![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article . com,
"Robert M. Gary" wrote: On Jul 23, 4:30 pm, "karl gruber" wrote: " The MDA is 1120 unless you have DME. If you have DME then the MDA is 680 once you pass CULVE. You cannot descend below 1120 prior to CULVE even if you see the runway unless you either cancel, get a contact approach, or a visual approach. If you have DME, IFRGPS, or ATC Radar, you can descend to 680 past BEVEY............that is simply what that chart reads. Karl I'm still a bit confused. When I first looked at the chart I assumed that you had to have 1120 at CULVE and could go down to 680 after CULVE. Then looking at it again, it seemed that you could go to 680 at BEVEY since the 680 is modifying the restriction of 1120 at CULVE (very, very, scarry with those buildings around). However, looking at it again, I'm not sure what purpose CULVE would serve if that was the case. I wonder if this chart meets the FAA requirements because it seems to be a bit ambiguous. I can't honestly believe that the FAA would want airplanes at 680 from BEVEY (or anyone who has seen the approach VFR would want to do that IMC). Robert -- you're right, and Karl has (rather graciously, I have to admit) apologised else-thread for misreading the chart. Having looked at the NACO plates I still find it a little difficult to see how people are misreading them -- the asterisk next to CULVE on the NACO profile view refers to the note specifying that if SMO tower is closed, you must use DME to identify CULVE. It does not affect the unambiguous underlined 1120 step altitude between BEVEY and CULVE in any way. The minimums box below that is very clear -- 1120 unless you can identify CULVE, in which case 680; and the latter only applies after CULVE. As you say, the idea that anyone would descend below 1120 much before CULVE on that approach in IMC is really scary -- there are significant buildings in the area with heights above 680' close to the approach... Hamish |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VOR approach SMO | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 124 | August 3rd 07 02:17 AM |
first approach in IMC | G. Sylvester | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | July 12th 05 02:14 AM |
No FAF on an ILS approach...? | John Harper | Instrument Flight Rules | 7 | December 24th 03 03:54 AM |
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 45 | November 20th 03 05:20 AM |
Brief an approach | Ditch | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | October 14th 03 12:10 AM |