Yet another "Radar Required" question.

!FDC 4/3343 DMW FI/T CARROLL COUNTY REGIONAL/JACK B. POAGE FIELD,
WESTMINSTER, MD
RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, ORIG...
UNYTS WP: CHANGE FIX DESCRIPTION FROM (IAF) TO (IF).
RADAR REQUIRED.

"Stan Gosnell" me@work wrote in message
...
Roy Smith wrote in
:

There's two GPS approaches into KDMW; the RNAV (GPS) RWY 16
and the RNAV (GPS) RWY 32.

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/...dfs/05533R16.p
df
http://www.myairplane.com/databases/...dfs/05533R34.p
df

Both start from off-airway IAF's, with no feeder routes.
Both use the same missed approach fix. Yet, one is marked
"Radar Required" and the other isn't. Anybody have any
clue why?

It appears to me that they made a mistake on the GPS Rwy 16 by
not making radar required. There is no way to fly the approach
if you're coming from the south, since it's marked PT NA.

Secondary question -- I thought the concept of these pure
GPS approaches was to lay out 3 IAF's in a T pattern. Why
no outside IAF's, and no PT? Both of these seem kind of
ugly if you start them from a course 180 degrees off the
FAC.

Yabbut, lots of them don't have that. All the GPS approaches to
Scholes Field, Galveston, TX are without a T, and all are marked
radar required. They are too close to HOU and EFD to have
people flying long procedure turns, so they just have a
straight-in approach, with radar required to get to the FAC.
The approaches you referenced look the same, but I don't have
any charts handy to see what else is near. I think both
approaches should have radar required.

--
Regards,

Stan