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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
ICAO criteria splits approach categories for segments of an approach, unlike TERPs. That is why the teardrop is tighter for A/B than C/D. The outer X is the turn limit for C/D. The next X inbound is the turn limit for A/B and it is also the intermediate fix where all categories can leave 2100 for 1400. The X at 1400 is the FAF and you will note that is where the descent table begins for 260 feet per mile descent gradient. But, that gradient has you crossing the threshold (1 CAG DME) at 91 feet, which is about 40-50 feet higher than what the VGSI is likely sited for. It is all well below a 3-degree slope, however. As far as the outer limits of a procedure turn being below the VGSI, what is unusual about that? I don't know about Italy but a VGSI in this country is survey for obstacles only to 4 miles (VASI) or 3.5 miles (PAPI). also bear in mind that the process for establishing the glideslope when on an ILS approach is to join from beneath the glideslope and then track the glideslope down to DA. Its the same principle. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GPS approach question | Matt Whiting | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | August 29th 08 03:54 AM |
VOR/DME approach radio calls | Derek Fage | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | December 8th 04 11:36 PM |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Canadian holding procedures | Derrick Early | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | July 22nd 04 04:03 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |