Question about approaches

D

Dragos

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
8
Display Name
Display name:
dragoscscc
Am I looking at this approach correctly?

NZNR
VOR/DME RWY16
Not allowed to post links yet, but it comes up right away on google search.

Fly a course of 185 and on short final line up with the runway heading 165 once over the DME?

Is this common? Why not have the approach on runway centerline, there doesn't seem to be any obstacles in the way?

Thanks,

D
 
I’m not sure what you mean by over the DME. Fly 185° until visual, then correct to rwy centerline to land. Not sure why it’s not aligned, but I’m guessing it has something to do with obstacle clearance.
 
Took me a sec to find the IAP for this approach. For the others in the Gallery, this link should work. But it is an out of date plate, from 2015.

http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZNR_43.1_43.2.pdf

I concur with Cooter that there might be some obstacles we are unaware of because they are not depicted on the plate. And just because the plate doesn't depict them, doesn't mean they aren't there. There could be other reasons such as noise control that keeps them over the water during the approach.

I also found the RNAV approach (http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZNR_45.1_45.2.pdf) and it shows a similar inbound course
 
If the approach was aligned would th the runway, approx 345radial, it would be in the 77 part of the NSA circle. I'm betting with cooter that there is rocks out there.
 
I checked out the airport on Google Earth, and it seems that to the North of the airport is significant terrain.

Staying over the water keeps you away from this. Probably a good idea by the designer of the approach.
 
http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZNR_43.1_43.2.pdf

You should be at the MDA before you reach the VOR. At that point you visually turn to the runway or you go missed at the VOR.

I agree that it's better to be along the shore and over water. There are far few obstacles there.
 
Thanks for clarifying, new to all this. I always assumed that an approach would be down the runway center line, but I see that there can be exceptions to this.

BTW, what does the NR next to the NAPIER VOR morse code mean?
 
Dragos said:
Thanks for clarifying, new to all this. I always assumed that an approach would be down the runway center line, but I see that there can be exceptions to this.

BTW, what does the NR next to the NAPIER VOR morse code mean?
Click to expand...
It’s the 2 letter identifier for Napier VOR.
 
Dragos said:
Thanks for clarifying, new to all this. I always assumed that an approach would be down the runway center line, but I see that there can be exceptions to this.

BTW, what does the NR next to the NAPIER VOR morse code mean?
Click to expand...
That is the Morse Code identifier. The dots and dashes are Morse Code for N and R.
 
Dragos said:
Thanks for clarifying, new to all this. I always assumed that an approach would be down the runway center line, but I see that there can be exceptions to this.
Click to expand...
There are many, many exceptions. Here are two that I have flown at Ardmore, OK and Rockport, TX.

Note in Rockport, you approach the airport perpendicular to the main runway.

902BC0FD-9720-4FE8-9D7F-39035E8B13D8.png AAE12E56-F6C1-4636-A1E4-76C8007CCFA5.png
 
So for RKP you'd fly a course of 054 above 1600 until BISON, then begin descent to 800. Once runway is in sight do a circling approach to land?

What is a circling approach? A non precision visual approach?
 
Dragos said:
So for RKP you'd fly a course of 054 above 1600 until BISON, then begin descent to 800. Once runway is in sight do a circling approach to land?

What is a circling approach? A non precision visual approach?
Click to expand...
A circling approach is simply an approach which contemplates a landing on a runway other than one right in front of you. It may be because the course is not aligned with the runway or it might be that there would be a higher than normal descent rate required than is permitted by straight-in design requirements. The minimums are higher than straight in to allow for maneuvering. Many straight in approaches also have circling minimums.
 
I've actually been to Napier, about 18 months ago. I didn't fly there. Not many towers there, but there are hills. The airport itself is on a plain near a river. East of the river, it is all flat, but hilly west of it.
 
Dragos said:
So for RKP you'd fly a course of 054 above 1600 until BISON, then begin descent to 800. Once runway is in sight do a circling approach to land?

What is a circling approach? A non precision visual approach?
Click to expand...
Based on your questions so far, I have two really good books for you to start reading....


These will answer your questions you have posed so far and many others you have yet to ask.
 
Thanks for the help and all the links. Lots of good info.
 
Dragos said:
Am I looking at this approach correctly?

NZNR
VOR/DME RWY16
Not allowed to post links yet, but it comes up right away on google search.

Fly a course of 185 and on short final line up with the runway heading 165 once over the DME?

Is this common? Why not have the approach on runway centerline, there doesn't seem to be any obstacles in the way?

Thanks,

D
Click to expand...
The vor is is not on the extended runway centerline so it can't line you up precisely unless they move it. As long as the final approach course is within thirty degrees of the runway heading, it's considered a straight in. If it's more than thirty, it's considered a circling approach and its name will have a letter instead of the runway number Eg. VOR/DME A instead of VOR/DME 16.
 
So much to learn and remember, a little overwhelming...
 
Dragos said:
So much to learn and remember, a little overwhelming...
Click to expand...
That's the way it seemed to me when I first started. I dealt with it by telling myself that I only had to learn one thing at a time. It worked!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top