SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info

If he had done that last May the note would have never appeared on the
plate.

That remains to be seen. Let's hear what Mr. Harmer has to say.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
. com...

That remains to be seen. Let's hear what Mr. Harmer has to say.


I received a response from Mr. Harmer. ADF is required to identify the FAF.
Apparently marker beacons cannot be used to determine position along track.
His response and my reply follow.




Paul

I will try to clarify this issue because it is more than a bit confusing.

When a procedure isn't absolutely clear on what equipment is required to
fly the approach then we have to add notes as necessary so the pilot knows
exactly what equipment is needed. For this particular approach the VOR
and
NDB are used for the procedure and are depicted in the plan view. Their
close physical proximity as depicted on the planview could lead a pilot to
believe that he could do the hold in lieu pattern using the VOR, but that
is not correct. The VOR is only used on the procedure as a feeder and a
missed approach holding fix.

Now to try and explain. This approach has 2 parts, the full ILS and then
the LOC only which must be addressed separately for clarification. There
are 2 IAFs identified on this approach, first the hold in lieu at EXECC
LOM
and secondly the NoPT segment from COUPS INT to EXECC LOM; and 1 feeder
route, SAC VORTAC to EXECC LOM. When an aircraft is shooting the full ILS
approach from COUPS INT it does not require the use of ADF to fly the
final
(the precision FAF is based on an altitude not the LOM) or missed approach
because 2 missed options are provided. But should the glideslope fail and
he has to transition to the LOC only approach, or when flying the LOC only
approach, then ADF is required to identify the FAF. The missed approach
provides the pilot with 2 possible holding options either going to the SAC
VORTAC or the EXECC LOM to hold so ADF required doesn't apply. Mr
McNicoll
is correct is stating that he is allowed to substitute GPS for ADF in
certain circumstances. However we have to consider the least possibly
equipped aircraft shooting this approach and that requires that we place
an
"ADF REQUIRED " note on this approach.

I hope this will answer the question for Mr McNicoll. Feel free to
contact
us anytime



Don Harmer
Air Traffic Organization-W
Western Flight Procedures Team
Lead, Western Pacific Area (AJW-324)
405-954-9930




Dear Mr. Harmer,

I received your response through Paul Spadero explaining why ADF is required
on the SAC ILS or LOC RWY 2 approach. You indicated that ADF is required to
identify the FAF when flying the LOC only approach. The FAF is EXECC LOM,
why must the pilot use ADF to identify station passage of the Compass
Locator? Why can't the Outer Marker be used to identify EXECC?

Steven P. McNicoll
De Pere, WI

Mr
McNicoll
is correct is stating that he is allowed to substitute GPS for ADF in
certain circumstances. However we have to consider the least possibly
equipped aircraft shooting this approach and that requires that we place
an
"ADF REQUIRED " note on this approach.

Why not "ADF OR GPS required"?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
Mr

McNicoll
is correct is stating that he is allowed to substitute GPS for ADF in
certain circumstances. However we have to consider the least possibly
equipped aircraft shooting this approach and that requires that we place
an
"ADF REQUIRED " note on this approach.


Why not "ADF OR GPS required"?

Jose

Good question. I'm sure that will be an option in the not too distant
future, but right now you can't mix and match ground-based systems with
GPS on published procedures due to TERPS requirements. That's another
set of guidelines that allows substitution with GPS in some
circumstances, and already you may have seen NOTAMS stating "Procedure
NA except for IFR certified GPS equipped aircraft" where the NOTAM
specifically allows substitution for DME or ADF ancillary equipment.

John

On 06/29/06 15:17, JPH wrote:
Jose wrote:
Mr

McNicoll
is correct is stating that he is allowed to substitute GPS for ADF in
certain circumstances. However we have to consider the least possibly
equipped aircraft shooting this approach and that requires that we place
an
"ADF REQUIRED " note on this approach.


Why not "ADF OR GPS required"?

Jose

Good question. I'm sure that will be an option in the not too distant
future, but right now you can't mix and match ground-based systems with
GPS on published procedures due to TERPS requirements.

Huh? The AIM has a complete section called "Use of GPS in lieu of
ADF and DME"


That's another
set of guidelines that allows substitution with GPS in some
circumstances, and already you may have seen NOTAMS stating "Procedure
NA except for IFR certified GPS equipped aircraft" where the NOTAM
specifically allows substitution for DME or ADF ancillary equipment.

John



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

"JPH" wrote in message
news:TjYog.11140$f76.5031@dukeread06...

Good question. I'm sure that will be an option in the not too distant
future, but right now you can't mix and match ground-based systems with
GPS on published procedures due to TERPS requirements. That's another set
of guidelines that allows substitution with GPS in some circumstances, and
already you may have seen NOTAMS stating "Procedure NA except for IFR
certified GPS equipped aircraft" where the NOTAM specifically allows
substitution for DME or ADF ancillary equipment.


It's an option now. See AIM para 1-1-19.f.:

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/AIM/Chap1/aim0101.html#1-1-19

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"JPH" wrote in message
news:TjYog.11140$f76.5031@dukeread06...

Good question. I'm sure that will be an option in the not too distant
future, but right now you can't mix and match ground-based systems with
GPS on published procedures due to TERPS requirements. That's another set
of guidelines that allows substitution with GPS in some circumstances, and
already you may have seen NOTAMS stating "Procedure NA except for IFR
certified GPS equipped aircraft" where the NOTAM specifically allows
substitution for DME or ADF ancillary equipment.



It's an option now. See AIM para 1-1-19.f.:

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/AIM/Chap1/aim0101.html#1-1-19


I realize that GPS can be used as a substitute, and pointed that out in
my message.
His question was why the ground based procedure didn't have a chart note
"ADF or GPS required". What I was stating is that TERPS criteria does
not yet allow combining ground based and GPS on the chart, that's why
the procedure does not say "ADF or GPS required" (A temporary NOTAM can
address GPS but the chart can not). As I said, you can use GPS to
substitute in some situations based on regulations other than TERPS, but
TERPS criteria does not yet allow GPS notes to be charted on ground
based procedures (except on the old GPS overlay procedures).
TERPS criteria still requires ground based procedures to be built based
only on ground based equipment, so your not going to see a "GPS
required" note on a ground based procedure.

JPH

"JPH" wrote in message
news:EEmpg.11443$f76.5591@dukeread06...

I realize that GPS can be used as a substitute, and pointed that out in my
message.


You did? Where?



His question was why the ground based procedure didn't have a chart note
"ADF or GPS required". What I was stating is that TERPS criteria does not
yet allow combining ground based and GPS on the chart, that's why the
procedure does not say "ADF or GPS required" (A temporary NOTAM can
address GPS but the chart can not). As I said, you can use GPS to
substitute in some situations based on regulations other than TERPS, but
TERPS criteria does not yet allow GPS notes to be charted on ground based
procedures (except on the old GPS overlay procedures).
TERPS criteria still requires ground based procedures to be built based
only on ground based equipment, so your not going to see a "GPS required"
note on a ground based procedure.


"ADF OR GPS REQUIRED" would just add unnecessary clutter as it's already
understood that GPS can substitute for ADF in cases like this.

"Jose" wrote in message
om...

Why not "ADF OR GPS required"?


No need for that, GPS can substitute for ADF in this case anyway. But why
not "ADF REQUIRED FOR LOC RWY 2"?