Can you make a video about the equal transition theory? My DPE caught me on it on my CFI checkride and told me it was a common myth. There is a nasa link on Google that helps explain it, and I think it's important to let everyone know. And don't worry, I still passed the checkride
Can you please do a video on the ODP out of KBKE? it seems confusing where you have to fly a radio and do a hold to gain altitude right after departure. Let's say runway 26 or 31...
Good reminder that you don't have to begin the climbout before the DA if no runway environment is in sight. Thank you! The problem is I don't know if all examiners will also know this.
Even if the DPE disagrees, most DPEs won't consider it a "wrong" answer if you are pointing to the relevent regulations and provide sound reasoning for your interpretation. (Also you could go to the FAA terps publications and show that approches are designed assuming that you will make the decision at the DA and dip below due to momentum. Those publications are not intended as piloting rules or educational references, however they are support for interpreting FAR 91.175(C) ) A personal operational consideration is to set a slightly higher DA if your climb angle will be borderline on the missed segment, but this is more of a specific case. You also don't want to be too conservative on the DA either, because actually breaking out and landing is generally safer than going missed (Assuming all else about the approach is stable, between the lines, and obstacle clearance maintained.).
Interesting. I’m pretty sure I learned about protected / unprotected from the King’s course. I always suspected some margin was built in, but this shows that a good amount of margin is built in.
I was always taught that the "protection" for the protected side of the hold was primarily for the purposes of traffic deconfliction, not terrain, so ATC has a bit more freedom and simplicity when it comes to vectoring in the terminal area. Any thoughts?
@@75takenalive in a very simple way, the barometric altimeters do not read altitude or heights. they measure presure that then is corrected so that you can read altitudes or heights. One of those correction factors is ISA temperatures, so when in places that go way above/below those you have to correct again for temperature. hope that helps a bit.
This explanation is incorrect. The final approach fix on the ILS is always glideslope intercept at final approach altitude. The Maltese cross marks the final approach fix on the localizer approach. These are two different approaches, one precision and one non-precision, on the same approach plate.
The biggest myth that I hear, is that if your airplane has a VOR then you have to do a VOR check in the last 30 days to file/fly IFR. CFR 91.171 says that you can't operate under IFR "using the VOR system of radio navigation" unless it has been checked in last 30 days. However if you have a WAAS GPS approved for IFR navigation then you can use that as your primary navigation source and don't need to necessarily use the VOR for navigation. The regulation is mainly for people with non-WAAS GPS who need to have a VOR check to use that as their primary form of navigation. Non-WAAS GPS are certified under TSO-C129 or TSO-C196 and are not approved for standalone use. EDIT: OK I have another one. 91.167 flight in IFR conditions says you need fuel to destination then alternate then 45 minute reserves. But the myth is that you always need these reserves. I think the technicality is that in VFR conditions such as when no alternate is required, that you only need VFR reserves.
Get a FREE IFR Checkride at a Glance PDF delivered straight to your inbox here! www.flight-insight.com/ifr-pdf
More IFR videos please. A mock checkride or IFR checkride questions you’d present would be super helpful
th-cam.com/video/_fgoilQqT3w/w-d-xo.htmlsi=FAu8RtIYOi2GIBcY
Helped me a ton before my checkride. Three part series. Good luck
@@Lunchbox28 I wish he had an oral portion though. Sorry, should’ve been more specific with my request
Agreed
2:42 Is it legal to cross BELOW a published restriction while on the GS?
Can you make a video about the equal transition theory? My DPE caught me on it on my CFI checkride and told me it was a common myth. There is a nasa link on Google that helps explain it, and I think it's important to let everyone know. And don't worry, I still passed the checkride
Can you please do a video on the ODP out of KBKE? it seems confusing where you have to fly a radio and do a hold to gain altitude right after departure. Let's say runway 26 or 31...
Good reminder that you don't have to begin the climbout before the DA if no runway environment is in sight. Thank you! The problem is I don't know if all examiners will also know this.
Even if the DPE disagrees, most DPEs won't consider it a "wrong" answer if you are pointing to the relevent regulations and provide sound reasoning for your interpretation. (Also you could go to the FAA terps publications and show that approches are designed assuming that you will make the decision at the DA and dip below due to momentum. Those publications are not intended as piloting rules or educational references, however they are support for interpreting FAR 91.175(C) )
A personal operational consideration is to set a slightly higher DA if your climb angle will be borderline on the missed segment, but this is more of a specific case. You also don't want to be too conservative on the DA either, because actually breaking out and landing is generally safer than going missed (Assuming all else about the approach is stable, between the lines, and obstacle clearance maintained.).
@@mytech6779 I agree. However, it would still be stressful and no guarantee.
You could just ask the DPE you know... say "so this is how my instructor trained me to shoot ILS approaches down to mins, if this fine with you?"
Can you check out recent ACS changes? It seems there is minor changes in PVT, IR, COM. Also, brand new CFI ACS has been released.
Good idea,
Interesting. I’m pretty sure I learned about protected / unprotected from the King’s course. I always suspected some margin was built in, but this shows that a good amount of margin is built in.
Super video, so much useful information! Thanks a lot!
Super helpful! Thanks!
#1 was taught to me, great stuff
I was always taught that the "protection" for the protected side of the hold was primarily for the purposes of traffic deconfliction, not terrain, so ATC has a bit more freedom and simplicity when it comes to vectoring in the terminal area. Any thoughts?
this is what i was taught as well, our usual practice hold was over CCC and i was told it was this way to help let ATC get the jets in to the bravo
I love these, I've heard so many people talk about unprotected and protected holds. They are supposed to be called non-holding and holding sides.
why is myth number 2 wrong? you would have the correct altimeter setting by then so always be at 2000 true, rigth?
Altimeters cannot correct for temperature.
@@neverfox isnt baro setting based on temperature too?
@@75takenalive in a very simple way, the barometric altimeters do not read altitude or heights. they measure presure that then is corrected so that you can read altitudes or heights. One of those correction factors is ISA temperatures, so when in places that go way above/below those you have to correct again for temperature. hope that helps a bit.
This explanation is incorrect. The final approach fix on the ILS is always glideslope intercept at final approach altitude. The Maltese cross marks the final approach fix on the localizer approach. These are two different approaches, one precision and one non-precision, on the same approach plate.
@@havattarah isnt that what the baro setting is for? like setting 30.00 instead of 2992 when other factors affect it?
The biggest myth that I hear, is that if your airplane has a VOR then you have to do a VOR check in the last 30 days to file/fly IFR. CFR 91.171 says that you can't operate under IFR "using the VOR system of radio navigation" unless it has been checked in last 30 days.
However if you have a WAAS GPS approved for IFR navigation then you can use that as your primary navigation source and don't need to necessarily use the VOR for navigation. The regulation is mainly for people with non-WAAS GPS who need to have a VOR check to use that as their primary form of navigation. Non-WAAS GPS are certified under TSO-C129 or TSO-C196 and are not approved for standalone use.
EDIT: OK I have another one. 91.167 flight in IFR conditions says you need fuel to destination then alternate then 45 minute reserves. But the myth is that you always need these reserves. I think the technicality is that in VFR conditions such as when no alternate is required, that you only need VFR reserves.
The very best 🏆🥇🛫🛬 vídeos EVER!! TY 👋🏼