Why Landing at San Diego's Airport is So Hard
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 кві 2023
- Me explaining why landing at San Diego International Airport. I show some clips from near the approach end of RWY 27 and then show it in the simulator flightgear. Flying the RNAV Localizer approach for Runway 27 is notoriously difficult, and even landing in VFR conditions is pretty dicey.
- Наука та технологія
I had heard that it was challenging to land there and also had the opportunity to see the planes landing when I was there a few years ago but now I understand a lot better why it is so difficult. Looking forward to taking off from beautiful San Diego next March after my cruise on the Panama Canal. Thank You for your excellent explanations!
Thanks! I'm so glad you found it informative!
@@EricaCalman Your Welcome
This Makes Me Think Of Hong Kongs Kai Tak Airport That Was Also A Dificult Landing Because Of The Weather And The Mountains And The Water
This approach is not difficult at all. It just takes proper planning and execution. I will give you the perspective from an active airline pilot that flies into this location on a regular basis ( I just landed there two days ago). There is an ILS to KSAN but only to runway 9. We almost never do the localizer approach to 27 as we have the RNAV (RNP) Z approach that gives us vertical guidance. If you're coming from the north you'll join the approach at KLOMN intersection on the downwind leg. If you're coming from the east you'll join the approach from LYNDI intersection. In general you'll slow to 210 knots on the downwind. On base, you'll start extending your flaps and slats and slow to 170. SoCal will usually want you to keep your speed of 170 until REEBO or a five mile final. The approach is a bit steeper as it is a 3.5 degree glidepath instead of the usual 3 degree. For this reason the plane will not slow as easily (depending on what you're flying). You just have to plan for this and extend your landing gear a little earlier to get the drag required to get slowed while maintaining a 3.5 degree glideslope. The biggest threat is the parking garage that is just prior to the airport. For this reason, there is a displaced threshold. Again, this approach is slightly more challenging with the steeper glide angle, but by no means hard or difficult, even if you're doing the visual approach. It's all about energy management and using your drag devices at the appropriate time. In my opinion, landing at places like Orange County (SNA) or Burbank (BUR) are more challenging than San Diego to tell you the truth.
I mean it’s not that bad no but definitely a bit harder than average. Runway 9 and its ILS are seldom available, RNAV or GPS for 27 aren’t bad but are a bit steep and non-precision which is a somewhat dicey combo. Again, not super crazy but it presents a challenge. When landing here gets really hard is when there’s low cloud ceilings and a westerly breeze, which fortunately doesn’t happen every day but it’s by no means rare. Usually conditions facilitate either going visual well above MDA or an outright visual approach or if it’s foggy wind is dead calm and 09 can be used. Most days are either clear or overcast at about 1,500 ft with a steady wind from the west. That and dealing with both Miramar and the border but those aren’t a big deal just make the class B shaped weird.
@@EricaCalman Well, the title of your video suggests to your audience that is hard. It is not and many pilots do it everyday. I am very familiar with landing in San Diego. I do it all the time in various weather conditions in a real 737. I don't quite understand why you feel landing on 27 with low cloud ceilings and a westerly breeze is really hard. I don't know if you've had actually flight training or are a sim pilot only. As a suggestion in the simulator, try extending your landing gear a bit early and get slowed. SoCal will usually ask you to hold 170 knots until 5 miles from the runway. This can be done as long as you get your drag devices out earlier than usual.
I use RNAV(GPS) 27 or RNAV(RNP) 27 that have both horizontal and vertical guidance to runway 27. It works great in X-Plane 12 and MSFS.
Those are both options but they are considered non-precision approaches, as is the localizer/DME approach I was semi demonstrating. In both cases I believe the MDA is the same at 680 ft.
It works great in real life too. Highly recommended.
That Delta was a A321 not a A320
San Diego approach to 27 never made since to me , seems like it would be better to maintain altitude and 180 back and land on 9
So if the wind is dead calm or less than 5 knots that could work but landing downwind is always risky and combine that with the hill that makes landing on 27 so hard the margins for a go-around become dangerously thin. If the wind accommodates landing on 09 they just do that but sea breeze almost always blows in from the west.
and in either case you'd want to use the 09 ILS and approach from the west and if you got visual high enough I guess you could fly a visual pattern to land on 27 but using the 27 localizer and then the 09 ILS would never really make sense, and if you can do that you can probably do a visual into 27
You mentioned that 2 red and 2 white lights mean you are on a proper decent rate...Not correct...It means you are on proper Glide Slope...To maintain proper glide slope you have to be on glide slope AND have/maintain proper decent rate..ie. a stabilized approach..
Yeah I misspoke, on glide slope is more correct. Being on glide slope and on correct approach speed result will result in a proper decent rate and vice versa though.
That is not how you pronounce the word cyan haha
Oh did I say Kay-yan lol?
@@EricaCalman yeah like the pepper so I was like wait what?? haha