@MikeMike91103]

Terrain, wires etc.. but you don't want to dive below, because the altitudes provided are still providing safety

[@n176ldesperanza7]

I like to brief (and highlight) all the approaches for my airport of intended landing the day before the flight. Then they are like old friends when it is time to fly one.

[@flightinsight9111]

I like it

[@Jdalio5]

I have never flown a day in my life and I like it!

[@justdewit]

I used to do this but found it to be a waste of time since there's never a guarantee that the winds will favor the approaches you brief. Sure there might be a high probability but it's never guaranteed. I found myself at least half the time briefing the IAP the night before only to have to switch things up the next day. Sure I might pull up the two possibilities the night before but I would not study them in depth. So now instead I just make sure that I give myself an extra hour before the flight

[@brianb5594]

That my friend is how you stay ahead of the airplane. 👍🏼👍🏼

[@frayzeii]

I highlight color code the approach name (green or pink) based off of VLOC or GPS for the GTN650 and G1000, on a stage check flight I failed to hit the CDI button, I learned from that mistake by having a easy way to look down and see the color pop in my face. If I see pink I make sure I am in GPS, green VLOC. As well as what you say! It really helps glances when the workload is high. Happy flying :)

[@Mcphaterson]

So why did the LOC approach have a lower visibility requirement in this example???

[@Andromedon777]

Ever found the answer?

[@hvenable]

Thanks!

[@StevieWonder737]

As a pilot with over 38,000 hours I found this video informative. I will say that I brief generalities where specific numbers are likely only to be confusing and create mental data overload. Example: the MSA altitudes/radials. You are never going to remember lots of these numbers nor should. Generalize with something like "high terrain" NE or SW as appropriate. Ditto on the missed approach. Have the first couple of actions in mind but you can't memorize a complicateds MA procedure. You want the first couple of items since they often involve terrain avoidance in routing and altitudes. In other words ... KISS (keep it simple, stupid) ... is the best philosophy. Have a good grasp of the general structure of the approach but don't bog down in details that you likely won't remember anyway. And the missed approach, as noted in a comment below, is either the DA or if you were too high for the approach and elected to go around, the MA procedure would start at the MAP for localizer only be it DME or time. A premature missed approach might trigger issues if it calls for climb to an altitude that might create interference.

[@peteconrad2077]

If there’s one number I definitely brief, it’s the MSA.

[@StevieWonder737]

@@peteconrad2077 There is rarely one MSA ... there are typically at least 2 and sometimes 3 and even 4 on rare occasions. If you're going to brief sector MSAs then you need to keep your regurgitation of the chart to the most likely and most urgent sector and forget the precise radials defining the sectors ... it's information that you won't recall especially under stress (single engine go around, etc). Better to see compass related sectors (northeast, or north northeast or such). You can always glance back at the chart if you are entering that sector and get real defining radials.

[@peteconrad2077]

@@StevieWonder737 there is always a dominant MSA. Not be firing this and key other MSA where there’s a major change is negligent. It’s needs to be briefed to be clear where the terrain critical area is and where terrain warning response becomes mandatory.

[@StevieWonder737]

@@peteconrad2077 Terrain warning response should be part of a general mission brief and is not just applicable to an approach. Same can be said for abort procedures. Bottom line is this ... if you clutter your mind with a slew of numbers that you won't specifically remember, you will have defeated the purpose of the briefing. An awareness of the general location of any likely terrain issues is most important. The precise altitude is less important. IFR vs VFR is also a factor ... you can see and avoid (with adequate aircraft performance) or you must use precise IFR routing procedures when the terrain is hidden by weather or darkness. Just reading 50 different numbers off the chart is not going to make you safe. It's going to result in data absorption overload ... you simply can't reasonably recall those numbers without referring to the chart. Knowing WHICH numbers is more valuable.

[@peteconrad2077]

@@StevieWonder737 if reading a couple of numbers from a chart for your own protection is too much you shouldn’t be at the controls. As you descend, terrain becomes more of a threat and a more dynamic one. Knowing how high you need to go in the event of a loss of SA it a TAWS warning is critical. Without it, you’re asking for a CFIT.

[@ksuen106]

Thank you for making this video, I wish I had this during my instrument stage.

