Non-precision approach without a published MAP?

That's why it's called a non-precision approach. You are suppose to
understand on on-airport-faciliy's IAP limitations and be guided
accordingly.

These are antiques now.

No... it's called a non precision approach if it lacks vertical guidance
component in the form of a glideslope. And of course if it has a
glideslope, its going to have a localizer or localizer type lateral
guidance to the runway end..

what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport. Hadn't seen that
before.. til now. Call me green.. I dont care..

I guess that isn't that remarkable of a thing to all the wise old men
out there..

Dave S wrote:

what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport.

The primary thing an approach does is make sure you don't hit anything.
After that, it's good if it also gets you to a runway.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message ...
Dave S wrote:

what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport.

The primary thing an approach does is make sure you don't hit anything.
After that, it's good if it also gets you to a runway.

Or at least *close enough* to the runway that you can see it for landing.
I guess that'd be within about a mile for the approach we're talking about.

John R. Copeland wrote:

"Roy Smith" wrote in message ...

Dave S wrote:


what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport.

The primary thing an approach does is make sure you don't hit anything.
After that, it's good if it also gets you to a runway.


Or at least *close enough* to the runway that you can see it for landing.
I guess that'd be within about a mile for the approach we're talking about.


If you fly out an On-Airport IAP to the facility, your only viable
option is circle-to-land. And, without planning, you could very well be
below the circling MDA.

Dave S wrote:

what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport. Hadn't seen that
before.. til now.

Keep in mind that what is important about the MAP is that it is not
necessarily the point at which a safe descent to the runway will occur, or
even the point at which the airport will be spotted, but rather that it is
the point at which the pilot *begins* flying the missed approach.

This is especially important on approaches such as Starke County (the
approach linked and discussed in this thread) where it is imperative that
the pilot continue along the final approach to the MAP before beginning the
missed instructions.

Terrain or man-made obstacles might dictate flying the final approach
course past the airport before the missed can begin, or perhaps in this
approach's case it was simply that the VOR was close enough to the airport
to conveniently designate the missed approach point (although given that
this VOR is co-located with a DME that could have been used to designate a
closer MAP, maybe not)?

Call me green.. I dont care..

I just rolled 1,000 hours with plenty of actual IMC and I still consider
myself green.

--
Peter

Dave S wrote:

That's why it's called a non-precision approach. You are suppose to
understand on on-airport-faciliy's IAP limitations and be guided
accordingly.

These are antiques now.


No... it's called a non precision approach if it lacks vertical guidance
component in the form of a glideslope. And of course if it has a
glideslope, its going to have a localizer or localizer type lateral
guidance to the runway end..

Some non-precision IAPs have more non-precision than others.

what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport. Hadn't seen that
before.. til now. Call me green.. I dont care..

I guess that isn't that remarkable of a thing to all the wise old men
out there..

It is a matter of training, not experience.