Introducing myself.. and a approach chart question

Discussion in 'Cleared for the Approach' started by Beatle1967, Oct 26, 2019.

  1. Beatle1967

    Beatle1967 Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2019
    Messages:
    5
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Beatle1967
    Hello,

    I'm a CFI teaching in the SF Bay Area, mostly ab initio airplane students, but I also have a few instrument students. While doing some lesson prep this afternoon I was looking at the LVK LOC RWY 25R approach (I would include a link, but new members are prevented from doing so because of spam). My understanding is this- if equipment is required for the final approach segment to be flown, it is included in the title. In this case, the final approach segment has named step-down fixes HINIX & ZABGO identified by DME from the localizer, and unnamed fixes identified by DME, including the MAP at I-LVK 1nm.

    In the notes section the chart says "DME required". My question- why not in the chart title?

    Thanks,

    Beatle
     
  2. James331

    James331 Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2014
    Messages:
    19,855
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    James331
    [​IMG]

    With a IFR GPS you don’t need DME, someone will be along shortly with a letter or FAR.
     
  3. NoHeat

    NoHeat En-Route

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,731
    Location:
    Iowa City, IA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    17
    Welcome to PoA!

    Since you cannot post a link, here it is, and below is a screenshot of the relevant part of the plate.

    I think that DME arc approaches have that same issue, the title of the approach doesn't mention DME, but the note says "DME required."

    Screen Shot 2019-10-26 at 7.58.32 PM.png
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Beatle1967

    Beatle1967 Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2019
    Messages:
    5
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Beatle1967
    Thanks for the quick responses and help with posting the chart.

    I am aware of AC 90-108 and GPS substitution for DME/VOR & ADF. But charts still have required equipment in the chart title for those without GPS. For example the OAK ILS or LOC/DME RWY 28R. Maybe it's an unimportant nuance, but I don't understand why the LVK approach is LOC RWY 25R instead of LOC/DME RWY 25R.
     
  5. Walboy

    Walboy Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2014
    Messages:
    1,076
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Walboy
  6. Beatle1967

    Beatle1967 Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2019
    Messages:
    5
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Beatle1967
  7. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,309
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    The purpose is actually to reduce confusion. Pilots reported a lot of trouble understanding why DME or ADF might be required because they can appear in three different places. So they decided putting all required equipment information in one place - the notes box - made sense. Sometimes it might even say something limited, like "DME required for procedure entry."
     
  8. Walboy

    Walboy Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2014
    Messages:
    1,076
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Walboy
    Thank @RussR. His PBN equipment notes toward the end that that post are very good too.
     
  9. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    7,186
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    @Beatle1967

    Yeah. This Approach naming policy is pretty new. There are still Approaches using the old way. It’s going to take awhile before all Charts are caught up. Here’s one. The VOR/DME-C at KHIO. Last amended 30APR15. When it gets caught up it will be the VOR-C with the DME requirement in the equipment required box.
     
  10. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,735
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    Ugh. Instead of a few nice big letters here or there now there's a whole lot of little small letters and more words cluttering up the chart landscape. Not an improvement, IMO.
     
  11. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,309
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    They are comparing it to having them in three different places. Now just one.

    Whether better or worse is going to be a combination of personal preference and ease of personal change. I don't think there has ever been a change some didn't complain about. Alphabet airspace, METAR & TAF, even simple stuff like "line up and wait." Heck, about 40 years later and some folks still gnash their teeth over the "horrible" logging flight time rules!

    I didn't see much need for it myself. Wherever located, "Required" meant required. But I also read a few of the minutes from the charting forum talking about it and it seemed to have been well considered. I guess including "why" something is required on the chart when applicable, as opposed to in the AIM, has some benefit for some segment particularly of the community. So, it's there and, like those other changes I mentioned, I accept it and save my whining for more important things,
     
  12. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,735
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    The one place they decided to put it already reads like a telephone book chock full of fine print and trivia. I'm sure it makes lawyers feel more at home, though.

    The following whinings seem contradictory:

    And, I s'pose railing against teaching the easy way to use the DG to instantly see how to properly and accurately enter a holding pattern in accordance with the AIM is also "more important", hmm? ;) Being an advocate for holding pattern entry anarchy is more noble than holding bad thinkers to account?
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2019
  13. aterpster

    aterpster Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,485
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    aterpster
    It was decided upon by the ACF. Probably not one lawyer there. They still do it "your way" in most countries so those who fly international need to know the rules and formatting for each country they fly to. But, that has always been the case.

    I would still rather have sequence reports. They did that switch when I had three years remaining at TWA. Never did get used to METARS. But, FF decodes them for me.
     
