![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dave Butler" wrote in message ... Oh, right, sorry. I lost sight of the original premise, an ILS with ADF REQUIRED. So what I should have said was: "I think the alternate missed approach instructions still don't relieve the pilot of the requirement for carrying an ADF as explicitly stated on the approach chart." You're viewing the note "ADF REQUIRED" as having legal authority. I view it as just a reminder that ADF is needed to fly the full approach, the missed approach segment in this case. This isn't the first time this matter has been discussed in this forum. As I recall from previous discussions, nobody was able to present any definitive documentation in support of either view. But logic tends to support the view that these notes are just reminders to the pilot. Take a look at most LOC BC approaches and you'll find a similar note that says "BACK COURSE". Is that a legal requirement that a back course receiver must be aboard to fly the approach, or is it just a reminder of reverse sensing? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
The perfect approach | Capt.Doug | Home Built | 25 | December 3rd 04 03:37 AM |
Which aircraft certification is required for R&D? | Netgeek | Home Built | 5 | November 23rd 04 05:59 AM |
LSA Approach speeds | Ace Pilot | Home Built | 0 | February 3rd 04 05:38 PM |
Download approach charts | Ron Natalie | Home Built | 0 | July 9th 03 08:29 PM |