Unstable approach - too high - The Flying Reporter
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
- How not to land an aeroplane! While trying to save time by flying direct, I end up too high on approach to Redhill Aerodrome.
The Flying Reporter RUclips channel is sponsored by light aircraft maintenance organisation, Aero Anglia.
www.aeroanglia...
My website: www.jonhunt.net
About me/Supporters' Club membership/Bonus content/Flying Reporter Shop
www.jonhunt.net/
/ theflyingreporter
Facebook:
/ theflyingreporter
Twitter:
/ jonhunttv
Instagram:
/ flyingreporteruk
Music:
Epidemic Sound
www.epidemicso...
My recording equipment
2 GoPro Hero 5 Black
3 GoPro Hero 4 Silver
1 GoPro Hero 3+
Sony AX53 camcorder
Blackmagic Ursa Mini Pro G2
Tascam DR-05 audio recorder
Audio attenuator 40dB
3x GoPro suction cup mounts
MiPilotPro tie down mount
Ipad mount
RAM Ipad Mini 4 holder and Yoke mount.
Editing & Graphics:
FCPX
Apple Motion
Color Finale Pro
Voiceover: Rode NT USB microphone
That extra 9minutes has given you a flying lesson. Those moments are priceless.
You did the right thing by ditching the approach and joined the circuit.
This is the same thing you would do if you were IFR.
- B737 Captain.
Thanks captain.
I really appreciate that you are showing us that no matter how exprienced you are you still can make some mistakes. You added to my self confidence when I make the miss judgment
Thanks for sharing.
A good pilot never stops learning. I'm sure I've said it before but why people enjoy your videos are that you're not afraid to show your mistakes. Keep up the great work
Hello Jon. Greetings from the west of Ireland. I haven't watched your video yet but you get an instant like from me. Happy Landings. Chris
Thanks, really great cameras POVs, to look inside and outside ... perfect !!! One of the best GA aviation channel on RUclips !!!
Thank you for sharing so openly and honestly Jon. Of course in hindsight of course you could have descended as you came over Gatwick as you didn’t need to be at 2000’ (and a nice big runway to land on if you did have an engine problem).
A straight in approach is of course always a challenge to integrate with existing traffic, even more so at somewhere busy like Redhill. You could hear the uncertainty in the Redhill controllers voice when you announced where you were. An overhead join gives the time to assimilate other traffic, more more importantly as my instructor told me, to settle down and prepare myself for the landing.
Thanks Geoffrey.
Whether to fix an unstable approach or go around and try again is the sort of decision making that can't be taught. You only get it with experience. Nice flying!
My personal limit is three go arounds. After the third I'll leave the zone to reconsider my options: divert, circle to settle my nerves, whatever.
In the commercial world you are limited to two approaches.
We're all human, and you handled the human element perfectly by making the right decisions to join overhead and then going around. As you know, a rush to get on the ground often ends with the aircraft being IN the ground so you did the right things. nice flying, stay safe, keep the videos coming!
9 minutes x 118 (comments at time of post) = 17.7 hours of interest and learning you have created. Good pay back.
This is just the type of video that makes you so special to watch Jon. No hiding, no excuses just the experience for you most importantly, and us to learn from a real life flight not an engineered traiing flight.It fits the old mantra "a good pilot is always learning" but equally it takes a good pilot to realise all is not right and make the corrections and land safe.
Thanks Mikey.
Excellent video as always. Apart from the "lesson" to us all, all rather good anyway as I remember as an ATCA at Gatwick in the 1970s, such as they were then, a Special VFR clearance, were on pink strips as a I recall. Nice to see the beehive in relation to modern Gatwick all from the air whilst transiting. A few years back I met the daughter of the Beehive's originator/designer...a fantastic 1930s design.
I visited the Beehive when GB airways ( I think it was GB) was based there. Lovely building.
I like the fact that you share showing your experiences good and bad. It highlights to lower hours pilots like me that flyingng is a constant learning process and videos like this help us all as you include your analysis. It is so tempting to only post the good videos or edit out the errors so thank you for posting good honest content.
Thank you.
Yes agree with the B737 Captain, very good experience and you fixed it safely. Keeping it real, thanks Jon
Thank you for the kind words. B737 Captain
Thanks Robin.
