Missed approach procedure...

In article ,
(Ryan Ferguson) wrote:

"Greg Goodknight" wrote in message
thlink.net...

I can't think of any missed that has very tricky routes

Check this one out.

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/...st/SZT_ldA.pdf

The missed approach instructions read:

"MISSED APPROACH: Climb to 8000 to I-RPO 10 DME, then climbing right
turn via SZT bearing 030 degrees to SZT NDB, then via SZT bearing 181
degrees and COE R-359 to COE VOR/DME and hold." (And of course it's a
parallel entry!)

-Ryan

Wow. What on earth did they have in mind when the wrote that? The
route is bizarre. By the time you reach 8000, you're above the sector
MSA (and 3000 feet above anything shown on the chart). What point is
there in making you turn west to Sandpoe instead of just going direct
Coeur D'Alane?

The other interesting thing is that you've got a 5000 foot climb ahead
of you before you can turn. In some types, it may be hard to make 8000
before I-RPO 10 DME! My 172N POH say it takes 14 miles to climb from
3000 to 8000 in no wind and standard atmosphere (obviously worse in the
summer or with a tailwind). The MAP is 2 DME on the front course, so
you've only got 12 miles.

I'm not even quite sure what "Climb to 8000 to I-RPO 10 DME" requires of
you. What if you reach 10 DME and you're not at 8000 yet? Is it worse
to start the turn before you're high enough or to keep climbing straight
ahead beyond where you're supposed to turn? No clue that I can see from
the procedure plate.

Another interesting thing about this approach is that starting from COE
as an IAF to the MAP and then flying the missed to I-RPO 10 DME then
back to COE looks like about 86 nm. I'll bet that takes a full hour in
a 172. That'll put a crimp in your style if you only planned the
minimum legal IFR fuel reserves.

I suppose this kind of stuff is routine in the mountains, but to a
flatlander like me, it sure looks wild.

You guys are getting into the nuances of how Flight Standards and the
National Flight Procedures Office word their missed approach instructions.

There is always room for improvement, but it is also an issue of brevity vs.
impossibly wordy text.

Without looking at the chart at issue, the wording sounds like 8,000 is the
final altitude, and it must not be met at the DME ARC.

As to a 172 doing all this, well Roy, I don't think so.

Roy Smith wrote:

In article ,
(Ryan Ferguson) wrote:

"Greg Goodknight" wrote in message
thlink.net...

I can't think of any missed that has very tricky routes

Check this one out.

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/...st/SZT_ldA.pdf

The missed approach instructions read:

"MISSED APPROACH: Climb to 8000 to I-RPO 10 DME, then climbing right
turn via SZT bearing 030 degrees to SZT NDB, then via SZT bearing 181
degrees and COE R-359 to COE VOR/DME and hold." (And of course it's a
parallel entry!)

-Ryan

Wow. What on earth did they have in mind when the wrote that? The
route is bizarre. By the time you reach 8000, you're above the sector
MSA (and 3000 feet above anything shown on the chart). What point is
there in making you turn west to Sandpoe instead of just going direct
Coeur D'Alane?

The other interesting thing is that you've got a 5000 foot climb ahead
of you before you can turn. In some types, it may be hard to make 8000
before I-RPO 10 DME! My 172N POH say it takes 14 miles to climb from
3000 to 8000 in no wind and standard atmosphere (obviously worse in the
summer or with a tailwind). The MAP is 2 DME on the front course, so
you've only got 12 miles.

I'm not even quite sure what "Climb to 8000 to I-RPO 10 DME" requires of
you. What if you reach 10 DME and you're not at 8000 yet? Is it worse
to start the turn before you're high enough or to keep climbing straight
ahead beyond where you're supposed to turn? No clue that I can see from
the procedure plate.

Another interesting thing about this approach is that starting from COE
as an IAF to the MAP and then flying the missed to I-RPO 10 DME then
back to COE looks like about 86 nm. I'll bet that takes a full hour in
a 172. That'll put a crimp in your style if you only planned the
minimum legal IFR fuel reserves.

I suppose this kind of stuff is routine in the mountains, but to a
flatlander like me, it sure looks wild.

In article ,
wrote:

Yes, a very interesting missed approach procedure. And, to tie to the other
part of the thread: if you haven't gotten to 8000 by the time you get to
I-RPO, what should you do? (By my reckoning it takes 403 ft/nm climb to get
there.)

You continue the climb in the holding pattern.

What holding pattern? There is no such pattern shown on the chart.

The textual wording of the government missed aproach is wrong,
misleading, and potentially dangerous. Jeppesen has it right. Should
be 210 bearing (to) and 181bearing from SZT. Otherwise, it is a
fairly simple, straightforward missed, although long. 8000' is the
final altitude and need not be reached prior to the 10 DME fix


On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 17:59:16 -0800, wrote:

You guys are getting into the nuances of how Flight Standards and the
National Flight Procedures Office word their missed approach instructions.

There is always room for improvement, but it is also an issue of brevity vs.
impossibly wordy text.

Without looking at the chart at issue, the wording sounds like 8,000 is the
final altitude, and it must not be met at the DME ARC.

As to a 172 doing all this, well Roy, I don't think so.

