Procedure NA for arrivals at .......

Discussion in 'Cleared for the Approach' started by dmount76, May 7, 2019.

  1. dmount76

    dmount76 Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2018
    Messages:
    10
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dmount76
    Would appreciate some help here. Look at the RNAV 32 at KGUR : https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1905/09220R32.PDF

    Notice there are several notes stating that the procedure is NA when.....

    For example when arriving at HOCXU on V547 southeast bound. So, if I were coming in from the northwest instead of using HOCXU as the first point, I would be fine going direct to UBODE and doing the procedure turn in a tear drop then inbound. Correct?

    It looks like the procedure turn is required even if you are able to use HOCXU, KACTI or direct UBODE from the south unless on vectors. Am I missing something?

    Also, at the top of the diagram it says "When R-7001 is active, procedure NA" so this means when the restricted airspace to the north is active I can't use the RNAV correct?

    I came in on the RNAV last week and ATIS said the north training area was hot but I asked tower for the "practice approach for RNAV 32" and they said "Remain VFR and report UBODE" so I guess they gave it to me. Was it because it was a "practice" approach?

    Thanks in advance.
     
  2. Velocity173

    Velocity173 Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    10,346
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Velocity173
    The missed approach takes you right through the R area. So yeah, they don’t want you doing the approach IFR and apparently don’t have an alternate missed. VFR practice approaches aren’t authorized to do the missed unless specifically cleared by ATC. I take it after your approach they simply told you to remain clear of 7001 on the go?
     
  3. Walboy

    Walboy Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2014
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    Arizona
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Walboy
     
  4. aterpster

    aterpster Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,359
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    aterpster
    The feeder route from HOCXU meets both alignment and descent gradient requirements for NoPT. But, they would have had to make HOCXU an IAF. For reasons known only to them, they chose not to do that.
     
  5. benyflyguy

    benyflyguy Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    1,546
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    benyflyguy
    It’s a haul to that Missed approach
     
  6. aterpster

    aterpster Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,359
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    aterpster
    How about this one? Over 72 miles from MAP to missed approach holding.


    05U RNAV 18.jpg
     
  7. benyflyguy

    benyflyguy Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    1,546
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    benyflyguy
    That will make you think about fuel reserves a bit more!!
     
  8. apr911

    apr911 Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2015
    Messages:
    255
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    apr911
    That would be the historical convention for most approaches but the ubiquity of Radar coverage and GPS have changed things and made the requirement to cross UBODE twice to ascertain location a bit redundant. According to the AIM post-2006, you can request to begin the approach at the Intermediate Fix as long as your turn to the final approach course upon reaching UBODE is less than 90 degrees.

    Here are 2 older AOPA blog posts about the topic (of starting the approach at the IF instead of vectors or IAF)
    https://blog.aopa.org/aopa/2014/01/...approach-vectors-iaf-and-intermediate-fix-if/
    https://blog.aopa.org/aopa/2014/02/...start-an-approach-at-the-intermediate-fix-if/
     
  9. flyingron

    flyingron Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    16,214
    Location:
    Catawba, NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    FlyingRon
    Pretty irrelevant. Lots of approaches go through R areas (even before the missed). ATC is not supposed to clear you if the airspace is hot.
     
  10. Velocity173

    Velocity173 Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    10,346
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Velocity173
    No kidding. It says it on the approach plate.
     
  11. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    5,953
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    Question 1, yes, if you could get clearance from the Center to go direct UBODE. Depending on exactly how ‘northwest’ you are you could do the HILPT entry as parallel instead of tear drop if you wanted to.

    Question 2, no, however you could request and get Clearance for the Approach “straight in” and then you would not do the HILPT entry.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2019
  12. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    5,953
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    That is a long haul. It would be a 160 miles if you decided to give it another try unless they had enough Radar coverage to give you some short cuts to bypass going out to JEBEG to start over
     
  13. aterpster

    aterpster Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,359
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    aterpster
    No radar coverage below 10,000-12,000. Nearest center radar is at KBAM.

    Further south on the missed approach I doubt center would have you on radar until you reached 14,000. Very remote area.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2019
  14. aterpster

    aterpster Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,359
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    aterpster
    Provided they have you on radar, provide an intercept angle of not greater than 90 degrees, provide an altitude compatible with the procedure, and state "straight in" twice, once not less than 5 miles from the IF, and again with the approach clearance (as spelled out in the AIM).
     
  15. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    5,953
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    Yeah. There are some rules that must be followed before they can give you the ‘straight in.’ In @dmount76 ’s examples in his question he was in less than 90 degree territory. AIM 5-4-6 e. 4. & 6 and 5-4-9. a. is where ‘straight in’ in the AIM is. That ATC must give you notice of it and not spring it on you less than 5 miles from the IF is in the Controllers Handbook. I know you know this terpster, just getting the references out there
     
  16. apr911

    apr911 Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2015
    Messages:
    255
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    apr911
    Not completely. The OP asked about why ATC allowed him to do the approach when requested as a practice approach and ATC cleared them and instructed them to remain VFR. Normally a clearance for an approach includes clearance for the missed approach or a modified missed approach. Understanding that the procedure is not available in actual IFR conditions when the Restricted-area is in use because the missed approach procedure upon which you will rely if you cant find the runway goes right through the restricted area is different from the procedure being "available" in VFR conditions when you can provide your own obstacle avoidance without following the full missed approach procedure.
     
  17. dmount76

    dmount76 Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2018
    Messages:
    10
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dmount76
    I appreciate all the replies. This has definitely helped me better understand this and other approaches!
     
  18. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    5,953
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    Good. Keep askin, keep readin
     
  19. tylerjewell

    tylerjewell Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2018
    Messages:
    9
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    TylerJewell
    Off topic, but I cannot help to ask given the Eureka RNAV approach plate. What is the difference between MDA and MDA*? The only asterisk on the plate is the comment in the summary about missed approach climb rates, but that cannot apply here.
     
  20. aterpster

    aterpster Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,359
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    aterpster
    It refers to the climb gradient note in the briefing strip.
     
  21. tylerjewell

    tylerjewell Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2018
    Messages:
    9
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    TylerJewell
    So if you are unable to climb at 390 ft / nm at that density altitude, then you must accept the higher minimums.
     
  22. luvflyin

    luvflyin Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    5,953
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Luvflyin
    It’s 9200 feet MSL indicated altitude that you must maintain the 390 feet per NM until
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2019
  23. aterpster

    aterpster Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,359
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    aterpster
    Correct. It is indicated altitude with local altimeter setting applied.

    Application of density altitude to the required climb gradient is up to each user of the approach to the lower MDA.
     
  24. Tommar98

    Tommar98 Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    May 3, 2018
    Messages:
    97
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Tommar98
    Also, wouldn’t the lower MDA’s on the LPV and LNAV put you closer to the runway and further down the glide slope and hence the need to meet a more aggressive client gradient if you have to go missed from that point.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk