KHEF ILS 16L - is radar required?

[TMetzinger]

If an airport is within Class B airspace, is it just assumed that radar is required for approaches? I ask because I'm looking at the KHEF ILS 16L approach, and I see an IAF with no published radial or feeder route, and then the other two fixes are marked as RADAR.

So, I cannot see how a /A or /U aircraft would fly this approach without ATC, but I don't see any "Radar Required" note on the chart anywhere.

I may have answered my own question - MANNE is an enroute fix as well as the IAF, so it's possible to find it on the LO enroute chart, and the other two fixes have cross radials listed, so it's possible to navigate without radar I guess. I'm just not used to seeing the IAF "undefined" on the plate. Perhaps I got spoiled by Jepp charts that may put more information on them.

 

[tonycondon]

just briefly looked at it, but why couldnt you go to MANNE intersection, then a 190 heading until intercepting the localizer, then ID COLSN and DORGE off the VOR?

 

[TMetzinger]

just briefly looked at it, but why couldnt you go to MANNE intersection, then a 190 heading until intercepting the localizer, then ID COLSN and DORGE off the VOR?

My concern was how to find MANNE without RNAV... and I think I answered it since MANNE is on the enroute chart. So if I was doing this I would try to file airways to MANNE and then commence the approach.

I guess I'd have liked to see the AML radial/distance for MANNE defined on the plate itself.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Hmmm. The procedure does not say "Radar Required". That has to count for something.

 

[poadeleted20]

Concur with Greg -- doesn't say RADAR REQUIRED either in big letters on the planform view or in the notes. Ergo, RADAR is not required and you can still fly the approach if Potomac TRACON's radar is down (like that might ever happen). Since MANNE is on V4 and defined by a crossing VOR radial, all you need is VOR capability to find it, and then follow the procedure from there.

 

[TMetzinger]

Thanks. Does anyone have a Jepp plate handy? I'm curious if the radial/distance defining MANNE is published on that version. I agree that once you know how to find MANNE you are good to go.

 

[KennyFlys]

Thanks. Does anyone have a Jepp plate handy? I'm curious if the radial/distance defining MANNE is published on that version. I agree that once you know how to find MANNE you are good to go.

Simple, it's 11 DME on R-300 from AML.

 

[Everskyward]

Does anyone have a Jepp plate handy? I'm curious if the radial/distance defining MANNE is published on that version.

I don't see a radial/distance defining MANNE on the Jepp plate either.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Thanks. Does anyone have a Jepp plate handy? I'm curious if the radial/distance defining MANNE is published on that version. I agree that once you know how to find MANNE you are good to go.

...which you would because you realize that an approach chart always has some context in the enroute environment and we don't think we were beamed to an IAF by the Enterprise.

btw, Tim,

If an airport is within Class B airspace, is it just assumed that radar is required for approaches?

Why would you assume that just because you can anticipate that radar is typically used for Class B that the airport would simply shut down to all IFR traffic in the case of a radar outage?

 

[poadeleted20]

I don't see a radial/distance defining MANNE on the Jepp plate either.

It's on the enroute chart. You don't get the defining information for enroute fixes feeding approaches on the approach chart, only the enroute chart. Further, they're not supposed to use intersections as feeder fixes unless they're on airways on the enroute chart (no more "orphan" intersections as feeders).

 

[midlifeflyer]

It's on the enroute chart. You don't get the defining information for enroute fixes feeding approaches on the approach chart, only the enroute chart. Further, they're not supposed to use intersections as feeder fixes unless they're on airways on the enroute chart (no more "orphan" intersections as feeders).

I really find the number of "how do I get there?" questions about approaches that that are answered, at least in part, by simply looking at the enroute chart, surprising.

I've always thought that one of the weaknesses of the way instrument training is done is that the emphasis on shooting approaches seems to be at the expense of the enroute portion of flight. (I was a "victim" of it also). Could that be the reason for questions like that? We spend so much time in training on local approaches that we don't even think about looking at approaches in the context of the enroute environment?