It's your honest that wins a lot of praise. Another great video.
Thanks Shane.
Well worked out in the end, that looked a bit stressful. I bet a cup of tea was the order of the day after landing. ( I might have needed the loo also!!!)
I have soloed today. This channel has been an inspiration for me to pursue an old dream. Thanks for that, Jon!
Congratulations Federico.
I really appreciate that you are showing our share information and experience with us thanks 🙏
Its great that you share these sorts of videos Jon. Having watched it, I might recognise a growing problem in time to correct it and, if not, then at least I know what the right course of action is.
As you always say, fly safely!
Nothing better than a "Jon beats himself up" video. 😂
To my layman's eyes you spotted something was going wrong, made corrections and communicated your intentions. Nothing wrong with that. 👍
People love seeing me beat myself up.
Great video and thanks for sharing Jon. Sharing our learning experiences is very much a dying art in modern culture. One of the best lines I heard in my career was "You haven't got time to make all the mistakes yourself, so learn as much as you can from other peoples".
Great video John. Safety is No1 well
Done paul
Thanks Paul.
Hi Jon! We have all done similar or worse, and as always your honesty is admirable. You made the right decision and went around and landed safely. As they say 'If on Finals with too much height then stay in flight!' 😂
I think that was a wonderful example of how to do it.
Your attitude was great! You were calm, and dealt with the situation in a great way!
We can all make "mistakes" like misjudging height, but that's zero problem with your attitude and "problem" solving.
This is zero problem.
I can think of 100 different things that would be a problem in my opinion:
- skipping DI
- flying with too low fuel, into too bad weather, or otherwise not prepared.
- bad focus, bad reaction to unexpected things..
Most accidents start with a small error in judgment - followed by another - and another, until disaster.
So bad judgment / attidute = bad.
Misjudging something while having a great attitude / judgment = no problem :)
GG mr reporter ;)
All been there!! Rather too high that too low and a climb out..that’s ga!
That controller must have thought "Got a right numpty here" 🤣
Thanks for sharing! Also good to remember that chopping the power to get down quick isn't very nice for the engine or turbo either.
Great video, Jon! You remained completely safe and didn't present a risk to any other traffic. Excellent decision making in very stressful conditions 👌👏👏
Excellent episode to watch. Cheers.
Thanks Martin.
One lesson I'm learning is that a lot of stories start with "My plan to save time...." What I see here is that several times, you realized there was a problem and within seconds, took action to address the problem in a safe way. Much better than the long list of pilots who appeared to try to force things to stick to the initial plan and ended up as an accident report with the conclusion "He should have called off the initial plan and simply gone around..." Well, you did and here you are to share the story first-hand. Thanks for this.
Thanks Thomas.
Hi John, the GNS430 in your aircraft has a very useful VNAV feature (vertical navigation) and works even when using the ‘Direct’ airport command, the setup is simple and it does the maths for you, displaying feet per min required.
Yes good early and..er..decisive decision. And a lesson for us all to take away. Also that was a bumpy day (10th december I'll bet), gusts on approach could make it even worse. Nice jumper.
Thanks Chris.
Very good. Apart from the initial planning, you did everything right and will have learned from this experience. Thanks for sharing the bad as well as the good.
Well OK you didn't end up saving any time but far more exciting and demanding flying over a major international busy (perhaps not quite so in these times) airport than pottering around its ATZ. Thanks for allowing us to come along!
Lol’d off Redhill controller’s scepticism in voice as he was saying “you are no. 3”
Interesting!!!
The Curse of the Christmas Jumper. Dont ever wear it again, ever. Not in the plane, not in the car, not even in the privacy of your own home.
Ah well look at this way, one miscalculation followed by some sound decision making practice you wouldn't have got had it been for the first miscalculation
That was a really useful video! Mistakes are extremely valuable learning tools. I’m glad you posted this, as I’m a brand new PPL and this will really help newbie pilots like me from making errors, and plan better. Thanks Jon!! 👍
Thanks Simon.
Appreciate you sharing these kind of videos. While it may have cost you 9 minutes, the lessons learnt are much more valuable.
