IFR enroute onto the approach - Still training

forseth11

forseth11

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Sep 30, 2016
Messages
194
Location
Fort Worth, TX
Display Name
Display name:
Forseth11
I am currently training for my IR, and I recently flew a flight to KFYV (Fayetteville Drake Field) in Arkansas. I was flying from FSM VOR on V13. My clearance had me go to BOYLE, but I got radar vectors to LOC-C about 10 miles out. If I didn't get vectors for whatever reason, such as a loss of radio contact, what should I do to get on the localizer and still follow my clearance?

I think I could go direct to DAK VOR (Drake vor) then go out on radial 026 to intercept the localizer then fly backcourse and do procedure turn to get inbound on the localizer. Would this be the proper thing to do, or should I do something different in this case? If I had radio contact in this scenario, and still did not get vectors or clearance to follow begin the approach should I query ATC for direct to Drake VOR for LOC-C approach?
 
The way I read the plate is you'd want to fly to ELMIE and fly the PT to establish on the LOC. Been a couple years since I was taking instrument lessons though. I am sure some of the more experienced IFR guys will chime in
 
sferguson524 said:
The way I read the plate is you'd want to fly to ELMIE and fly the PT to establish on the LOC. Been a couple years since I was taking instrument lessons though. I am sure some of the more experienced IFR guys will chime in
Click to expand...
Yea that's what my idea was, but if I don't have an RNAV would I just intercept the outbound for the localizer or go to the drake vor then from the vor on 026 radial then back on localizer to begin the approach at ELMIE?
 
ELMIE is defined as the intersection of 11 DME off of the localizer and the 221 radial off of the Razorback VOR
 
sferguson524 said:
ELMIE is defined as the intersection of 11 DME off of the localizer and the 221 radial off of the Razorback VOR
Click to expand...
I see that, but with only a vor and no RNAV, how do I get to ELMIE since I can't go directly to it unless I am on the 221 radial already?
 
I can't see how you'd fly this approach without DME or a GPS to provide the distances for the stepdown fixes and the MAP.
 
sferguson524 said:
I can't see how you'd fly this approach without DME or a GPS to provide the distances for the stepdown fixes and the MAP.
Click to expand...
I have DME and two VORs. I did have an RNAV in this case, but the plane I usually fly does not have an RNAV.
 
This looks easy. Am I missing something?

V13 goes direct to an IAF for this approach -- RZC VOR. Fly there, then follow the procedure. Identify the FAF with the OM in the absence of DME. No DME nor GPS is necessary to fly this approach.
 
Wow, i totally brain farted with identifying the MAP absent DME.. Time :\
 
I would continue directly to the RZC VOR like @MAKG1 said. Looks like HOGGE is identifiable by the 26 degree radial off DAK as well then timed to the missed approach point.
 
MAKG1 said:
This looks easy. Am I missing something?

V13 goes direct to an IAF for this approach -- RZC VOR. Fly there, then follow the procedure. Identify the FAF with the OM in the absence of DME. No DME nor GPS is necessary to fly this approach.
Click to expand...
Yea I saw that, but that's quite a bit extra distance to travel, and I didn't know if there was a faster way to get inbound without vectors.
 
forseth11 said:
Yea I saw that, but that's quite a bit extra distance to travel, and I didn't know if there was a faster way to get inbound without vectors.
Click to expand...
Doesn't appear so with the note saying the procedure isn't allowed between R-150 and R-264.
 
Agreed, Razorback is your best/only bet.
Remember, you MUST start an approach at an IAF. (unless vectored)
Since your route does not take you to the ELMIE INT, you continue on V13 to the RZC VOR and commence the approach from there.
 
Absent vectors, that is what I would do also.
 
forseth11 said:
I am currently training for my IR, and I recently flew a flight to KFYV (Fayetteville Drake Field) in Arkansas. I was flying from FSM VOR on V13. My clearance had me go to BOYLE, but I got radar vectors to LOC-C about 10 miles out. If I didn't get vectors for whatever reason, such as a loss of radio contact, what should I do to get on the localizer and still follow my clearance?

I think I could go direct to DAK VOR (Drake vor) then go out on radial 026 to intercept the localizer then fly backcourse and do procedure turn to get inbound on the localizer. Would this be the proper thing to do, or should I do something different in this case? If I had radio contact in this scenario, and still did not get vectors or clearance to follow begin the approach should I query ATC for direct to Drake VOR for LOC-C approach?
Click to expand...