Maybe that proposed Part 61 revision that broadens the currency requirement by including an enroute segment isn't such a bad idea.

(BTW, that was =not= a comment on iNverted's post. I am 99 44/100% sure that it was informational)

 

[poadeleted20]

I think it's a training philosophy issue. Few instructors seem to cover the depth and breadth of flight planning during training -- route selection, fixes, "how you gonna get there from here" stuff. It's something I hit hard when training folks, including about a day of ground training plus planning XC's for homework each night and going over the plan each morning. Examiners often don't examine these issues in depth during the IR practical test, but it's something that will have great value when the trainee actually goes out and starts flying places s/he's never been before or isn't familiar with.

It may also be related to instructor experience. Those instructors who have a lot of experience planning and flying IFR flights in the system, particularly in heavily travelled airspace, may be more aware of the importance of planning ahead and studing the interplay of the charts, routes, and procedures so you aren't surprised by what happens when you get your clearance, or when you arrive in the terminal area.

 

[Everskyward]

(BTW, that was =not= a comment on iNverted's post. I am 99 44/100% sure that it was informational)

And you were right.

I was not trying to comment on how you would identify MANNE, only that the radial/distance defining it wasn't indicated on the Jepp plate either.

 

[poadeleted20]

I was not trying to comment on how you would identify MANNE, only that the radial/distance defining it wasn't indicated on the Jepp plate either.

If you read the books, as a feeder fix, it's not supposed to be defined there.

 

[Everskyward]

If you read the books, as a feeder fix, it's not supposed to be defined there.

I know how and where it's defined. As I said before, I was just posting the Jepp chart for Tim.

 

[TMetzinger]

I think it's a training philosophy issue. Few instructors seem to cover the depth and breadth of flight planning during training -- route selection, fixes, "how you gonna get there from here" stuff. It's something I hit hard when training folks, including about a day of ground training plus planning XC's for homework each night and going over the plan each morning. Examiners often don't examine these issues in depth during the IR practical test, but it's something that will have great value when the trainee actually goes out and starts flying places s/he's never been before or isn't familiar with.

It may also be related to instructor experience. Those instructors who have a lot of experience planning and flying IFR flights in the system, particularly in heavily travelled airspace, may be more aware of the importance of planning ahead and studing the interplay of the charts, routes, and procedures so you aren't surprised by what happens when you get your clearance, or when you arrive in the terminal area.

I find that in the mid-atlantic and northeast this sort of planning, even if taught, becomes stale, since you're almost always in radar coverage, and getting vectors, even well outside of B or C spaces. When I fly west to less populous areas, then I expect that the transition from the enroute structure to the terminal area will be "own nav" and so I'd better plan my route to end at a fix from which an approach commences.

Of course in a couple of decades we may look back on the victor airways the way we look on the colored airways today.

Thanks to all for the good discussion.

 

[Everskyward]

I know how and where it's defined. As I said before, I was just posting the Jepp chart for Tim.

I am adding an attachment showing a portion of the relevant enroute chart which shows MANNE.

Besides, I enjoy talking to myself.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I find that in the mid-atlantic and northeast this sort of planning, even if taught, becomes stale, since you're almost always in radar coverage, and getting vectors, even well outside of B or C spaces.

You're right. I turned out to be lucky.

I trained in the Northeast but on my very first solo IFR flight I crossed Long Island Sound in solid IMC. Halfway across, NY Approach lost radar contact and I was told to report an intersection. I hadn't even opened my enroute chart my reliance of vectors having been ingrained into me. I pulled out the chart and started searching.

So, after recovering from the unusual attitude...

The result is that the likely routing and its location on the enroute chart and how that connects up to the approach at my destination is a regular part of IFR planning for me - flying or teaching - even if I am in an area where I know the entire flight will be vectored.