Awesome real world example, you just can’t get this from under the hood. A great tip I got from an old pilot late in my training was “ landing is always Plan B, plan A is Missed/ go around unless plan B checks all the boxes!”
Having been in a few of situations with unforecast weather, one involving icing and unable to even maintain altitude, I tend to concentrate on A being a landing and B sometimes still being a landing. Sometimes a go around is a luxury you can't afford, but I get your point.
Very nice video. I am impressed with Christophe and how he never even flinched when he saw the runway. It appears like he instantly made the call that he couldn't land it
I was on a medevac flight in instrument conditions. The only approach was an NDB. Right at the time to missed we saw nothing, and then all of a sudden a huge hole opened up. We slowed to around 20 knots and hovered through the opening to the ground. Helicopters and the ability to hover; you gotta love em.
IF this was way back in '78 I might have been a student IFR pilot, ..... too late now but I still love riding with ya on these videos....... BIG Thank You for filming AND posting these.
8:35 - great point! Obstacle clearance for the Missed Approach Procedure is calculated from the Missed Approach Point at MDA or DH whatever is lower...so if you try duck under you’re hosed If you have to go around. In the future and something you could have talked about here is HOW to calculated our own VDP ... divide the HAT for the approach by the desired Glideslope
AWESOME, my CFII wouldn’t sign me off unless I had a minimum of 5 hours actual (got more than that)... and several approaches were VERY close to minimums, wished I had a few like this one, where you HAD to go missed! it amazed him how many IFR rated pilots have never flown in actual, you know what to expect if you get the luxury of experiencing it with a CFII... So KUDOS and great job!!!!
Excessive head down right as going missed is not what you want to be doing. Flying the missed is the key, get to safe area and altitude then go head down if needed, hopefully with autopilot on if you have it. If you do not, then another IFR co-pilot is recommended if you are not a master at IFR approaches.
MasterCarguy44 I saw some other people saying this as well but I don't get it. They are ifr flying by reference to the instruments. Why would they not have their heads inside?
*this video is so helpful, I can’t even really say how much I appreciate this!! I’m starting my flight portion of IFR soon, after passing the written I must say the whole rating is intimidating after I hear how much other pilots hate it. But I’m really looking forward to it. These videos help me feel better prepared as well. Keep up the great content!* :)
Great video! Having the opportunity to fly actual IMC in training is a huge benefit! Unfortunately, unless you're military, helicopter guys can't experience this during initial instrument training.
I think the description of VDP given in the video is misleading. As far as I understand it, when there is a published VDP what’s critical is that you must not descend below MDA _before_ the VDP. It’s not defined as a point after which a “normal” landing cannot be achieved. In light singles doing less than 100kts a 3 degree approach is pretty shallow and certainly not the only safe/stable/normal approach.
The VDP means that when you're at the MDA and pass the VDP a steeper glide slope will have to be maintained to land. The VDP is there to alert pilots to decide to go missed when they pass the VDP. Note; you don't actually do the missed approach procedure until the MAP. You just make the decision at the VDP.
Stephen Bordano steeper than 3 degrees. Not necessarily steeper than is safe or “normal”. Do you have an FAA source on your definition? If it’s the right one why wouldn’t all non precision approaches have a VDP? All the FAA seems to have to say about it is that you cannot go below MDA (even with requires visual references) before the VDP. My assumption is that this is because of low close obstacles in some environments.
@@outerim FAR/AIM 5-4-18 states " The VDP is a defined point on the final approach course of a non-precision approach procedure from which NORMAL descent from the MDA to the runway may be commenced". With this said, if you barely pass the VDP you probably will be able to land safely. The point of the VDP is to encourage pilots to make their decision on going missed earlier. All Non-Precision approaches do not have a VDP because the FAA has to come and survey the area...
That was what I wanted to ask as well. The lesson is great, however, I kept thinking about his headset and if he likes it, is the sound isolation effective, etc.
Great lesson! I've actually never seen a plate with a visual decent point before. Could be it's not a thing in Canada or just less common. It's great you have the opportunity and desire to take your students up in your IFR playground. Solid IMC can be quite disorienting for the first few times
I do agree going missed was the right decision; did you try again a 2nd time knowing what to expect this time around? That being said, I hesitate to call this a setup for a "look-see" event. I dont know what the visibility was but the Localizer approach had only circling minimums published and while you didn't see the runway until you were too close to land safely, it certainly looked like you had the altitude and visibility to execute a circling maneuver, at least on a 2nd attempt (I would have gone missed on the first attempt since it was not planned as a circling approach and therefore you weren't prepared to do a circling approach). As to the concern about executing the missed approach beyond the missed approach point, I always look at the DP/ODPs for a given runway so that in the event I have a situation where I have to go missed after the MAP (maybe an animal on the runway for example or a situation like this where I just couldnt get the plane down or stopped short enough), I have an option available to me. In this case, the ODP is to fly a climbing right turn to 175 and intercept a radial to SNS VOR which is for all intents and purposes is the same as your missed approach so long as you climb to the appropriate ODP altitude and wait to pass the departure end of the runway (though this is usually only required if you got really low over the airport) before making the turn, there will be nothing in your path.
