WDD
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2019
- Messages
- 5,373
- Location
- Atlanta / KRYY
- Display Name
Display name:
Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
It can’t surely mean the ILS 27 and RNAV 09 are discontinued for 2 years??
Because the approach still exists.Why would they still publish a plate?
No one can use it. In what way does it still exist ? Just put a red X through it and in stern fonts “None Shall Pass”Because the approach still exists.
My understanding is that two years is a default timeframe for a NOTAM with no specific time frame planned.Those are the major / key approaches at our local D airport. What would cause an ILS and RNAV to be shut down for 2 years? Yikes - am I reading this right?
It hasn’t been decommissioned.No one can use it. In what way does it still exist ?
Feel free to do that based on the NOTAM if you like.Just put a red X through it and in stern fonts “None Shall Pass”
Probably won’t be for 2 years. I’ve seen long time spans like this before because they just aren’t sure how long something is going to take. That’s why the EST. There have been a lot of changes made and it looks like they are waiting to be Flight Checked. Go here https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/procedures/ and plug in RYY. Here’s a pic of part of it. @RussR , whadda ya know about this one?Those are the major / key approaches at our local D airport. What would cause an ILS and RNAV to be shut down for 2 years? Yikes - am I reading this right?
Great question - doesn't make sense, unless like the ILS 27 one of the fixes or part of the missed and hold were dependent on the PDK or ATL VOR. Doesn't look like it though. I don't know.Why would the RNAV be taken down too?
If they trash can the procedure it costs more to reestablish later.No one can use it. In what way does it still exist ? Just put a red X through it and in stern fonts “None Shall Pass”
Looks like the took off the NOTAM and put back the old plates
The plate that is now in use looks identical to the one listed as “old”, unlike the one they had up last Friday that didn’t use the PDK VOR for a fix - also listed below as “new”.
I think maybe this was you answering a post I had just made. But I deleted it a couple minutes later thinking that what I said had pretty much already been said by you. I had added a bunch of stuff about Chart cycle dates and Foreflight updates being current. The current cycle is Jul 14-Aug 11. It has the Amdt 5 Chart. So are you saying you and the CFII saw the Amdt 6 Chart, on Foreflight, during the Jun ##-Jul 13 cycle?Yes. Saw the “new one” on ForeFlight. CFII and I actually looked at it together where she pointed out the removal of the VOR defined waypoint
While we’re here I have some questions. The Amdt 5 one does not show OVPEW, ALBRS and CUMAV as DME Fixes. Charting error, or was there a reason then? Isn’t CUMAV to close in to be a Radar Fix? Amdt 6 seems to address this, CUMAV is not a Radar Fix there.The currently published ILS OR LOC RWY 27 is Amdt 5. This is what was published on July 14th and was NOTAMed NA, and is the chart available in Foreflight or Skyvector or from any other source. That NOTAM has since been canceled and so this approach (Amdt 5) is now flyable.
The one you posted is from the coordination website, and is Amdt 6. It is scheduled for publication on 11/3 and deals with the decommissioning of the PDK VOR/DME.
While we’re here I have some questions. The Amdt 5 one does not show OVPEW, ALBRS and CUMAV as DME Fixes. Charting error, or was there a reason? Isn’t CUMAV to close in to be a Radar Fix? Amdt 6 seems to address this, CUMAV is not a Radar Fix there.
It’s going to become a moot point soon enough anyway but there is another thing. The RMG R-101. Isn’t that to narrow an angle? If there was a HILPT there I am sure it would be too narrow. What is the limit to just identify an IF intersection?OVPEW, ALBRS, CUMAV DME:
Just from looking at the documents on the coordination website, I don't think it's a charting error exactly, nor a source error. Somewhere in between. The RYY LOC did not have an associated DME source in the past. If you look at Amdt 4E (available in the Amdt 5 "S" file), they are intersections and radar only, and in the upper left corner of the chart it says "I-RYY LOC" with the frequency, not "I-RYY LOC/DME". So it didn't have DME.
The source document (the "F" file) does not list these fixes as DME fixes either, and there is no discussion of adding "DME" in the Changes/Reasons. So I infer that to mean the facility did not have DME when the procedure was designed. However, the charting of "LOC/DME" on the chart is driven not from the source document, but from the navigation facility database. So it seems that for whatever reason, the DME was installed prior to the publishing date, but too late to make changes to the charted fixes - but that's a guess.
On the source document for Amdt 6, it adds the DME to those fixes. And if you look in the Changes/Reasons, it specifies that was done due to installation of the DME.
CUMAV RADAR - this does seem to be a charting error. CUMAV is not specified as a RADAR fix on the 8260-3 for Amdt 5 (profile section, Line 4). I suggest that be reported to the FAA through the IFP Gateway.
It’s going to become a moot point soon enough anyway but there is another thing. The RMG R-101. Isn’t that to narrow an angle? If there was a HILPT there I am sure it would be too narrow. What is the limit to just identify an IF intersection?