Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 20:14:44 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-607750@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <sportform@cox.net>
Received: from fed1rmmtao08.cox.net ([68.230.241.31] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8)
  with ESMTP id 607209 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:29:25 -0500
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.31; envelope-from=sportform@cox.net
Received: from [68.228.74.87] by fed1rmmtao08.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-117-20041022) with ESMTP
          id <20050114172853.XQAF27771.fed1rmmtao08.cox.net@[68.228.74.87]>
          for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:28:53 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
In-Reply-To: <list-607093@logan.com>
References: <list-607093@logan.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-34-714997615
X-Original-Message-Id: <C2A15FFE-6651-11D9-8C1B-0003936AFD3E@cox.net>
From: Barry Hancock <sportform@cox.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Another LNC2 Down
X-Original-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:28:52 -0800
X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619)


--Apple-Mail-34-714997615
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=ISO-8859-1;
	format=flowed


> =A0=A0 One more comment on the 27R approach at Gillespie Field: In=20
> addition to PAPI, that runway has a 1300' displaced threshhold,=20
> expressly to provide additional terrain clearance for approaches over=20=

> rising terrain=A0to the east.=A0 Ignoring the=A0PAPI is one thing, but =
to=20
> get so low as to hit a perimeter fence beyond a displaced threshhold,=20=

> in clear weather no less,=A0seems inconceivable to me.
> =A0=A0 Bottom line (how many times have we heard this)=A0is not to =
accept a=20
> bad approach.=A0 Clean it up while you're out far enough to safely do =
so=20
> or go around.
> =A0=A0 Skip Slater

Guys, all of your comments are right on target.  It does not take away=20=

from what's being said, but let's remember we are dealing with *very*=20
preliminary information.  We do not know if he lost power, etc.

FWIW, this is one of the reasons why I love the overhead approach and=20
use it whenever possible.  Yes, it is a "warbird" thing, but it=20
accomplishes some very nice safety "extras" including:  better=20
visibility of traffic in the pattern, increased altitude and airspeed=20
until inside the airport boundry which means you *should* always be=20
able to make the runway no matter what happens to the power, and you=20
also become a higher priority target for others because you're flying a=20=

non-standard pattern.  Obviously it needs to be used carefully at a=20
non-towered airport, but IMO it is safer, and waaaaay more fun, too!

Cheers,

Barry

--Apple-Mail-34-714997615
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset=ISO-8859-1



<excerpt><fontfamily><param>Arial</param><smaller>=A0=A0 One more =
comment
on the 27R approach at Gillespie Field: In addition to PAPI, that
runway has a 1300' displaced threshhold, expressly to provide
additional terrain clearance for approaches over rising terrain=A0to the
east.=A0 Ignoring the=A0PAPI is one thing, but to get so low as to hit a
perimeter fence beyond a displaced threshhold, in clear weather no
less,=A0seems inconceivable to me.</smaller></fontfamily>

<fontfamily><param>Arial</param><smaller>=A0=A0 Bottom line (how many
times have we heard this)=A0is not to accept a bad approach.=A0 Clean it
up while you're out far enough to safely do so or <bold><italic>go
around</italic></bold>.</smaller></fontfamily>

<fontfamily><param>Arial</param><smaller>=A0=A0 Skip =
Slater</smaller></fontfamily>

</excerpt>

Guys, all of your comments are right on target.  It does not take away
from what's being said, but let's remember we are dealing with *very*
preliminary information.  We do not know if he lost power, etc. =20


FWIW, this is one of the reasons why I love the overhead approach and
use it whenever possible.  Yes, it is a "warbird" thing, but it
accomplishes some very nice safety "extras" including:  better
visibility of traffic in the pattern, increased altitude and airspeed
until inside the airport boundry which means you *should* always be
able to make the runway no matter what happens to the power, and you
also become a higher priority target for others because you're flying
a non-standard pattern.  Obviously it needs to be used carefully at a
non-towered airport, but IMO it is safer, and waaaaay more fun, too!=20


Cheers,


Barry


--Apple-Mail-34-714997615--