[@fromunderplease]

Great video! Can you clarify the procedure notes section(2:13) “ Takeoff and alternate procedures” some Pilots say that you should included it in your brief, career pilots say if you’re not using it as an alternate airport this does not apply and not have to be briefed. Any thoughts?

[@HeinzMcDurgen]

My 2 cents as a CFII - Anything in that box should have been briefed/reviewed on the ground. Sure, things happen, but if you've done your due diligence (91.103) you should know if any of this applies to you and have thought about it already. My other argument is that you already have enough going on, adding extra steps to the brief is unnecessary. If I'm not using the airport as an alternate, why do I care about the alternate mins? Planning on leaving on a better day that's VFR? Why do I care about the alternate take-off numbers? Stay ahead of the aircraft, but don't introduce a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter.

[@antonattard3678]

Ahhh the airport where I always pratice my approaches!! So cool to see this video!

[@JPLAviation]

Hello, at 7:00 when briefing the ILS or LOC RWY 23, you said "this approach doesn't have a defined missed approach point so we can go missed when we decide." Can you clarify the reasoning? I may be mistaken but I believe that when shooting the ILS your missed approach trigger (assuming stabilized approach) is the DA at which you arrive while tracking the glide slope and localizer. The localizer missed approach trigger is when you've descended to the MDA and have hit your time limit specified on the lower left of the chart based on indicated airspeed. Very valuable insight to students who use this videos to study as I'll send many of mine to your channel. Let me know your thoughts! Great vids!

[@flightinsight9111]

Thanks so much! This part of the video goes into the LOC approach brief. Where because the missed procedure is straight out, the climb out can begin anytime up to the time limit you mentioned at the lower left. A more accurate statement might have been you can go missed anytime prior to hitting the time limit. Really appreciate you diving into the video!

[@gort8203]

@@flightinsight9111 "A more accurate statement might have been you can go missed anytime prior to hitting the time limit." Mu understanding has always been that you can climb prior to the MAP, but you cannot turn prior: "Therefore, when an early missed approach is executed, pilots should, unless otherwise cleared by ATC, fly the IAP as specified on the approach plate to the missed approach point at or above the MDA."

[@javacup912]

Great presentation and well explalin. Very good memtioning of the ODALS, and why. You'd be surprised how many pilots do poorly here (briefing). Just a couple of notes. Though somewhat obvious, flying outbound from the VOR , the No PT, should be noted. Also, as for chart currency and dates, for people that want to spend the extra money and buy the Jeppesen charts, Jeppesen only updates their dates, if changes have been made. Government charts (formerly NOAA, as shown), updates their dates with the current Nav Database cycle.

[@AlanTheBest97]

I have a question. You state that this plate has no defined point for the missed approach and you can go missed when you decide in the non precision approach... However, there IS a time table for the FAF to the MAP that shows the time to fly from the FAF to the MAP at a given ground speed... Is this table only aplied for the precision approach and not relevant to the non precision? Wouldnt it be a good practice to follow this table in both precision and non precision aproach? This is getting me very confused in my studies, could someone please help?

[@4thpage]

Isn't the missed approach point for this localizer approach determined by the time after passing the final approach fix?

[@menahgo9574]

I don’t believe it is. You fly to your MDA and maintain until your localizer hits 0nm and then go missed.

[@guitarstuffs1236]

@@menahgo9574Localizer doesn’t give distance, and this approach doesn’t mention DME.

[@LTVoyager]

So, why is the visibility requirement for the ILS higher than for the category A LOC?

[@codylucero5855]

Right? lol i was like "......so are you going to tell us?"

[@LTVoyager]

@@codylucero5855 He doesn’t know either and is hoping someone can tell him in the comments.

[@RichEdwards]

It’s the note about the VGSI and ILS not coincident. Usually that means the separation between the equipment on the airport has resulted in a difference in the angle or TCH, practically meaning you might break out with the needles centered, but off in the PAPI and need the additional distance to align and use VGSI to descend to the runway (vs intercepting the visual VGSI guidance from the MDA of the LOC approach). On the plate here though it’s not showing a difference in GS or TCH so not sure on the note. The note is required for GS angle >.2 degrees or TCH of 5 feet.

[@paulstout6029]

@@RichEdwards not helpful. Use your people words..

[@westcoastpilot]

Does it have anything to do with the 718' obstacle at ZIBAT? The localizer has a stepdown at ZIBAT which will keep you above the obstacle that penetrates the Obstacle Clearance Surface. The ILS has no such stepdown. This requires the ILS to have greater visibility to see and avoid. I could be wrong.

[@drewpanderson]

"Helicopter visibility we don't care about". MFW I'm a helicopter pilot brushing up on instrument knowledge... 😭 Haha don't worry, no offense taken. Love your videos! Super helpful and wish I had them in flight school.

[@flightinsight9111]

Lol!

[@aviatewithmahrad6796]

Thanks for the explanation! Great video as usual!

[@bradcameron7535]

I'm guessing the difference between the ILS and LOC visibility requirements is because the distance from the aircraft to the runway threshold is further at the DA than it would be at the MAP. No idea, just a wild guess. Standing by for internet correction.

[@oddrobotman]

Everyone in the comments here is saying for the LOC approach that there is no defined MAP, but in the time/ distance table it clearly states the MAP is 4.3 NM from the FAF which means the MAP is at the threshold. If you have GPS you can identify the MAP as RW23 waypoint on the FMS and go there. If you don’t have a GPS, then you must use a timer to ID the MAP. Correct me if I’m wrong.

[@borntofly9438]

When you say “there’s no defined missed approach point,” that’s not correct. If you’re flying the LOC approach, once you pass the FAF, you hit your timer and use the chart on the bottom left of the approach plate to determine how much time it will take to get to the MAP, it’s based on ground speed. 🙂

[@gabrieldaniel6693]

Correct

[@abrahamnemani3907]

Great and very well done.

[@topofthegreen]

These videos are so good, thanks!

[@aviationenthusiast4353]

how would you fly the LOC approach if you didn't have dual vor receivers? (you wouldn't know where intersections are, right?) just looking at the plate it would appear that dual vor receivers are required, so what indicates that dual vor receivers are not required?

[@matthewpellegrino4926]

You missed an important part regarding the localizer briefing, you stated that there is NO missed approach point and that you can go missed whenever you want..THAT IS NOT CORRECT.....it is based on your time inbound as depicted in the lower left section of the approach plate that says FAF to MAP 4.3 miles at 90kts is 2:52.....so, at the FAF, you start your time and if you haven't broken out or met the criteria to land you execute your go around once you hit 2:52..AND THAT NEEDS TO BE BRIEFED as well

[@megacode2]

Thanks for all these great, easy to understand videos! They are definitely helping me to improve my skills.

[@jakew9887]

Great presentation. Thanks

[@josephmiller8869]

From Numbe to the IAF I would have briefed teardrop then 1 turn in the hold before approach. A procedure turn is not the preferred entry into this approach.

[@faaacademyairportcertifica5155]

SO, IN AN IFR YOU WOULD SET THE MODE PANEL TO THE THREE TRANSPONDERS AFTER YOU SET THE MODE PANEL TO TRANSPONDER?

[@heaths766]

This maybe a dumb question, but what flight software is he using when he is demonstrating everything? Is it just Microsoft flight sim?

[@tlhphotography8676]

I appreciate all of your wonderful IFR videos. Could you please list the order in which someone wishing to obtain their IFR should watch your videos? Thanks

[@joshuahunter7972]

When IDNT we need to be down range of the course. So when we idnt, we hear the Morse code. The ILS is a cone out from near the PAPI lgts. So my question is at what point or near do we ident?

[@paulvandingenen5135]

Hello, I will give you the Briefing i used to use in my 50 years as ifr FI,and TRI on several Boeing and airbus aircraft. WNF RAR DEP ARR DIV Weather Notam Fuel Routing Altitudes Radio aids Paul

[@lephotographinc]

Excellent video

[@chrissanchez9935]

When do we have to start reading the Approach Brief? 20 naut mi before TOD perhaps?

[@faaacademyairportcertifica5155]

YOU CAN ALSO SET THE MODE PANEL TO DO HEADINGS?

[@tangocharlie9291]

I brief mine in MSFS. In VR. In a full motion sim. With a GNS 530 & 430. (I pretty much *have* been there when I fly it irl.) MSFS is awesome.

[@coopercrowley9580]

What kind of motion sim do you use?

