A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 21st 06, 02:36 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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.
  #2  
Old June 28th 06, 11:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info


"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


  #3  
Old June 29th 06, 09:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info

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.
  #4  
Old June 29th 06, 11:17 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info

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
  #5  
Old June 29th 06, 11:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info

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
  #6  
Old June 30th 06, 02:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info


"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


  #7  
Old July 1st 06, 05:14 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
JPH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info

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
  #8  
Old July 1st 06, 03:03 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Steven P. McNicoll[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 660
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info


"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.


  #9  
Old June 30th 06, 02:19 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SAC ILS "ADF Required" Info


"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"?


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help! - Wooden prop - any info? G0MRL Aviation Marketplace 1 February 13th 06 03:14 PM
Seeking Northrop Gamma info Dillon Restoration 3 December 12th 05 04:45 AM
Helicopter Physics info online anywhere?? [email protected] Rotorcraft 4 April 24th 04 04:18 PM
POSA Carb Info and HAPI Engine Info Bill Home Built 0 March 8th 04 08:23 PM
Starting new info site need info from the pros MRQB Piloting 7 January 5th 04 03:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.