@@elsieparker8802 In this case, visibility wasn't great but it wasn't terrible either and once visual contact with the runway is obtained, they could have descended below minimums to keep out of the clouds (and that's still not necessarily a "look-and-see" hazard). In fact, watching the video again I noticed AWOS this time which reported 4 miles visibility and they were clearly breaking out of the clouds into the mist below. KWVI is Class G below 700 feet so there easily could have been VFR traffic in the pattern there on this particular day and once they reached minimums at 700ft, were out of IMC and had the airport in sight, they legally could have cancelled IFR and completed VFR. Of course there are a lot of things that come into play here as well, how well you know the airport and surrounding area, what the terrain is like, any obstacles in the area, emergency options if the engine quits and the field is no longer attainable, etc but the scenario presented in the video does not seem to present a particular hazard for "look-and-see" or circling approach minimums based on the reported conditions and what is visible in the video. With the understanding that this was an instructional flight, I could understand if a second approach and/or a circling approach was not attempted as it would additionally depend on where the student is in their training (I probably wouldn't ask my student to perform this approach in these conditions as their first approach and still probably wouldn't have them execute this approach to landing as their "nth" approach but I would expect my checkride bound student to be able to do so) but that's where my question was born from.
Why did you not decide what approach you would fly before the flight even started? You know what instruments the plane has. It would have made more sense to decide before the flight what you are going to fly. It would have prepared you more fully, requiring less stressful thinking. Squinting through IMC is never easy, and when you need to decide in the moment/BRIEF in the moment, it becomes even more challenging.
JEFFREY KISS, maybe they did discuss it in the pre-flight. This is training after all. Sounds like the instructor wants to know his student's 'REAL TIME' thinking (SITUATIONAL AWARENESS: going through it verbally as he is doing it): REPETITION & TALKING IT THROUGH AS YOU DO IT!
That's a great point Jeffrey. We didn't confirm RAIM or check WAAS before we left and that was an oversight. Either way, the weather can change and it's good practice for Christophe to brief "on the fly" (ha!) Plus, in many real world scenarios you would not know which approach you were going to fly before you got there.
Yes, very good points. When I originally wrote my comment, I was grumpy, hungry, and quite cynical haha I'm in a better mood, and can appreciate all the learning involved :)
dave jones That would be considered a "bold" move given their situation.(there was no urgency to get the plane on the ground) We all know the saying "there are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old bold pilots". IMO it is much wiser to keep "bold" moves off your scorecard whenever possible.
They were there and know best. From the video, it's not obvious to me that it was too high (unless runway was too short). A forward slip is not a "bold" move. Still, a good lesson regarding VDP, and they showed good judgment because they felt unsafe continuing to land. When in doubt, go missed.
Yeah I don't understand that, I instruct on g1000 aircraft and they have WAAS on every single one. They maybe lost RAIM but I didn't see the GPS LOI cas message so I don't understand
@@kennethallen2931 about 10 years ago, I installed a GNS430 with WAAS and indicator, full IFR STC, in my $30K, 1964 C172E.... I can do approaches that glass panel piece o crap can only dream of, LOL.
@@strikerwyatt he didnt go around... he did a missed approach back into ifr, which is arguably a more unsafe position then a slip. If you think a slip when you're a little high is dangerous, your instructor probably didnt do a good job teaching you basic stick and rudder skills
@@ritualghost With respect, it's really impossible to tell from this video what we could have made or not. If you watch again, you'll see that both Christophe and I took one look at the runway and knew we couldn't make it, so consider that. I am not afraid of slips -- it would not have worked to try it. Anyway, this is a video to teach the lesson about the VDP, not slips. If we had tried a slip and not made it, we would then have been about 1 mile past the missed approach point and back in IMC near mountains. I think that's the lesson here.
@@TheFinerPoints vdp? It's a cessna man, not a citation x. 182's land on gravel bars that are 500' or less. So yes, it teaches an instrument lesson of being in a position to make the runway, but you also need to have basic stick and rudder skills. If you can't throw in a quick slip in an airplane like that, you're lacking.
