In my previous column entitled the “Anatomy of An Approach” (February 2025), I wrote about analyzing and setting up an IFR approach. I was in a holding pattern after going missed at Rhinelander, Wisconsin (KRHI). The follow-through was what do I do next? The decision was to pick and fly to an alternate, Iron Mountain, Michigan (KIMT). Moving forward, I wrote about two factors that pilots must consider consciously or unconsciously, “Aeronautical Decision Making” and “Human Factors.” We try to teach these concepts as flight instructors as it has been a major contributor to general aviation aircraft accidents. Within the last 30 days, I have seen an unusual number of accidents occur, and many of them fall into this category. We will never be accident free as humans, as we are far from perfect, but let’s attempt to eliminate those accidents dealing with bad decision making.
One accident I remember well involved “Aeronautical Decision Making” (NTSB file #ERA15FA144). On March 4, 2015, a pilot from Virginia Beach, Virginia borrowed a Mooney from a friend to fly to Key West, Florida for some fishing, along with two friends as passengers. After fishing all day, they decided to fly home that night to Norfolk, Virginia. After departing, they made a fuel stop in Palatka, Florida, and then on to Suffolk, Virginia (KSFQ) in low IFR weather. After two attempted IFR approaches to the Suffolk Airport, which was below minimums and they were now low on fuel, they attempted an ILS approach to Norfolk in low weather conditions and crashed.
I remember from my college days my professor, Winston Dole, taught a class on “Aeronautical Decision Making.” There was a handout entitled “the plane that crashed before takeoff.” You may search the web for the NTSB files for this accident and see how important “Human Factors” and “Aeronautical Decision Making” played in this fatal accident. Many times, in my aviation career, I have encountered unforeseen circumstances, and a decision needed to be made, including declaring an emergency seven times. My advice — don’t hesitate to declare an emergency! ATC is there to help you.
The continuation of my previous column “Anatomy of An Approach,” this being part three, we did an ILS 09 approach into Rhinelander, Wisconsin and went missed due to unforecasted deteriorating weather conditions (Part 1). We proceeded to fly the missed approach procedure at Rhinelander and entered the published hold, then overcame human factors with a decision to fly to an alternate (Part 2). With the conclusion of this flight, I was proceeding to an alternate, Iron Mountain, Michigan (KIMT), for a RNAV/GPS approach to Runway 01. Remember, the purpose of the hold after going missed gives the pilot some time to decide where to go or what to do next, and the air traffic controller knows where and what the pilot will be doing. In the hold, the pilot of 38Y made his decision after checking the weather and NOTAMS and advised ATC.
(38Y): Minneapolis Center, Bonanza 38Y would like to leave the hold and proceed to Iron Mountain. Will advise the approach we are looking for with a climb to 5,000.
(ATC): 38Y, proceed as requested. Advise when you have Iron Mountain weather, and the approach you would like. Report level 5,000.
(38Y): 38Y Roger. Will report reaching 5,000.
After activating Iron Mountain as the new destination, which appeared in the alternate box on the navigator (FIG 1), 38Y is proceeding to Iron Mountain and initiated a climb to 5,000. There is a very large TV transmitting tower at 3326 MSL, and the highest minimum enroute altitude (MEA) for the airway is 4,500 feet.
After a more in-depth check of the weather, runways, wind, and NOTAMS, the decision was the RNAV/GPS 01 approach, using the AFERO transition (FIG 2).
(38Y): Center, 38Y is level at 5,000 and would like the RNAV/GPS 01 approach to Iron Mountain with the AFERO transition.
(ATC): 38Y, proceed direct AFERO as requested. Maintain 5,000.
(38Y): 38Y, proceeding direct AFERO. Maintain 5,000.
Currently, we are ready to load the approach and proceed to fly direct to AFERO. Depending on the navigator you have in your aircraft, this will determine how this will be done. On most navigators, there is a procedure button and a sequence after pushing it to follow. The navigator will find the last airport listed in the flight plan, or the one you are currently proceeding to. It then gives you a list of approaches to that airport (FIG 3). Next, the navigator will offer you a list of waypoints for you to choose from or you may select vectors to final. Most instructors will tell you not to choose vectors to final, unless you are confident you will be getting vectors. If you should choose a waypoint and the controller later starts to give you vectors, it is an easy process button-wise to make this change.