What exactly was your last clearance received? Was it BOYLE direct? Or was there something after BOYLE. BOYLE does not join any segement of any Approach to KFYV. If you're still in radio contact, yes you need to query ATC. If NORDO, and BOYLE is your last fix before KFYV, you are in never never land and have to "roll your own." I'd most likely continue up V13 to RZC and commence the Approach. I wouldn't be to concerned that the approach is not authorized for the radial I am arriving to RZC from. If I was flying a pretty fast airplane I'd be getting back to Approach speed before RZC to keep the "overflying" effects from that steep turn back to the 221 radial to a minimum. I'd have a good handle on what the winds were up there. I wouldn't fight it to hard getting centered on the 221 radial, just make sure I join the Localizer somewhere within the distance North of ELMIE that is a one minute hold. All this assuming you don't have GPS of course
 
forseth11 said:
Yea I saw that, but that's quite a bit extra distance to travel, and I didn't know if there was a faster way to get inbound without vectors.
Click to expand...
Welcome to IFR. Unless you have another problem, the additional risk of rolling your own procedure is not called for. How long it takes is not a consideration unless you have abused your reserve or you've lost comms because your radio is on fire.

Approaches often take you out of the way to avoid obstructions or radio anomalies.
 
MAKG1 said:
Welcome to IFR. Unless you have another problem, the additional risk of rolling your own procedure is not called for. How long it takes is not a consideration unless you have abused your reserve or you've lost comms because your radio is on fire.

Approaches often take you out of the way to avoid obstructions or radio anomalies.
Click to expand...
Because of the note, flying the approach after approaching RZS from V13 would constitute rolling his own. Given that, if it's a lost com situation he might be justified in exercising his emergency authority and doing whatever seems safest under the circumstances. Because of the MEA on V13, he will probably be above the MSA, which gives him a lot of safe options.
 
Palmpilot said:
Because of the note, flying the approach after approaching RZS from V13 would constitute rolling his own. Given that, if it's a lost com situation he might be justified in exercising his emergency authority and doing whatever seems safest under the circumstances. Because of the MEA on V13, he will probably be above the MSA, which gives him a lot of safe options.
Click to expand...
Wow, I don't know how I completely missed that. I was thinking the note said procedure NA for arrivals at DAK on V13 but DAK isn't even part of V13. Brain fart.
 
Last edited:
Okay, so if I understand this right I should do the following:
- Continue on V13 to Razorback.
- Intercept 221 radial off of Razorback and descend as low as 3000.
- Remain on radial 221 until localizer is established then turn inbound and descend to 2500.
- Upon reaching the OM or 026 radial of drake descend to 2000 for circling and start approach timer for missed approach.
 
forseth11 said:
Okay, so if I understand this right I should do the following:
- Continue on V13 to Razorback...
Click to expand...
"Should" is putting it too strongly, since the note on the chart says that entering the approach in that manner is "NA," which means "not authorized."

Other than vectors or RNAV, I don't see any way to get onto that approach from V13 from the south that is authorized, so in a lost com situation, the method you came up with originally may be as good as any other.
 
Keep in mind that, unless you have been cleared for an approach, you don't have to fly THAT approach. A different one might make more sense in a lost comms scenario. With DME but no RNAV from the south, the LDA would be my approach of choice, even if I had to CTL.
 
Yes, depending on where you were when you lost com, that could be a good choice. Same for the VOR/DME-B.
 
Palmpilot said:
"Should" is putting it too strongly, since the note on the chart says that entering the approach in that manner is "NA," which means "not authorized."

Other than vectors or RNAV, I don't see any way to get onto that approach from V13 from the south that is authorized, so in a lost com situation, the method you came up with originally may be as good as any other.
Click to expand...
So the note "Procedure NA for arrivals on RZC VORTAC airway radials 150 CW 264" means from radial 150 to radial 264 (moving clock wise) are not authorized. I overlooked that.
So does this mean that instead of wanting V13 I should of requested FSM to SUMMO then fly the 221 radial for razorback to get to ELMIE IAF and do a parallel entry to turn inbound?
 
forseth11 said:
So the note "Procedure NA for arrivals on RZC VORTAC airway radials 150 CW 264" means from radial 150 to radial 264 (moving clock wise) are not authorized. I overlooked that.
So does this mean that instead of wanting V13 I should of requested FSM to SUMMO then fly the 221 radial for razorback to get to ELMIE IAF and do a parallel entry to turn inbound?
Click to expand...

