Yeah...Don't read 'em.

You should see the way my wife packs for overnight trips with us and the kids, Ale. For her 1100# is anemic UL...

Garmin only builds what the customers request. So yes, Cirrus leads the way. Garmin may do the actual coding and technology; but it is the Cirrus companies vision and money. You notice a lot of these features are specific to Cirrus? If Garmin led and paid for it it would show up on many more companies.

Tim

and we know that just because there's a chute.....it will work....right?


http://www.aero-news.net/Subscribe.cfm? ... 95ab971053

Deano,

love ya bruh, but That is NOT how they work.

Like YOU would know

I'm absolutely embarrassed to be flying around in a 49 year old airplane with a useful load of 1200 lbs that cruises at 178 kts. So what if it's a timeless design that garners compliments wherever I land, and is a joy to fly? Who cares if it has a fully capable IFR panel? It's a relic. Ken Griffey Jr. doesn't have one. Angelina Jolie doesn't have one. It takes a pilot to fly it. It doesn't even have a stick shaker, for the love of Mike! It's obsolete. I should knock it in the head and put it out of its misery.

(That probably should have been written in green.)

not the ones the Army flys.

If the AV is near the box....it does aquire and will land. Even Grey Eagle can do that.

Deano,

love ya bruh, but That is NOT how they work.

LOL. Like there's a tractor beam on your computer forcing your eyes to read and your finger to click? Pathetic!!

11.5 pages in 24 hours. Isn't that a record?

I think what he said was bogus.

As for the approach, the problem becomes getting down with weather at minimums for the CTL or doing the 180 for the back course missed before you hit something. There is a fourteener close by and plenty of hills leading up to it.

The approach does not allow CAT D speeds, let alone CAT E, for this reason.

That is the beauty of what you fly vs. what I fly. The approach profile is similar, but you can come blazing in and then just chop the power without hurting the turbine. I have to plan further out. I have flown this approach 10 or 15 times in the sim in all conditions. 140KIAS at RedTable works best. I try to get to 120 at 10,200. A little extra time for the circle, or less ground coverage in the turn for the back course can make the difference.

As for the descent rate, try dropping quickly down to each altitude after crossing the DME fixes and then leveling off while looking for the field. The last two step downs are so short-coupled, you'll blow through them if your fast. Go slow, chop, and drop. You're chances of breaking out will be much higher. Even airliners fly the final between 120 and 140 KIAS. In a Pilatus, I'd bet you could hit the MDA early and be doing 100KIAS, without giving up recovery ability.

I'm not sure why it shows my GS so high. I suppose it's correct. I started slowing down way ahead of time for this approach. Flew each waypoint and descended appropriately. Looked up and there was the runway.

I too flew this approach many times in the sim just a month earlier. I'm going to do it again for real this summer. Thanks for the tips.

So we are all members of an antique car club (maybe muscle cars but antique nonetheless) arguing with someone who just sold his late model BMW for a brand new Maserati. For most of us, shopping for airplanes is like shopping for cars in Cuba. Dont forget who invited all of us to Fairhope. It was not Bechcraft. It was the manufacturer of our 1950 era designed engines. (Chuck and Bill, please invite us back! I had a blast.)

John - click on the 'x' to the left of the thread title. Poof, all gone.

(There, I just posted on the Most. Popular. BT. Thread. Ever.)