![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote:
J.Kahn writes: If no instrument departure gradients are published in a departure procedure, then the default gradient requirement applies, which is 200 ft/NM. OK, thanks. It looks like IFR departures from runway 26 in L35 aren't allowed at all, so I suppose I'll have to depart from runway 8 in the future if I really want to depart IFR. Odd that there's nothing for runway 26 since it leads right over the lake. Gosh, I wish you would submit your resume to the FAA. Then, you could be the boss of TERPS and get these credits for little narrow lakes applied and forget the big friggen mountains a bit further out, you numbskull. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sam Spade writes:
Gosh, I wish you would submit your resume to the FAA. Then, you could be the boss of TERPS and get these credits for little narrow lakes applied and forget the big friggen mountains a bit further out, you numbskull. The big mountains might or might not be a problem, depending on the aircraft. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote:
Sam Spade writes: Gosh, I wish you would submit your resume to the FAA. Then, you could be the boss of TERPS and get these credits for little narrow lakes applied and forget the big friggen mountains a bit further out, you numbskull. The big mountains might or might not be a problem, depending on the aircraft. Your judgment differs from the FAA's. Why don't you go argue with them: http://naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=nfpo/west |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sam Spade writes:
Your judgment differs from the FAA's. I haven't seen an opinion from the FAA. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote:
Sam Spade writes: Your judgment differs from the FAA's. I haven't seen an opinion from the FAA. I believe a judgment is different than an opinion. They denied an ODP into those mountains; that is a fact. So go argue with them numbnuts. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sam Spade wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote: J.Kahn writes: If no instrument departure gradients are published in a departure procedure, then the default gradient requirement applies, which is 200 ft/NM. OK, thanks. It looks like IFR departures from runway 26 in L35 aren't allowed at all, so I suppose I'll have to depart from runway 8 in the future if I really want to depart IFR. Odd that there's nothing for runway 26 since it leads right over the lake. Gosh, I wish you would submit your resume to the FAA. Then, you could be the boss of TERPS and get these credits for little narrow lakes applied and forget the big friggen mountains a bit further out, you numbskull. At Canadian airports in the mountains where the required gradient is too much they have a cat called "Spec Vis" which may involve a vfr initial climb over the airport, then to a fix, then a shuttle climb to mea. See the dep procedure for Prince George BC below. Do any US airports in the hills do that? DEPARTURE PROCEDURE Rwy 09 - SPEC VIS - CLB visual over APRT to 1200. Continue CLB on TRK 271 from "YPW" NDB to 2400. Left turn direct "YPW" NDB to cross at 3900. Shuttle (max 200 kt) to MEA BPOC. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Final Glide Calculation over Obstacle | [email protected] | Soaring | 3 | February 7th 07 04:49 PM |
How to adhere to this obstacle departure procedure? | Peter R. | Instrument Flight Rules | 38 | April 25th 05 09:00 PM |
Garmin 196 & obstacle database. | max | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | March 16th 05 08:51 AM |
Obstacle Clearance Altitude / Height | Tim | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | November 21st 04 10:33 AM |
Notes on NACO Obstacle Departure Procedures | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 1 | July 15th 04 10:20 PM |