Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Ross wrote:
When they first commissioned the ILS RWY 17L to KGYI they had a ADF
required for the hold. I never understood why you couldn't use the
localizer, the outer marker, and or the 302 degree radial to define
the holding point. I sent a letter to the designers, and they came
back saying in their haste that they did make it more complicated.
They moved the hold to URH VOR that was some 30 miles away. I
withdrew my request and they went back to the ADF required on the
approach.
My idea was to fly the missed approach, to to fly the local backwards
to intercept the 302 degree radial and hold. But the designers didn't
like that.


If RIBBY OM is good enough to be a FAF on the localizer approach it should
be good enough to be holding fix. I would think a missed approach procedure
could have a heading back to the localizer and fly the localizer to hold at
the OM. But what's the problem with ADF? Who'd be flying this approach
with a marker beacon receiver but without ADF or GPS used in lieu of ADF?




When I first started instrument training I didn't have a ADF but did
have a IFR GPS. So, for me it was immaterial. I could still fly it. But
my thinking (engineer), and as you stated, was this could be
accomplished without the need for requiring an ADF, yet it was put on
the IAP and my thinking (again) unnecessary.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
Sold
KSWI