Came to my home airport one evening above the mountains instead of down the valley, something I had never done before, so I was 2000 ft higher than normal. Yes sometimes full flaps and a sideslip can save your bacon, but that was just too much and really unnecessary. I was still far enough I requested ATC for a 360 to drop some altitude, and it made for a much safer and relaxed approach.
Great Video John, it reminds me of our first landing at Oban where we had the rather large mountain on on base/final which encouraged us to stay high so we had to dive bomb the runway at the last minute.
I think there's some video of that, followed by a lovely touchdown!
Really good video, I love the radio dealing with Gatwick ATC, really useful.
Thanks.
every one has an off day , great landing ,
Rob
NSW
Australia
ppl
Another great informative video, although it’s never pleasant making mistakes, we all make them, regardless of experience or skillset. I think it’s great that you share them for us to learn from. To me learning from others is key in this discipline.
Thanks Anthony.
Reminded me of a recent video on Stephan Drury's channel. Electing not to join overhead makes co-ordination with other traffic both different and potentially difficult. The advantage of going overhead and letting down in the circuit is that all the regular landing checks and descent can then be done as they always routinely are. If it's "business as normal" then it's very much like pulling into one's regular parking spot when in the car. A change of routine makes the entire process both different and potential complicated (as demonstrated & kindly shared : Kudos). Well done for doing a Gatwick transit & thanks for sharing.
An overhead join is certainly a nice way to arrive. Obviously you have to adapt to the controlled environment. At Redhill, the joins are usually straight in, downwind or base....Only overhead if busy. The overhead join at Redhill is only 200' above the circuit, so it's not the nicest join!.
@@TheFlyingReporter When I did my flight training at Redhill, only once did the instructor land on 36 (for fear his student pilot would bust Gatwick’s airspace). He too misjudged his height & needed to slide slip. You’re in good company & I’m in no way criticising anything you did. All my other landings were easterly or westerly. Sitting on the sofa & having watched your clip twice (noting your comment about 300’) I can’t help but wonder if another way of doing things might be to descend on Redhill’s western side of their ATC (the dead side) & then do a normal right hand circuit for 36 ??? Hindsight is a wonderful thing. If one then is crossing the northern end of 36 at circuit height, there is ample room for safe separation IMHO. Of course if you approached direct from the south I’m sure your experience would now stand you in good stead vis a vis height. Question : if the circuit was busy & a straight in approach to 36 was not on the cards ( for whatever reason), how would you join the circuit, having had that experience ?
Really enjoy your video's thank you, just ordered a Flying Reporter Hat.
Thanks Peter. And Bertie has just taken it to the post box!
@@TheFlyingReporter Thank you much appreciated
Managing a complex aircraft takes away a little bit of the available thought process. Transiting controlled airspace like Gatwick nibbles into that as well. With hindsight it's easy to say what actions would have produced a better outcome. A year after moving to the Cessna 172RG and being very comfortable with it I was flying a Rockwell commander 112a. The extra workload resulted in lots of minor errors that started to worry me. A few hours of dual instruction sorted things out.
Use the ATP concept called the landing gate which is a generic, measurable stability goal. VMC 500AGL on speed, on profile, fully configured, V/S proportional to ground speed and good power setting.
OOOOOPS!!!!! LOL.
Thanks John great 'learning' video, we have the same time constraints crossing Farnborough from the south for Blackbushe joins. Almost always an overhead, but still leaves us dropping in amongst the action fairly late on... and that can be a plateful for the developing (mature) student type!
Blackbushe is quite busy and being dropped by Farnborough at the edge of the ATZ isn't fun.
Better being too high than too low... Maybe this was a bit of getheritis? Anyway you realized in time that you were too high for the straight in rwy 36. Thanks for sharing this!
Thanks. There was no pressure to get there, it was just a case of making the flight as efficient as possible. The difficulty with Gatwick is that you don't know what they're going to do. Their direct routing to Redhill without coordinating that with them made it difficult. Sometimes they coordinate, sometimes they don't. You don't know if they have or haven't until the last minute. I didn't know what join Redhill were going to give me until I called them at 3 miles. However, my error was not considering my descent profile from 2400ft.
Might be interesting going several thousand feet up, setting the aircraft up for approach, then sideslipping the 2000ft to see what distance it took to lose the height?
Excellent again Jon. Very few you tubers are so open about their errors - a great learning experience. On the descent profile, I was taught to use 4nm per 1000' at 500fpm & 120 knots in our 182 (similar performance to the Arrow), a very useful rule of thumb, if not always 100% accurate depending on winds etc. So at 2,400 feet from Redhill threshold on a straight in you'd want to begin your descent at around 10nm. I don't know if your Garmin 430 also has a visual approach aid like the GTN 650/750? That's a v useful (VFR only) back-up and will also instantly show you if you're way too high with enough time to do something about it. It will also show you if you're correctly on the final approach track too.
Good rule of thumb. I (usually) use 3NM for 1000ft to lose. And then the descent rate is GS x 10 / 2 for a 3 degree path. I didn't do that here!!!
My PA 32 still catches me out, even at home plate. Side slipping, the occasional 360 or S turns often work. I would love air brakes. It’s all part of becoming a better pilot. It’s never a bad decision to overshoot and get the aircraft properly set up.
There’s a number of things you could have done - main thing is you recognised an issue and corrected it. One orbit on final approach may have been enough to loose the height, and to execute a safe, stable approach. You also could have transited CAS at a lower altitude.
Yes, a most underrated maneuver. A 360 degree standard rate descending turn adversely affects nobody and allows you two minutes to collect your thought processes and establish an approach that otherwise might have been rushed and unstable.
It is also quite satisfying to fly as you pop back onto the approach with no worries. It hadn't occurred to me that this is not taught in the PPL syllabus.
@@AnthonyHigham6414001080 I assume you inform ATC you are going to conduct the turn.
Good decisions in the end Jon rather than just trying to get it down. May I ask which ram mount extension you use on the yoke between the clamp and iPad holder?
That go around seemed like exactly the right thing to do. I'd have done the same thing, and I say that as someone who flies a plane that will stop in 200m on grass, and less on a good day.
Thanks for the comment.
Thanks Jon, enjoyed that, and a good learning too. I was wondering when you started if there would be enough time between Gatwick and Redhill for the straight in to runway 36, and you showed there was, had you been at the right height! One thing that would have helped is to slow right down to give more time to the runway, thus more time to descend. I don’t think you had any flaps in at all for example did you? I did also enjoy the part where you were over Crawley with Gatwick dead ahead, wondering where you would glide clear to in the event of an emergency! 😉 another great video, thank you. 🙏
What you need is a 2nd 8.33 radio.
You could be talking to Redhill tower on box 2 to make a better assessment of your circuit position. It also would allow Redhill ATC a “heads up”.
Yes. We do need one. I'll put it on my Birthday list.
Looks a bit like my "Five weeks off, it shows!" video with the Fenland approach, though I'd forgotten flaps that time. I hadn't flown for 5 weeks so was a bit behind on everything - I was having to think rather than just act (well act from thinking ahead! rather than in the moment)
Nice to see how you dealt with it, choosing to route into the overhead was the decision you made and therefore the correct one I think. Its a good demonstration of a mistake I might make in focussing on the transit in the planning without fully seeing how it would affect the approach which has been done lots of times before. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on what you might do differently next time, you mentioned the glide clear - would it have been simply to request a lower altitude from Gatwick as they had no traffic to affect?
You didn't save any time but you did learn something & noticed when things went wrong, so chalk it up as a positive.
I wouldn't say you did anything wrong at all. Flying over Gatwick and through their airspace is something that in my opinion should use 100% of your attention. So I wouldn't start to think about the approach into Redhill until I was well past the airport.
I Would have asked for an earlier decent after Gatwick threshold, or gone over Gatwick at slightly lower and at a speed you could put gear and flaps down earlier. They did not ask you to fly at 140kts, so you could have slowed to 80kts after the Threshold.
They all land eventually 👍
As soon as you left gatwick control, could you have not done an orbit or two whilst descending to lose some of that height??
Difficult to do so in Gatwick Airspace without a clearance from them. Gatwick controls the airspace up to the Redhill ATZ which is truncated to the south.
Great video as always. One question as a PPL student - you mentioned you went around again because you were still getting to grips with the aircraft’s short field performance, how would a land-after clearance alter your approach/landing? I thought it was just an identical landing but ensuring the traffic on the runway has vacated? Sorry if a daft question.