For you to say going missed in IFR is unsafe or “more” unsafe than trying to force a landing you’re already not comfortable shows lack of judgement. And yes, he did a missed approach which is the equivalent to a go around. Why do you want these guys to land so bad lol, and why are you trying to keyboard fly on what you would’ve done? I applaud these guys for having good judgement and trusting their gut when things don’t feel right. Most people in the comments would’ve done the same thing. If you wouldn’t, that’s fine but it could get you in trouble one day. Cheers.
As an IFR pilot in training, I can't express how helpful these videos are for me! Thank you!
I completely agree! This is extremely helpful and always learning every time Jason speaks. Thank you so much Jason!
Everything was great except shouldn't the approach speed be around 90kts?
Ryan Gee not necessarily, depends on the plane, as well as other things, such as if you're told to "expedite" etc
Awesome real world example, you just can’t get this from under the hood. A great tip I got from an old pilot late in my training was “ landing is always Plan B, plan A is Missed/ go around unless plan B checks all the boxes!”
Having been in a few of situations with unforecast weather, one involving icing and unable to even maintain altitude, I tend to concentrate on A being a landing and B sometimes still being a landing. Sometimes a go around is a luxury you can't afford, but I get your point.
I agree! I feel very lucky for the actual conditions we get in the summertime. It's great experience
You should always be prepared for a go around but to have that as your plan A is just foolish lol. Try that in a commercial setting
Very nice video. I am impressed with Christophe and how he never even flinched when he saw the runway. It appears like he instantly made the call that he couldn't land it
I was on a medevac flight in instrument conditions. The only approach was an NDB. Right at the time to missed we saw nothing, and then all of a sudden a huge hole opened up. We slowed to around 20 knots and hovered through the opening to the ground. Helicopters and the ability to hover; you gotta love em.
IF this was way back in '78 I might have been a student IFR pilot, ..... too late now but I still love riding with ya on these videos....... BIG Thank You for filming AND posting these.
Man Jason what an awesome IFR training example! Thanks Again for all you do!
8:35 - great point! Obstacle clearance for the Missed Approach Procedure is calculated from the Missed Approach Point at MDA or DH whatever is lower...so if you try duck under you’re hosed If you have to go around. In the future and something you could have talked about here is HOW to calculated our own VDP ... divide the HAT for the approach by the desired Glideslope
Really great training video! Thanks Jason.
Kudos to Chrostophe -- doing your thing with cameras rolling is extra pressure.
AWESOME, my CFII wouldn’t sign me off unless I had a minimum of 5 hours actual (got more than that)... and several approaches were VERY close to minimums, wished I had a few like this one, where you HAD to go missed! it amazed him how many IFR rated pilots have never flown in actual, you know what to expect if you get the luxury of experiencing it with a CFII...
So KUDOS and great job!!!!
Awesome! Sounds like you had a great CFI
The Finer Points
Yep, I did, he like you seems to want to prepare students for real-life, not just pass a checkride!!
Great example. Thanks
Excessive head down right as going missed is not what you want to be doing. Flying the missed is the key, get to safe area and altitude then go head down if needed, hopefully with autopilot on if you have it. If you do not, then another IFR co-pilot is recommended if you are not a master at IFR approaches.
MasterCarguy44 I saw some other people saying this as well but I don't get it. They are ifr flying by reference to the instruments. Why would they not have their heads inside?
@@chrisbowpiloto yeah that's what I was thinking too.
Thanks Christophe!
*this video is so helpful, I can’t even really say how much I appreciate this!! I’m starting my flight portion of IFR soon, after passing the written I must say the whole rating is intimidating after I hear how much other pilots hate it. But I’m really looking forward to it. These videos help me feel better prepared as well. Keep up the great content!* :)
Awesome video... this was the perfect weather for IFR training!
All summer long, every day. Every summer. I love it
That was a great share!!! So helpful!!!!
Great video! Having the opportunity to fly actual IMC in training is a huge benefit! Unfortunately, unless you're military, helicopter guys can't experience this during initial instrument training.
Was waiting for the student to say sure I can slip it! Great ADM, can’t ever be faulted for going around 😎
Excellent..
He called it, good call. Should make a good pilot when he knows he can't do it and calls it.
That guy is yelling in the radio lol
Just a question, why is he not using the autopilot as he briefs the approach and sets up the MDA?
Great question. He's pretty advanced at this point. I know he can do this with an autopilot, we're cranking up the heat a bit by not using it.
