View Single Post
  #11  
Old January 24th 04, 01:24 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Richard Hertz" wrote in message
et...

Right, but why should that force the odd differences in the final segments
of the approaches?
e.g. - the "Fly visual 2.5 nm" on the LOC/DME 19 and the 1600 and 2

(loc/dme
19) vs the 1580 and 1 1/4 minima (loc 19 with dme)?

I suppose there is no good reason for the differences (the different

minima
and MAPs)


I'm not a TERPS expert, I'm pretty much just guessing. There is higher
terrain to the south, southwest, and west of KRUT. Climbing to 2600 via the
RUT VOR/DME 221 radial allows you to avoid these rocks until you're above
them. Without the positive course guidance provided by RUT VOR/DME you're
left with climb gradient requirements that can't be met with the MAP at
I-RUT 1.9 DME so the MAP must be pushed back to 3.4 DME.