Sharing Safety Guidance on Stabilized Approaches

Editor’s Note: Runway excursions remain one of aviation’s most stubborn accident categories, despite years of emphasis on stabilized approaches and widespread encouragement of go-arounds. Most pilots understand the criteria but far fewer consistently act on them.

That gap—between knowing what to do and actually doing it—is the focus of this guidance document from WYVERN, a global aviation safety consulting and auditing organization best known for its Wingman Standard and Flight Leader Program. Rather than redefining stabilized approach parameters, this paper examines the operational, cultural, and human factors that still lead pilots to continue unstable approaches, and offers practical recommendations to reinforce sound decision-making and professionalism on the flight deck.

The guidance was authored by WYVERN’s Guidance Review Team, including Mario Jimenez, a regular Air Facts contributor and past Air Facts Podcast guest. The team’s combined experience spans military, airline, charter, and corporate operations, and the recommendations reflect a Safety Management System (SMS) philosophy grounded in data, real-world operations, and pilot behavior.

Air Facts is sharing this material in the spirit of safety dialogue. While the guidance reflects WYVERN’s operational philosophy, we believe it offers meaningful insights for pilots across the spectrum, from general aviation to turbine operations, particularly in its discussion of approach planning, energy management, night and adverse-weather operations, and the cultural barriers that still discourage timely go-arounds.

Below are selected excerpts we believe will resonate with Air Facts readers. The complete WYVERN Stable Approach Guidance document is available as a downloadable PDF for those who wish to explore the recommendations in greater depth.

— Air Facts Editorial Team

Threats to a Stable Approach

Besides the weather factors that easily come to mind—such as wind gusts and wind shear—it’s important to consider distraction, channelized attention, fixation, and kinesthetic cues. Even exceptional pilots can experience a scan breakdown due to fatigue or other distractions.

The lack of kinesthetic cues is a byproduct of very quiet flight decks and perceived approach path stability, which can lead to insidious airspeed loss and undetected increases in rate of descent. Effective communication regarding anticipated hazards, verbalization of path deviations by the Pilot Flying (PF), and an engaged Pilot Monitoring (PM) are highly effective mitigations.

Stable approaches are not solely about aircraft parameters; they are equally about crew interaction, workload management, and situational awareness. When pilots fail to recognize or communicate subtle deviations early, small errors can compound rapidly as altitude decreases and time compresses.

Night Flying and Adverse Conditions

Flying an approach or executing a go-around at night and/or in instrument meteorological conditions significantly increases the risk of spatial disorientation and somatogravic illusion. Disciplined instrument scanning and timely, directive callouts by the Pilot Monitoring are critical.

Transitioning from instrument references to visual cues can be particularly challenging at night due to the lack of a defined horizon. This can create false perceptions of pitch and bank, leading to inappropriate control inputs. Optical illusions—such as the “black hole” effect, where the runway appears to float in a void—can make pilots feel higher than they actually are, prompting premature descent and increasing the risk of controlled flight into terrain.

Fatigue further compounds these risks, as night operations often coincide with circadian lows and extended duty days, reducing alertness and degrading reaction time. To mitigate these factors, crews must maintain disciplined instrument scanning, plan descents precisely, trust vertical guidance, and be prepared to execute a go-around if visual references are lost below decision altitude.

Acknowledging the increased challenges of night and adverse-weather operations, WYVERN recommends earlier configuration to avoid rushed approaches and to ensure the Pilot Monitoring is focused on scanning and cross-checking parameters—not catching up on checklists or guidance panel inputs.

Download the full guidance:

WYVERN Stable Approach Guidance (PDF)

This document expands on the excerpts above and includes detailed recommendations on approach criteria, flight data monitoring, go-around policies, and organizational safety culture.

• Author
• Recent Posts

Air Facts Staff

Air Facts began in 1938 with Leighton Collins’ vision to promote private air transportation. Today, as an online journal, Air Facts brings pilots together by sharing real-world flying experiences that inspire learning, good judgment, and a love of flying.

Latest posts by Air Facts Staff (see all)

• Sharing Safety Guidance on Stabilized Approaches - February 25, 2026
• A Mooney Pilot’s Night IFR Wake-Up Call with Bob Hamilton - January 21, 2026
• Announcing the 2026 Richard Collins Writing Prize for Young Pilots - January 6, 2026