Young, New Subscriber
I’ve just received my copy of the Feb issue—it’s my first. I’m glad I’ve found your magazine—it’s a very interesting read.
My plan covers both digital and print, so I have full access to the archive that’s definitely a never-ending trove of good reading for a long time to come.
I’m a (non-current) glider and TMG pilot (Touring Motor Glider), with no Instrument certificate. At 72 my active flying is over. I definitely will do my instrument rating in my next life cycle, because it is such an interesting and professional way of taking to the air.
I live in EU/DE Germany. Always happy landings for you.
—Paco Cortegiano, Germany
Welcome, Paco. Thanks for your note and for subscribing. We hope you find our material beneficial, interesting, and educational.
Where’s Tarrance?
I have been a serious and enthusiastic reader of IFR for over three decades. It is a periodical I look forward to receiving each month about a subject I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy.
While I haven’t started reading it yet, I received the February 2024 edition of IFR and happened to notice that Tarrance Kramer is no longer a contributing editor. If that means he will no longer write any more articles for IFR, I, and I dare say, many of my fellow pilots who regularly read the magazine will be deeply disappointed. Over the years, you’ve had many writers and contributors—some better than others. Tarrance Kramer was among the best. He had an uncanny way of conveying information in a way such that it was remembered long after the article was read. Sharing his insights as a controller gave a useful and practical perspective as to how things are perceived by those on the other side of our radios. I will certainly miss his column and only wish that he could be coaxed to continue sharing his insights if only on a limited basis.
Thank you for the efforts you undoubtedly expend monthly to keep the magazine coming with useful, practical and enjoyable content.
—Howard Smith, Long Beach, New York
We completely agree with your comments about Tarrance. And yes, his name has been removed from the list of Contributing Editors. Hopefully, he’ll return relatively soon.
Writing a recurring article for a magazine is more work than most people would think. The pressure of the deadlines, month after month, with little relief for illness, holidays, vacations, family and professional needs, etc., takes its toll. Before Editor Frank Bowlin took the helm for the December 2012 issue—yes, over 11 years ago—Tarrance was an occasional contributor. His talents were needed as Frank gathered a cadre of authors and Tarrance graciously agreed. For many years, Tarrance wrote an ATC column monthly. But, the grind wore him down and we offered to get another controller to split the duties. Enter Elim Hawkins.
Tarrance and Elim mostly alternated months until Tarrance’s October 2023 article. Tarrance informed us he was changing ATC facilities. He felt the geographical move and the training demands of the new facility wouldn’t leave enough time for him to continue contributing to the magazine. He assured me it was temporary and he’d resume his articles after he got fully checked out in the new facility. However, that can take a year or more at a large and busy facility where he moved.
Meanwhile, fortuitously another controller joined our ranks to pick up the slack. Mac Lawler is a good author who we believe will impress our readers. You’ll see him alternating articles with Elim just as Tarrance did. Of course, we’ll enthusiastically welcome Tarrance back as soon as he’s ready.
Better Late…
I am a long-time reader. I have a question about the ‘How to Die’ series. I have read parts 1 and 2, but I don’t see parts 3 and 4 of the series. Have they been published yet? Or…what can you tell me?
On the website, when I do a search for parts 3 and 4, it doesn’t show anything. Did the title change? I am way behind in my reading and am always trying to catch up. But there’s LOTS of good stuff in these!
Thanks again for a great pub! Lots of good stuff in there that I don’t find anywhere else.
—John Mahany, Long Beach, California
Wow! You certainly are behind, John. We ran those articles back in 2020. We caught some flak for the title, so for installment three and four we used different titles. See “Advanced Avionics Errors” in June 2020, and “Catch GPS Errors Early” in July 2020.
Thanks for the note and for reading IFR … whenever you get around to it!
Circling NA at Night Confusion
Prepping for an IFR flight in to Bermuda Dunes, California (KUDD), I noticed some oddity to notes on the approach charts. I contacted AOPA’s pilot center, but they didn’t know.
What first caught my attention was the RNAV RWY 28 and the note stating “Rwy 28 Straight-in and Circling minimums NA at night.” What does this actually mean (as opposed to stating “Circling to Rwy 28 NA at night”)?
So, I can circle to land on 10 from circling mins, but I can’t continue the circle back around to 28? (I’m assuming the reason for the note is how close the MAP is to the Runway 28 threshold.)
So then I look at the VOR-C approach and it says. “Circling to Rwy 28 NA at night.” That seems more straight-forward. (How does this differ from the note on the RNAV in practice?) But again, why? I can circle to land on Runway 10, but I can’t make a whopping 30 degree heading change as a circling procedure to land on 28?
And note that 28 has a VASI, Rwy 10 has nothing for glideslope at all.
Back to the idea that this has to do with where the MAP is on the approaches. Is it too close? But suppose the weather is, say 2000 and 10. I can have the runway environment in sight from not far inside the FAF. So then, while it would be safe, at night it would be illegal, correct?
Curious your thoughts and might make an interesting element of a future sim challenge.
—Garrett Calhoun, Pasadena, California
Over the last few years we’ve gotten a lot of similar questions. To answer your questions in order:
“Rwy 28 Straight-in and Circling minimums NA at night” means just what it says: You cannot fly the approach using Runway 28 straight-in minimums nor can you use the circling minimums to land on Runway 28. Effectively, this closes Runway 28 for night operations, at least via this approach.
You are correct in that you can use that approach to circle to Runway 10, but not to 28.
Since VOR-C is not runway aligned, it has circling minimums only and the note says you cannot circle to Runway 28. It essentially means the same as the Runway 28 approach note except that from the VOR-C approach there’s no straight-in option so there’s no reason to say it’s NA.
Yes, no matter what/when you see, those NA notes make Runway 28 unusable via an approach at night. However, if you enter VMC while on the approach, you could cancel IFR and land on Runway 28 under VFR. However, doing so would require extreme care and vigilance. The reason for the NA isn’t published, but typically is that unlit obstacles penetrate the obstacle evaluation area. It has nothing directly to do with the proximity of the MAP to the runway.
We read ’em all and try to answer most e-mail, but it can take a month or more. Please be sure to include your full name and location. Contact us at Frank@IFR-Magazine.com.
