KAVX GPS-B approach question

J

John Yossarian

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jan 26, 2020
Messages
2
Display Name
Display name:
Yossarian
Hi, question about the AVX VOR/DME or GPS-B approach. Say we're northwest of the field flying it in a WAAS-capable aircraft. Vectored direct to RIGLI, cleared for the approach. Assume it takes a heading of 160 to get there.

For a GPS overlay approach like this, is RIGLI considered a flyby waypoint? Can one use turn anticipation to turn northeast prior to RIGLI, track outbound, and execute the procedure turn?

Would it be incorrect to cross RIGLI at 3400', turn right (west), and then to a heading of approx 045 to intercept the outbound course?

Thanks
 
You’re requirement is to remain within 10 miles of RIGLI and do the course reversal on the side depicted by the ‘barb arrow.’ AIM 5-3-5 talks about course changes and say this, “Each course change consists of variables that make
the technique applicable in each case a matter only the pilot can resolve.” I say you can start the turn before RIGLI. You can wait until RIGLI. The PT airspace is protected to allow this as long as you don’t exceed he speed limit. I wouldn’t bother trying to intercept the outbound course. Arriving at RIGLI on a track of 160, I’d just do what would amount to a direct entry into a holding pattern North of RIGLI on the 352 radial.
 
Last edited:
This airport has been neglected by the FAA. It should have long since had an RNAV IAP to Runway 22.
 
Off topic - but why would you go IFR to Catalina? Kind of defeats most purposes of going there.
 
Ravioli said:
Off topic - but why would you go IFR to Catalina? Kind of defeats most purposes of going there.
Click to expand...
Morning stratus. Taking the bus to Avalon.

Medical evac flight.
 
aterpster said:
This airport has been neglected by the FAA. It should have long since had an RNAV IAP to Runway 22.
Click to expand...

Can a runway that slopes like that meet straight in RNAV requirements? Also, what about a missed?

Ravioli said:
Off topic - but why would you go IFR to Catalina? Kind of defeats most purposes of going there.
Click to expand...

Lots of reasons.
 
N1120A said:
Can a runway that slopes like that meet straight in RNAV requirements? Also, what about a missed?
Click to expand...
Don't know about straight-in but it certainly could have LP+V or LNAV+V with CTL minimums. Missed approach construction would be easier than what they have now.
 
aterpster said:
Don't know about straight-in but it certainly could have LP+V or LNAV+V with CTL minimums. Missed approach construction would be easier than what they have now.
Click to expand...

That 2135 foot obstruction could be a factor for straight in. Let’s say it’s not there. Does runway slope figure into it?
 
luvflyin said:
That 2135 foot obstruction could be a factor for straight in. Let’s say it’s not there. Does runway slope figure into it?
Click to expand...
That is where the VOR is. Without doing the Terps I would guess it is avoided with LP if straight-in minimums qualify. Don't know about the runway dip.

Even if the minimums weren't lower than the present VOR minimums, runway alignment would be a plus.
 
aterpster said:
Don't know about straight-in but it certainly could have LP+V or LNAV+V with CTL minimums. Missed approach construction would be easier than what they have now.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much that changes things.

aterpster said:
That is where the VOR is. Without doing the Terps I would guess it is avoided with LP if straight-in minimums qualify. Don't know about the runway dip.

Even if the minimums weren't lower than the present VOR minimums, runway alignment would be a plus.
Click to expand...

It definitely couldn't be LPV. LP might work from one side, but would that interfere with SIDs off any other airports? Or approaches? I could see an LP offset interfering with the SNA SIDs or Runway 02L or LGB 30 approach, or LAX or LGB SIDs. Of course, Catalina prefers angled entries for all approaches, so they might not even want a straight in. Maybe an RNAV approach to midfield?'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top