Some people might disagree, but lost com is rare enough so that in a radar environment, I don't always see it as necessary to file to the exact IAF that you think you're going to need. For one thing, conditions might change after you file, so that the IAF you select might not be suitable when you get there. There's also no guarantee that ATC will give you what you file.

If lost com actually happens, then the priority should be doing what's safe. Highly experienced pilots have said that when things go wrong, their goal is to "survive long enough to attend the hearing." Furthermore, AIM 6-4-1a and b give pilots a lot of latitude in how they handle lost coms. (I wouldn't put too much faith in the first sentence of 6-4-1c, however, because it's not consistent with what many controllers have said online.)

My preference in a lost com situation would be to stay on published routes as much as possible, because that makes it easy to determine a safe altitude. There often will be more that one way to do that.

With regard to the route you suggest, I don't know whether it's possible to file it, because the enroute chart does not show ELMIE, so I don't know whether the ATC computer recognizes it as being on V63.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
Some people might disagree, but lost com is rare enough so that in a radar environment, I don't always see it as necessary to file to the exact IAF that you think you're going to need. For one thing, conditions might change after you file, so that the IAF you select might not be suitable when you get there. There's also no guarantee that ATC will give you what you file.

If lost com actually happens, then the priority should be doing what's safe. Highly experienced pilots have said that when things go wrong, their goal is to "survive long enough to attend the hearing." Furthermore, AIM 6-4-1a and b give pilots a lot of latitude in how they handle lost coms. (I wouldn't put too much faith in the first sentence of 6-4-1c, however, because it's not consistent with what many controllers have said online.)

My preference in a lost com situation would be to stay on published routes as much as possible, because that makes it easy to determine a safe altitude. There often will be more that one way to do that.

With regard to the route you suggest, I don't know whether it's possible to file it, because the enroute chart does not show ELMIE, so I don't know whether the ATC computer recognizes it as being on V63.
Click to expand...
I've tried to file to an IAF several times, and I NEVER get it. I'll get whatever the preferred IFR route is, usually not at an IAF.

I also find Center doesn't always allow the approach you might want, particularly if it opposes departing traffic.
 
MAKG1 said:
I've tried to file to an IAF several times, and I NEVER get it. I'll get whatever the preferred IFR route is, usually not at an IAF...
Click to expand...
Come to think of it, I'm not sure I ever tried it.
 
This has been bugging me for a couple of days.

I just happened to have an old (2001) Low Altitude Chart along with a set of 2005 approach plates. Sometimes it pays to be a pack rat. :)

Looking at the old Low Altitude Chart, Boyle Intersection is identified along V13 by the 138 degree radial off DAK. The LOC-C approach plate was not with the 2005 set I have (may not have been in existence or the plate is lost (loose leaf). However, there was back then a VOR or GPS A approach plate. This approach has apparently been decommissioned. On the VOR-A plate, the outbound radial to the Airport was 139, which I am assuming in 2001 may have been 138 degrees but shifted slightly due to magnetic declination. If the OP was on V13 in 2001/2005, when he reached the 138 degree radial off DAK, he would have turned to 138 degrees (of course lead the radial a little), and flown to the Airport. Circling approach only, just like the LOC-C approach. I think the reason all of us have been having so much trouble is that there is a charting error here. I think BOYLE should have been on the approach plate for the LOC-C approach, and the radial off DAK shown. That's my story and I'm sticking to it :).
 
Well now I am no longer "Still training". I got my instrument rating today! :D Thanks for the help guys.
 
If BOYLE was your clearance limit, that's as far as you can go without:

1. Further clarification or clearance.

If that can't be obtained, then:

2. Lost comm procedures.
 
Congratulations, forseth11! Quite an accomplishment!
 
stratobee said:
If BOYLE was your clearance limit, that's as far as you can go without:

1. Further clarification or clearance.

If that can't be obtained, then:

2. Lost comm procedures.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's what he meant. It would have been very unusual if his clearance limit was anything other than the destination airport.

And congratulations to forseth11 for getting the rating!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top