"Hilton" wrote in message thlink.net...
Paul Tomblin wrote:
In a previous article, Barry said:
When doing an ILS approach, with the glideslope, is it a requirement to
be
able to identify the outer marker or a substitute? FAR 91.175(k) lists
the

"or a substitute" is the operative phrase. If the FAF is identified by an
intersection, LOM, or DME, that's an acceptable substitute for a locator
beacon.

The FAF on an ILS is glideslope intersect, not the LOM, DME etc which are
not required.

HIlton


Ahhh, but suppose your glideslope fails (onboard or on the ground)
after this "not required" intersection (with the "X" on Jepp charts)?
Suddenly you are doing a localizer approach and the FAF identification
becomes much more useful as a place from which you start your timing.


Lee