[@peteconrad2077]

This seems a quite old fashioned way of briefing. Lots of discrete data. Best practice these days is to start by talking/thinking about threats, what are the things that will most likely kill me today on this approach?

[@TM-xg4wm]

Good video , please may you do one with a Jeppesen chart too. Anyone , preferably LEVC ILS 12

[@flightinsight9111]

Good idea, help out all us Jepp users too!

[@TM-xg4wm]

@@flightinsight9111 thank you in advance

[@mahmutyuksel7480]

Thank you for great content

[@stephengrabe2753]

Thank you for this

[@HrishiGhute]

Can you tell me what is name ? Or where should I get this software that show this equipment too use... is it from Microsoft flying simulator?

[@tangocharlie9291]

Yes

[@HrishiGhute]

@@tangocharlie9291 thanks.👍

[@richardheinichen8279]

Good Work.

[@flightinsight9111]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@alirezaathari4462]

You Are Amaizing

[@comcfi]

The LOC 23 has a defined missed approach point.

[@streptokokke1003]

On 7:40 You are saying: „on this Approach the non precision visibility requirement is MORE restrictive than the precision requirement.“ I do not understand that. The non precision requirement (LOC) requires only 3/4 mile RVR, while the precision requirement (ILS) requires at least 1 mile. This is strange, but means, that the non precision visibility requirement is LESS restrictive than the precision visibility requirement.

[@beieber4life]

I noticed that, too. I believe he may have misspoken

[@streptokokke1003]

@@beieber4life I don't think so, because he's going to make a Quiz about this thereafter: „why do think this might be? It's kind of a special case here.“ and „I had to ask too, so don't feel bad.“ I don't want to be picky, but this is supposed to be tutorial!

[@cfagerstrom]

I think he misspoke.

[@raccoonair]

Except for MSA, a complete and clear briefing; thanks for sharing.

[@flightinsight9111]

Totally! There's a lot of choices that go into what to brief and what not to. I remember having to brief the MSA (Minimum Safe Altitude i.e. the number inside the circle on the plan view) on the fly after losing contact with ATC waiting for approach clearance. Never hurts to have an idea of how low you can go for emergency purposes, especially in mountainous areas. Also why I wish they would publish ATC's Minimum Vectoring Altitudes, but that's a topic for another video!

[@raccoonair]

@@flightinsight9111 Yep, MSA for a canceled/ missed approach, or circling approach (always turn towards the airport). Minimum Vectoring Altitudes are for me mostly covered by Airway-exits, Terminal Arrival Areas (TAAs) and feeder routes.

[@JustMe00257]

This is chart reading, not so much briefing. A briefing, from the modern airline perspective and having in mind a multipilot operation, is essentially aiming at: - identifying and mitigating the threats (e.g. man, machine, environment...) i.e "what is going to kill us", in a nutshell; - building a common plan and mental model. If one is operating in a single pilot environment, that would be summarizing the key points of the plan and making sure the strategy is clear and leaves no doubts. Brief what you actually expect to do or what might happen, and how you intend to do it, as appropriate (eg automation, configuration changes...). Eg I wouldn't fully brief a STAR if I expect it to be cut short, I would ensure that the FMS has been crosschecked prior to the briefing... Focus on what is more relevant or special. Eg If the weather is poor, have a closer look at the minimums, fuel and diversion planning. If you anticipate shortcuts, think of energy management and unstable approach mitigation strategy... Reviewing the charts is therefore just one part of the briefing. The briefing doesn't have to be very long. If it is too long, sounds like a recitation or is too fast and not interactive, the benefits might be quite limited. Always keep in mind: what will my crewmate take away from the briefing? The goal is not verify stuff or give a monologue because you have to but rather to improve safety and efficiency through good CRM and planning. Some generic structures: - CTWO (chart terrain weather operations) - Plan-threats-mitigation-additional considerations.

[@StevieWonder737]

Exactly and ol' Pete Conrad doesn't seem to gather to this generalist approach.

[@2Phast4Rocket]

Dude this is for the newer pilot who is learning instrument flying. This isn't about airliner and two crew members. If you are watching this and you are already an ATP, something is wrong.

[@StevieWonder737]

@@2Phast4RocketThis is about an approach BRIEFING. That would imply more than one pilot. Single pilot would be an approach REVIEW

[@tomgofly1]

@@StevieWonder737 Na, in single pilot IFR you brief the plate... to yourself. Maybe to your CFI or DE as well, but it's just you alone. If you don't do this well ahead of executing your approach you are behind the airplane in a big way. Maybe after you land and your sitting in the lounge you REVIEW an approach.

[@StevieWonder737]

@@tomgofly1 You're playing semantics ... and losing the game

[@whoanelly737-8]

Great brief but the visibility required is “flight” visibility not what the ATIS is reporting. Take a look at 91.175. Great presentation! Nice job.

[@flightinsight9111]

Thanks so much for the keen eye! Part 91 allows us to attempt an approach regardless of ceiling and visibility conditions. You still obviously want to get the ATIS/AWOS reported weather prior to attempting. And shooting an approach you know is below minimums is not advisable. When it comes to 91.175c, you are absolutely right that it's flight visibility, not reported visibility, that controls whether you can descend from minimums toward the runway. What you see is what you get! Still, prior to shooting the approach, without a PIREP or something giving us the flight visibility on short final, we'll rely on the ATIS.

[@whoanelly737-8]

@@flightinsight9111 I really like your presentations. Keep it up.

[@andrewstempel8793]

An error in the narration. Narrator comments that the (3/4 nm) visibility requirement for non precision approach is oddly "more restrictive" than the (1 nm) requirement for precision approach. He meant to say "less restrictive." You need to edit this video to omit that comment or it will be confusing to students.

[@emtdocjoe]

Hello. I do not agree. His narration is correct. The non-precision approach requires 3/4 SM visibility and the precision approach requires 1 SM visibility. Therefore, the precision approach requires better visibility to complete than the non-precision, thus making it more restrictive. Also, note that you are writing NM in your comment where the plates use SM for visibility. Don’t want to confuse anyone ;) 7:46

[@andrewstempel8793]

@@emtdocjoe Yes, and the narration is wrong to refer to 3/4 mile visibility as "more restrictive" than 1 mile visibility minimum.

[@onlytruth2661]

@@andrewstempel8793you’re wrong. If a NPA needs let’s say 3 miles, and a precision needs 1 mile. And on a particular day there is 2 miles visibility. You can do a precision approach, but not a non precision. The non precision approach is restricted. Hence, a higher visibility requirement is more restrictive.

[@andrewstempel8793]

Again, on this plate the 3/4 mile visibility requirement (for the NPA), is LESS restrictive than the 1 mi eequirement (for the PA), yet the narrator says "the nonprecision visibility requirement is more restrictive than the precision requirement." He misspeaks.

[@onlytruth2661]

@ what do you think restrictive means?? A restriction means something cannot be done. If an approach requires less visibility, that means it is less restricted, because you can perform it in a wider range of conditions. You’re getting confused because you think a smaller number is more restrictive, but actually it isn’t. It’s less restrictive. Have a think why you’re the only person thinking that.

[@pittiuomo123]

Simple briefing. Brief MSA altitude. Otherwise good channel

[@bendrixbailey1430]

I am not sure why you set up and used VOR intersections when you have a pair of GPS navigators. The waypoints you need are already depicted. Much less work and chance of making a mistake. To set up the VORs as a backup, and just an exercise, OK, to train to rely on those rather than the GPS navigator? Nope.

[@bendrixbailey1430]

@@AnangryLibertarian Thats just not true. You certainly can and should fly GPS to the IAF and intermediate fix. The autopilot will switch from GPS to LOC when reaching the IF and aligned with the LOC. There is no reason to go from GPS guidance to VOR guidance to the ILS.

[@bensaville477]

English approach charts aren't like this cover all types of charts please

[@GJar-uz1rv]

Sir, your videos are "excellent", except this one. You are spending too much time telling ppl "where" (on the plate) to find the information and "how" to operate the GPS/radio. This is detracting from the required context and format of a brief. Interestingly enough this is exactly what CFI's do and the actual "how to give a brief" lesson gets lost in the mix. Im no less confused then when leaving the classroom after $50 of ground school. Please re-attempt wo all the fluff.

[@PursuitMode2011]

This guy sounds like Jack Black.

[@gjferg]

Got me with the clickbait...*yawn*

[@Jay-po4kh]

God bless them they are too little to suffer.