Help understanding Aspen VOR/DME approach

Blanche Cohen wrote:
In article kH9Bg.513$0F5.178@fed1read04, Sam Spade wrote:

At Aspen, circling around the airport is very risky business.


Unless you're at 20,000 ft. Ok, maybe 18K.


But, those altitudes are in Class A airspace. ;-)

17,000 feet will provide legal en route (and circling ;-) altitude for
the entire 48 states.

Jim Carter wrote:


-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Spade ]
Posted At: Saturday, August 05, 2006 6:19 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Help understanding Aspen VOR/DME approach
Subject: Help understanding Aspen VOR/DME approach



At Aspen, circling around the airport is very risky business.


No kidding!! Isn't that why we all learned steep-turns-about-a-point?
Even the 360-overhead would be thrilling at Aspen.

If a pilot is going to do those types of maneuvers at Aspen, then he or
she better have the right airplance and be very familiar with the airport.

Those two factors always greatly improve the safety margin. But, that
becomes, more or less, a special-qualification circumstance, as opposed
to "plain old TERPS."

Just for grins fly the sim approach in the Baron, without circling...
It can be done but you need to be determined...

denny

Denny wrote:

Just for grins fly the sim approach in the Baron, without circling...
It can be done but you need to be determined...

denny


I can do it quite nicely in MSFS using the B737. That doesn't mean it
would work in the real airplane in the real world.

There are issues like suffiicent bleed air for anti-ice and perhaps wing
de-ice, and engine spool up time, not to mention sink rate. Bill Gates
doesn't worry about any of those critical issues.

Sam Spade wrote:

Because the LOC is not part of a final approach segment, the limitation
that RNAV (GPS) cannot be used to substitute for the LOC does not apply
in that sense.
snip

Thanks for setting me straight.

--
Peter