The Finer Points Ok gotcha
I think the description of VDP given in the video is misleading. As far as I understand it, when there is a published VDP what’s critical is that you must not descend below MDA _before_ the VDP. It’s not defined as a point after which a “normal” landing cannot be achieved. In light singles doing less than 100kts a 3 degree approach is pretty shallow and certainly not the only safe/stable/normal approach.
The VDP means that when you're at the MDA and pass the VDP a steeper glide slope will have to be maintained to land. The VDP is there to alert pilots to decide to go missed when they pass the VDP. Note; you don't actually do the missed approach procedure until the MAP. You just make the decision at the VDP.
Stephen Bordano steeper than 3 degrees. Not necessarily steeper than is safe or “normal”. Do you have an FAA source on your definition? If it’s the right one why wouldn’t all non precision approaches have a VDP? All the FAA seems to have to say about it is that you cannot go below MDA (even with requires visual references) before the VDP. My assumption is that this is because of low close obstacles in some environments.
@@outerim FAR/AIM 5-4-18 states " The VDP is a defined point on the final approach course of a non-precision approach procedure from which NORMAL descent from the MDA to the runway may be commenced". With this said, if you barely pass the VDP you probably will be able to land safely. The point of the VDP is to encourage pilots to make their decision on going missed earlier. All Non-Precision approaches do not have a VDP because the FAA has to come and survey the area...
Sounds out of subject, but which headsets your student is using? They look to be the lightest headsets could ever be!
They look like halos
That was what I wanted to ask as well. The lesson is great, however, I kept thinking about his headset and if he likes it, is the sound isolation effective, etc.
QT Halo
@@garabato21 I use a clarity aloft headset (similar to the halos) and love them. Lightweight, good sound isolation, and no head squeeze.
How many hours of dual have you gave?
After about 20 years of doing it full time, I'm somewhere near 8000 hours of dual
Did you go around and land, or did you divert?
How in the world do you get dislikes on such a good video?
klmelj there is always a hater! 😕
THANK U Maestro!!!
It's great to get training in actual IMC! You may think you're not peeking out of the hood, but your brain sure is haha.
confused as to why the missed wasnt initiated when the automated call out occurred?
Non precision approaches you can hold at mins until the MAP.
MAF*, MAP is for precision approaches
@@niekwarringa6834 This is incorrect.
Great lesson! I've actually never seen a plate with a visual decent point before. Could be it's not a thing in Canada or just less common. It's great you have the opportunity and desire to take your students up in your IFR playground. Solid IMC can be quite disorienting for the first few times
Yes, I think it's a hugely valuable experience for them, for sure
Where do you instruct out of?
San Carlos, Palo Alto, and Auburn
@@TheFinerPoints you teach out of Sunrise in Auburn?
I do agree going missed was the right decision; did you try again a 2nd time knowing what to expect this time around?
That being said, I hesitate to call this a setup for a "look-see" event. I dont know what the visibility was but the Localizer approach had only circling minimums published and while you didn't see the runway until you were too close to land safely, it certainly looked like you had the altitude and visibility to execute a circling maneuver, at least on a 2nd attempt (I would have gone missed on the first attempt since it was not planned as a circling approach and therefore you weren't prepared to do a circling approach).
As to the concern about executing the missed approach beyond the missed approach point, I always look at the DP/ODPs for a given runway so that in the event I have a situation where I have to go missed after the MAP (maybe an animal on the runway for example or a situation like this where I just couldnt get the plane down or stopped short enough), I have an option available to me. In this case, the ODP is to fly a climbing right turn to 175 and intercept a radial to SNS VOR which is for all intents and purposes is the same as your missed approach so long as you climb to the appropriate ODP altitude and wait to pass the departure end of the runway (though this is usually only required if you got really low over the airport) before making the turn, there will be nothing in your path.
Circling when you're in and out of the clouds at minimums is too risky in my book.
@@elsieparker8802 In this case, visibility wasn't great but it wasn't terrible either and once visual contact with the runway is obtained, they could have descended below minimums to keep out of the clouds (and that's still not necessarily a "look-and-see" hazard). In fact, watching the video again I noticed AWOS this time which reported 4 miles visibility and they were clearly breaking out of the clouds into the mist below. KWVI is Class G below 700 feet so there easily could have been VFR traffic in the pattern there on this particular day and once they reached minimums at 700ft, were out of IMC and had the airport in sight, they legally could have cancelled IFR and completed VFR.
Of course there are a lot of things that come into play here as well, how well you know the airport and surrounding area, what the terrain is like, any obstacles in the area, emergency options if the engine quits and the field is no longer attainable, etc but the scenario presented in the video does not seem to present a particular hazard for "look-and-see" or circling approach minimums based on the reported conditions and what is visible in the video.
