Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: expat2; TexasGator; ButThreeLeftsDo; C210
An assessment such as "2 meter visibility" would certainly make one think about going to one's alternate airport, as when one comes to the Visual Descent Point or Decision Height, 1) the visibility will need to be significantly better to be able to see the runway, or 2) it'll be a go-around or diversion at that time. One needs to prepare oneself dispassionately for the best and safest choice at that time, avoiding a terror-driven or get-home-now-we're-so-close response.

But 2 meter visibility at 2000' doesn't necessarily preclude breaking out below the clouds at 300' AGL four miles ahead. PIREPs (Pilot Reports) are oh, so welcome at such times, as well as a recent RVR (runway visual range) report.

HF

25 posted on 07/23/2014 9:32:07 AM PDT by holden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: holden
I believe that the 2-meter visibility report was from ground-level observation, not at approach altitudes, and was due to heavy rain, not cloud. Even if the visibility estimate were from 2000', when it is due to heavy rain there is very little likelihood that it would be better at DH and below. It's not like breaking out through a cloud layer -- more like tryng to land with 2m visibility due to fog.

I suspect that initiation of the 35min flight was the primary fatal decision since the storm covered a wide area, and diversion to another airport with better conditions was probably not available.

39 posted on 07/24/2014 7:36:49 AM PDT by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson