In the August 2006 article, “Five Ways to Better NPAs,” the author made an error by confusing straight-in approaches with straight-in landings. In the highlighted box called “Defining the Non-Precision Approach” the writer defined a straight-in approach as “a procedure where the final approach course is aligned to within 15 degrees of the runway heading….” This is incorrect; a straight-in approach is one in which there is no procedure turn. 288
Safer Trainers
In the August 2006 article, "Five Ways to Better NPAs," the author made an error by confusing straight-in approaches with straight-in landings. In the highlighted box called "Defining the Non-Precision Approach" the writer defined a straight-in approach as "a procedure where the final approach course is aligned to within 15 degrees of the runway heading...." This is incorrect; a straight-in approach is one in which there is no procedure turn. …
Key Takeaways:
- The article corrects a common error, clarifying that a "straight-in approach" means no procedure turn, while a "straight-in landing" requires the final approach course to be within 30 degrees of the runway heading.
- Glider flying, despite lacking engines and instruments, demands intense concentration on micrometeorology and precise piloting, which can challenge even experienced power pilots.
- It is argued that low-powered airplanes are suitable for cross-country and mountain flying, provided pilots are thoroughly prepared, knowledgeable about mountain flying procedures, and exercise common sense.
Key takeaways sponsored by Aviator Pro | Start Your Training ->
See a mistake? Contact us.