It is important to know your navigator well as there are, in most cases, several ways to set up and fly the approach. Most Garmin boxes will give you a choice of loading or activating the approach. In this case, once you select the approach and an Initial Approach Fix (IAF) or transition, activating the approach is all that is necessary. In our case, this is AFERO. The Garmin 480 has a different anatomy and requires that you modify the original flight plan by adding the approach sequence, make it the active flight plan, then select direct to AFERO in the active flight plan, then enter. 38Y is now on the way to AFERO with the autopilot directing its flight path.
Ten (10) miles from AFERO, we get a call from ATC.
(ATC): 38Y, you are 10 miles from AFERO. Maintain 5,000 until established on a segment of the approach. You are cleared for the RNAV/GPS 01 approach to Iron Mountain. Report JUNEM.
(38Y): Five thousand (5,000) till established. Cleared for the RNAV/GPS 01 Iron Mountain. Will report JUNEM, 38Y.
It is important to read back approach clearances to verify that the pilot and controller have the same understanding. Altitudes are extremely important as it is the primary method controllers use to separate aircraft.
The pilot of 38Y must decide when to slow down and descend on the approach. Once crossing AFERO, the approach chart shows 3,400 feet, and with an approach clearance, the pilot is expected to do that. The pilot using the flying by the numbers’ concept reduces power to 15 inches of manifold pressure and takes off altitude hold. The aircraft is trimmed for an airspeed of 160 knots and with the reduction in power, the aircraft descends at about 700 feet per minute. Upon reaching 3400 feet pushing altitude hold on the autopilot will stop the descent, and the aircraft will slow to an approach airspeed of about 110 knots with 16 inches of manifold pressure. The aircraft will need to be retrimmed for that airspeed to make the autopilot happy.
Approaching the Intermediate Fix (IF), the autopilot controlling direction makes a left turn to 10 degrees approaching SEYOC. On most navigators, the glide path needle comes alive when the next fix is the Final Approach Fix (FAF). The glidepath should be above you at this point. If that is the case, I usually hold altitude until the glide path is intercepted, which will be somewhere prior to the FAF. Upon glide path intercept, altitude hold comes off, landing gear is extended, and the GUMP (Gas Undercarriage Mixture Prop) and 5T’s (Time Turn Twist Throttle Talk) checklist is completed in preparation for the anticipated landing. On this approach, that is “Gas” on fullest tank, “Undercarriage” down and locked with green lights, “Mixture” full rich, “Prop” to 2500 RPM. Items to do on the 5T’s checklist is to report crossing the FAF at JUNEM.
(38Y): Center, 38Y is JUNEM inbound on the approach.
(ATC): 38Y, report canceling IFR on this frequency or on the ground 121.25. Switch to advisory frequency is approved.
(38Y): Roger.
(Freq 122.80): Iron Mountain traffic, Bonanza 38Y is on a 4-mile final on the Runway 01 approach.
Some tips to follow while flying an approach. These may differ with the type of aircraft or equipment in the aircraft. In the Bonanza, I do not use any flaps on the final approach segment until I have visual runway contact and confirmed to land at which time I go to full flaps. In a Baron approach, flaps make for a better stabilized approach. I reduce manifold pressure an inch halfway between the FAF and the runway. I hold the glidepath with elevator control — not power — unless necessary due to a wind change or heavy turbulence. I fly the gauges down to the missed approach point and never look at the chart beyond the FAF.
At approximately 2,000 feet MSL and 2.5 miles from the runway, we break out with visual site of the runway. Flaps are set to approach; power is adjusted to compensate for drag. About ½ mile from the runway, flaps go full, airspeed is reduced to cross the runway threshold at 80 kts, and a landing is accomplished. After exiting the runway, we stop and clean up the airplane (flaps), then contact ATC to close our IFR flight plan.
I hope that you as a reader enjoyed the three-part series on the “Anatomy of An Approach.” There are so many things to think about on an instrument cross-country flight and, especially, when things don’t go as planned.
My next article will be entitled “An Epic Flight In Juliet Juliet,” where interesting situations occurred and how we tried to explain them.
Until then, fly safe, and remember, the importance of how “human factors” and “aeronautical decision-making” play out in our everyday flying.
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this column is the expressed opinion of the author only, and readers are advised to seek the advice of their personal flight instructor and others, and refer to the Federal Aviation Regulations, FAA Aeronautical Information Manual, and instructional materials before attempting any procedures discussed herein. © Copyright 2025. All rights reserved!
