I didn't have my Chromebook last Sunday as I was in N.C. doing my Safe Maneuvering Flight Techniques Seminar and filming in Jeff's Highlander. Since I missed my fortnight original post, I will shift to today. I started the seminar with two opposing lists on a big white board. The first list was under the heading: High Altitude Orientation and the opposing list was under the heading: Low Altitude Orientation. Riding back in the big airplane got me to thinking about how those two lists covered the problem of the circle to land part of an instrument approach. I seem to be the only one covering low altitude orientation and I was a CFII, but I have no jet experience. Therefore I will need the help of Gunny, Jaun Browne, and Rob. Gunny and Jaun and Dan Gryder have already said just don't use circling approaches, but what can be done to help those who will use them to understand the problem better?

High Altitude Orientation Low Altitude Orientation
Taught Myth or even taboo
Altitude is life Airspeed is life
No vertical space limitation Vertical space is limited
No horizontal space limitation Horizontal space is limited
Turns to heading All turns are to target
Downwind turn is myth Downwind turn kills by bumping groundspeed into horizontal space limits

This partial list is sufficient to our needs here.

What makes IFR and even IMC so safe? High altitude orientation works in a world where airspeed, altitude, and procedural track are legal, know to PIC and ATC, and can be loaded into the computer autopilot and autothrottles. You guys who actually have used this stuff correct me if I am wrong.

What makes the circling approach so dangerous? The transition from High Altitude to Low Altitude is not along an ILS, VOR, DME or GPS Arc, NDB, or GPS procedural track. In order to satisfy IFR requirements, MDA must be maintained so missed approach is safe. In low altitude orientation it would be a go around from an altitude that would not allow a safe transition. In order to maintain MDA, altitude and not airspeed is still life, still king. When altitude is king at an altitude from which an inadvertent stall is fatal, fatalities are bound to happen.

I had the same sort of problem with pipeline patrol pilots leaving marginal VFR at 200' AGL and climbing to MEA in totally unprotected airspace. That pipeline was not a legal or safe IFR procedural track. Nor are the lower portions of the circle to land.

So what can help. My 2 cents is the difference between high and low altitude orientation and the energy management turn. No you cannot go to low orientation and allow the nose to go down in the turn and maintain MDA altitude. And as with any safe turn to target at low altitude, getting a lot of turn in early (by allowing the nose to go down in the steep turn) so as to be able to level the wings before dragging the low wing through stuff isn't going to happen. Like jumping up into the clouds from low on the pipeline, it's the transition that is going to kill you.

Please guys help me out on the different considerations with fast moving airplanes. I know this is not exactly back country, but a lot of the orientation differences are in play there as well.

And Rob, could you help by explaining how the nose is continually going down in the latter portion of your race track pattern at night (scary dark night in the dark desert) to a light on the ground. Please turn the landing lights up, eh?

That’s a lot to follow.

I know I made the check airman extremely nervous on the circle to land approach during my IFR checkride. Apparently he had never done one where you actually needed to keep the airport in sight. We do them in real life with some frequency, however it’s VFR. Really a non-event, obviously, or we would have a lot of accidents. He couldn’t disagree or bust me for it but he sure was uncomfortable with the slow “energy management” turn to final. He was flying a Lear 60 for a NACAR driver at the time.

At Centennial, there would have been no legal or safety problem with the Cirrus pitching up just a bit and then banking to 60 degree bank while releasing back pressure in a 1g energy management turn to target. The target? The proper runway centerline extended and not the Metroliner. If maintenance of altitude way out there at Cherry Hills Lake is king, stall or parachute or groundspeed pushing the airplane into another airplane's centerline extended can happen. The wind blows at Centennial most every day. The parallel runways make that a pain in the neck for half the customers. 20 degree bank limitation is not the solution.

Concerning backcountry and bush flying in airplanes that carry a pretty good load IFR at decent airspeed but have reasonable OGE Vso, wind management on the circle to land or base to final, horizontal space limitations, turns to target rather than heading, and such have to be considered. We need to be cognizant of which world, which orientation, we are in or are entering. The rules on one do not apply well to the other.

And for the fast movers, zoom reserve airspeed degradation to accelerated stall seems to be a dangerous feature. I see the little winged F-16 doing yo yos. Why can't a Metroliner, Lear, Cirrus, or Air Tractor zoom up wings level to safely more than OGE Vso, staying above MDE, and then release the elevator back pressure in the turn now to target (the centerline extended)? There can be no stall, no spin, if the wing is unloaded.

Again, I may not know what I am talking about. There are a lot of buttons on those airplanes I know nothing about. Rob, however, does this a thousand times a night.