  14. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,735
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    A better way to improve things would be to clean up the notes. Too many. Seems like it's because one chart tries to serve too many masters. As for "DME required", I didn't have a problem with learning the title relates to final approach guidance, the plan view to procedure entry and the notes to everything else. Wasn't something I whined about. These sixty yo's and under, I swear. You can buy them books, send 'em to school and they still would rather change everything to their warped way of thinking than simply learn it. :)
     
  15. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,735
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    Don't get me started! Terminal Forecasts used "Chance of" and "Briefly" to describe destination weather. The former wasn't limiting (to me at least), but the latter invoked alternate planning and departure fuel loads which impacted the allowable passenger manifest. Along comes European style, namely French, jargon like "Mist" and the line of demarcation under USA alternate rules disappeared completely. If lawyers aren't to blame, then a pox on the "pilots" who sat still for it. Did they never have to balance fuel, passengers and weather to be legal?
     
  16. Palmpilot

    Palmpilot Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    16,610
    Location:
    PUDBY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Richard Palm
    One thing I've noticed about the missed approach on the ILS version of this procedure is that when flying it on an ATD, the aircraft doesn't intercept the OAK 060° radial until it's already past the holding fix. Is that "kosher"?

    I'm not sure whether it's a problem for this missed approach, because it requires climbing to 2000 MSL before turning, whereas the ILS missed approach only requires climbing to 1200 before turning.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Walboy

    Walboy Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2014
    Messages:
    1,076
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Walboy
    I bet you like the ICAO flight plan forms too
     
    dtuuri likes this.
  18. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    7,186
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    It doesn't look to me like that could happen unless you are 'missing' early and doing it incorrectly or the winds are really howling out of the West. You could reach, or already be above, 1200 and/or 2000 long before you should turn if missing 'early.' This is one of those ILS's where they don't give you a Missed Approach Point. Yeah, yeah, I know, you miss at Decision Height. But if you have to abandon the Approach for some reason before you get there you are left to 'roll your own' "Missed Approach 'Point' ". If missing early you may climb to the missed approach altitude immediately. But if the missed approach involves a turn you may not make that turn until the missed approach point. This one, and there a few others out there that leave you hanging. You have to make it up yourself. Easy enough to do with this one. Ya gotta have DME so it's a little over 1.0 DME. The 9.3 at JUSOM minus the 8.3 from there to the Runway. With a 3 degree glideslope and a 200 foot DH you may want to add about 2/3 of a mile. Make it 1.6/1.7.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2019
  19. Palmpilot

    Palmpilot Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    16,610
    Location:
    PUDBY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Richard Palm
    I have been missing at DH and climbing to the specified altitude of 1200 MSL before making the turn to the specified 020 heading. The ATD has a reasonably realistic climb rate for a C182. I guess I'll have to draw it out with a calculated climb gradient to see if there really is a problem.
     
  20. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    7,186
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    Hmm. Note the distance at which it reaches DH. I can't see anyway it can get to ALTAM before joining the OAK 060r unless there is a severe west wind. Do you notice other weird things on that ATD with other approaches?
     
  21. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,735
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    From the airport it's 10°, so if you climb really fast it could happen. Might have to transition to a 23 DME arc to find ALTAM :eek::
    https://skyvector.com/?ll=37.69341018695166,-121.82030435200505&chart=402&zoom=2&fpl= KLVK ALTAM

    What ATD do you have? I bought a used TD2 and haven't had time to figure out how to operate it yet.
     
  22. RussR

    RussR Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,292
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Russ
    You’re welcome. Glad it helped!

    Thanks!
     
  23. Palmpilot

    Palmpilot Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    16,610
    Location:
    PUDBY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Richard Palm
    I've drawn it out on the TAC. According to my calculations, DH occurs about 0.5 NM before the threshold of Rwy 25R. Decision altitude is 600 MSL, so the plane only has to climb 600 feet above that to get to the specified 1200 MSL turn-initiation point. Interpolating between the first two lines of the attached climb performance table gives an estimate of 3 NM x 600 ft / 2000 ft = 0.9 NM from the decision point. An on-line calculator I found estimates a turn radius of about 0.4 NM. I don't know a way to plot a curve on Skyvector, so I just added 0.5 NM to the straight-out climb as an approximation, for a total of 1.4 NM. Subtracting the 0.5 NM from the DH point to the threshold gives a distance past the threshold of 0.9 NM, which is just past the departure end of the runway. The result plotted below is very similar to what I have been seeing on the ATD.


    C182S Climb Performance_1.png LVK ILS Missed Approach Course.png
     
  24. Palmpilot

    Palmpilot Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    16,610
    Location:
    PUDBY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Richard Palm
  25. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,735
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
  26. Palmpilot

    Palmpilot Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    16,610
    Location:
    PUDBY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Richard Palm
    Other than what it says on their Web site, I don't have any information on that.
     
  27. midlifeflyer

    midlifeflyer Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    10,309
    Location:
    Chapel Hill NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mark
    thank you for making my point.
     
  28. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,735
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    That it makes lawyers more comfortable? Guess I missed your point. I thought it was that if you don't kowtow to changes you're whining. And of course, you aren't whining when you whine about those who don't kowtow. :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2019