Not daft at all, I was a bit confused also. My guess is the extended pattern for the separation which caused him to misjudge the descent from base to final.
From CAP 413:
"A landing aircraft may be permitted to touch down before a preceding
landing aircraft has vacated the runway provided that:
1. the runway is long enough to allow safe separation between the
two aircraft and there is no evidence to indicate that braking may be
adversely affected;
2. it is during daylight hours;
3. the preceding landing aircraft is not required to backtrack in order to
vacate the runway;
4. the controller is satisfied that the landing aircraft will be able to see
the preceding aircraft which has landed, clearly and continuously,
until it has vacated the runway; and
5. the pilot of the following aircraft is warned. (Responsibility for
ensuring adequate separation rests with the pilot of the following
aircraft."
I was still refining my short-field technique in my new arrow, and at this point was still landing a bit long....I was therefore not confident of adequate separation.
Thanks for the explanation Jon. I didn’t realise you could land while the other aircraft was still on the runway ahead - makes total sense now. 👍🏼
As I found out, the real learning happens when you get your PPL licence
Do you do any training about wake turbulence from bigger passenger aircraft as you fly near large airports?
Yes we are...see the link to some info about the separation minima for different categories of aircraft. Typically, by routing overhead the airfield, you are less at risk, because the bigger aircraft are below you. www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-industry/Airspace/Air-traffic-control/Air-navigation-services/UK-Wake-Turbulence-Categories/
I personally love the Space Shuttle approach!
I’m fine in PA28’s but always end up high in C172’s…
Perhaps I should have made the title - Space Shuttle approach to Redhill.
I haven’t got a map in front of me so not 100% certain on the airspace but why could you not have started your descent whilst inside the Gatwick ATZ? She said not above 2400? 🤔
Yes - this was the problem.
Could you have requested a descending 360 on initial contact or requested a descent clearance from Gatwick after crossing overhead?
in aviation just like in other parts of life, you can always ask!
I've done what you suggest in his situation before and it worked out perfectly. Sometimes it's ATC who tells you to do a 360 for trafic spacing or to keep you out of the path of a descending/climbing jet
Interestingly, Gatwick said to not pass 'above 2400' so you could have legitimately descended to a lower altitude for straight in to Redhill 36, or am I mistaken?
I think it's all fine here, was also thinking of side slipping it but presumably from the real world view it didn't look too good. Can that radio monitor another station at the same time? If not perhaps pop out of the zone to the west of redhill instead? Gatwick was dead so probably would have agreed to any sensible assertive suggestion. All in all though, I wouldn't beat myself up about it, but maybe do it a bit differently next time.
It's difficult...my clearance was direct redhill...I could have asked for a different routing, but you don't know what's going on behind the scenes. In the past, Gatwick has sometimes coordinated my join with Redhill - for example, clearing me for a left base join BEFORE being transferred to Redhill's frequency - this time, they didn't coordinate - just dumped me on a 3 mile final! Redhill didn't know I was coming, the circuit was busy, and so there we are. I could be more assertive, perhaps plan in future to route to Buckland VRP, and if when talking to Redhill, they give me a more direct routing, then I can take that option. My haste, and lack of assertion meant i ran out of options.
@@TheFlyingReporter I would generally stay away from them... but they were really quiet. I got clearance through the east end of east midlands from Leicester to Tollerton but again the airspace has a gap of about 10 seconds at 100kt and if they don't get back to you its like being a rabbit in the headlights but then again Tollerton is A/G only and 40% of the people are not following a standard rules anyway. Id rather find myself too close to Redhill than busting Gatwick's zone. Things like that happen all the time. What I didn't like too much was the tone of the guy in the tower - which to me would have added pressure, however its perhaps just his normal tone.
That's Phil in the tower. That's him! We have a good working relationship actually.. Very dry on the radio.
@@TheFlyingReporter Yes I had a feeling that was just his way which is why I didn't make an issue and assume its only me, but you say dry so you know what I mean. I remember your ATC series, I'm based at Wolverhampton and so that was especially good to see and they are fairly relaxed. Some controllers sound like they have had 10 espressos, other sound like they are not really fully here.
Retired ATPL here - why bother with all of that hassle? I would rather take a taxi, or drive myself.