With the understanding that this was an instructional flight, I could understand if a second approach and/or a circling approach was not attempted as it would additionally depend on where the student is in their training (I probably wouldn't ask my student to perform this approach in these conditions as their first approach and still probably wouldn't have them execute this approach to landing as their "nth" approach but I would expect my checkride bound student to be able to do so) but that's where my question was born from.
Why did you not decide what approach you would fly before the flight even started? You know what instruments the plane has. It would have made more sense to decide before the flight what you are going to fly. It would have prepared you more fully, requiring less stressful thinking. Squinting through IMC is never easy, and when you need to decide in the moment/BRIEF in the moment, it becomes even more challenging.
JEFFREY KISS, maybe they did discuss it in the pre-flight. This is training after all. Sounds like the instructor wants to know his student's 'REAL TIME' thinking (SITUATIONAL AWARENESS: going through it verbally as he is doing it): REPETITION & TALKING IT THROUGH AS YOU DO IT!
That's a great point Jeffrey. We didn't confirm RAIM or check WAAS before we left and that was an oversight. Either way, the weather can change and it's good practice for Christophe to brief "on the fly" (ha!) Plus, in many real world scenarios you would not know which approach you were going to fly before you got there.
Yes, very good points. When I originally wrote my comment, I was grumpy, hungry, and quite cynical haha I'm in a better mood, and can appreciate all the learning involved :)
Side slip in when they became visual anyone?
dave jones That would be considered a "bold" move given their situation.(there was no urgency to get the plane on the ground)
We all know the saying "there are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old bold pilots". IMO it is much wiser to keep "bold" moves off your scorecard whenever possible.
I think you mean forward slip.
They were there and know best. From the video, it's not obvious to me that it was too high (unless runway was too short). A forward slip is not a "bold" move. Still, a good lesson regarding VDP, and they showed good judgment because they felt unsafe continuing to land. When in doubt, go missed.
“Albeit” not ‘“all be it” 😂.
Vladimir Yesayan haha I know that! Must have been a spell check - where did you see it?
Glass panel 182 does not have WAAS ??? Wow....
Yeah I don't understand that, I instruct on g1000 aircraft and they have WAAS on every single one. They maybe lost RAIM but I didn't see the GPS LOI cas message so I don't understand
Could be a slightly older plane. WAAS wasn’t introduced to the G1000 panels until around 2005 or 2006.
@@kennethallen2931 about 10 years ago, I installed a GNS430 with WAAS and indicator, full IFR STC, in my $30K, 1964 C172E.... I can do approaches that glass panel piece o crap can only dream of, LOL.
WAAS not available and WAAS not install are two different things. There are lots maintenance reasons why WAAS might be out of spec.
John Miller could be simulated as well. In the AUX menu, WAAS can be deselected.
Pays a premium to rent a plane with G1000 and can't get into airports a 1965 172 with a mini $4000 gps can.
How does this plane tricked out with G 1000s not have WAAS?
A bunch were made that way when they first came out and for several years after. You really have to check. It's 50/50 on our flight line.
A45s at San Carlos come visit me
You could have easily made that with a slip
jstack Maybe. But why risk it? You can always go around.
@@strikerwyatt he didnt go around... he did a missed approach back into ifr, which is arguably a more unsafe position then a slip. If you think a slip when you're a little high is dangerous, your instructor probably didnt do a good job teaching you basic stick and rudder skills
@@ritualghost With respect, it's really impossible to tell from this video what we could have made or not. If you watch again, you'll see that both Christophe and I took one look at the runway and knew we couldn't make it, so consider that. I am not afraid of slips -- it would not have worked to try it. Anyway, this is a video to teach the lesson about the VDP, not slips. If we had tried a slip and not made it, we would then have been about 1 mile past the missed approach point and back in IMC near mountains. I think that's the lesson here.
@@TheFinerPoints vdp? It's a cessna man, not a citation x. 182's land on gravel bars that are 500' or less. So yes, it teaches an instrument lesson of being in a position to make the runway, but you also need to have basic stick and rudder skills. If you can't throw in a quick slip in an airplane like that, you're lacking.
For you to say going missed in IFR is unsafe or “more” unsafe than trying to force a landing you’re already not comfortable shows lack of judgement. And yes, he did a missed approach which is the equivalent to a go around. Why do you want these guys to land so bad lol, and why are you trying to keyboard fly on what you would’ve done? I applaud these guys for having good judgement and trusting their gut when things don’t feel right. Most people in the comments would’ve done the same thing. If you wouldn’t, that’s fine but it could get you in trouble one day. Cheers.