Roy Smith wrote:

In article ,
(Ryan Ferguson) wrote:

"Greg Goodknight" wrote in message
thlink.net...

I can't think of any missed that has very tricky routes

Check this one out.

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/...st/SZT_ldA.pdf

The missed approach instructions read:

"MISSED APPROACH: Climb to 8000 to I-RPO 10 DME, then climbing right
turn via SZT bearing 030 degrees to SZT NDB, then via SZT bearing 181
degrees and COE R-359 to COE VOR/DME and hold." (And of course it's a
parallel entry!)

-Ryan

Wow. What on earth did they have in mind when the wrote that? The
route is bizarre. By the time you reach 8000, you're above the sector
MSA (and 3000 feet above anything shown on the chart). What point is
there in making you turn west to Sandpoe instead of just going direct
Coeur D'Alane?

The other interesting thing is that you've got a 5000 foot climb ahead
of you before you can turn. In some types, it may be hard to make 8000
before I-RPO 10 DME! My 172N POH say it takes 14 miles to climb from
3000 to 8000 in no wind and standard atmosphere (obviously worse in the
summer or with a tailwind). The MAP is 2 DME on the front course, so
you've only got 12 miles.

I'm not even quite sure what "Climb to 8000 to I-RPO 10 DME" requires of
you. What if you reach 10 DME and you're not at 8000 yet? Is it worse
to start the turn before you're high enough or to keep climbing straight
ahead beyond where you're supposed to turn? No clue that I can see from
the procedure plate.

Another interesting thing about this approach is that starting from COE
as an IAF to the MAP and then flying the missed to I-RPO 10 DME then
back to COE looks like about 86 nm. I'll bet that takes a full hour in
a 172. That'll put a crimp in your style if you only planned the
minimum legal IFR fuel reserves.

I suppose this kind of stuff is routine in the mountains, but to a
flatlander like me, it sure looks wild.

Wow. What on earth did they have in mind when the wrote that? The
route is bizarre. By the time you reach 8000, you're above the sector
MSA (and 3000 feet above anything shown on the chart). What point is
there in making you turn west to Sandpoe instead of just going direct
Coeur D'Alane?

This procedure actually seems reasonable to me (except for the error that Bill
pointed out - 030 bearing should be 210). Using 8000 for the missed provides
separation from incoming traffic at 7000. For a climb at 200 ft/nm, the 10
DME ensures you're above 5500 or so before turning. At that point you're
about 44 nm from the VOR, so they use the NDB for navigation until you get
back within the VOR service volume.

Barry

"John Clonts" wrote in message ...

Yes, a very interesting missed approach procedure. And, to tie to the other
part of the thread: if you haven't gotten to 8000 by the time you get to
I-RPO, what should you do? (By my reckoning it takes 403 ft/nm climb to get
there.)

Your reckoning is correct. If you're not at 8000 by the time you
reach the I-RPO 10 DME fix, make a climbing right turn and continue
the climb as you head inbound to the NDB on the 030 bearing from the
station. If you're still not at 8000 AFTER passing SZT southbound,
continue the climb as you track out from the NDB. If you still
haven't gotten to 8000 by the time you reach the missed approach
holding point, continue the climb as you hold.

The instructions on this approach account for the possibility of
reaching 8000 at any point during the procedure.

Best,

-Ryan

Huh?

Sure is on my KSZT LDA chart? On the 231 radial of the VOR.

Roy Smith wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

Yes, a very interesting missed approach procedure. And, to tie to the other
part of the thread: if you haven't gotten to 8000 by the time you get to
I-RPO, what should you do? (By my reckoning it takes 403 ft/nm climb to get
there.)

You continue the climb in the holding pattern.

What holding pattern? There is no such pattern shown on the chart.

Ryan Ferguson wrote:

"The instructions on this approach account for the possibility of
reaching 8000 at any point during the procedure.

Well, not exactly. There is no earlist point but there is a 40:1 (or, more practically 200 feet per mile)
minimum limit.

Bill Zaleski wrote:

The textual wording of the government missed aproach is wrong,
misleading, and potentially dangerous. Jeppesen has it right. Should
be 210 bearing (to) and 181bearing from SZT. Otherwise, it is a
fairly simple, straightforward missed, although long. 8000' is the
final altitude and need not be reached prior to the 10 DME fix


I have both charts in front of me and they both show the same misses approach
track in the plan view; and in particular as to the 210 degree bearing inbound to
SZT NDB. Whether it says 210 or 030 for that portion of the track doesn't seem
to me to represent a safety issue for the NACO chart.

But, you see it differently and apparently feel strongly about it. In that case,
the most responsible thing for you to do is to contact the Northwest Mountain
Region's Flight Procedures Office in Seattle and make your safety concerns known.

I presume you mean that someone might keep going NE on the NDB's 030 bearing? If
so, that is contrary to the plan view track and contrary to the context of
getting toCOE VOR, which is way south.

It would be interesting to see the text on the regulatory source document.
Neither chart maker is supposed to deviate from the source. Rather, if *they*
don't like the source they are supposed to complain to the National Flight
Procedures Office and make their case to get the source amended. That is the way
it's *supposed* to work, but it doesn't always work as planned.

My view is that pilots are beginning to rely on the briefing strip symbololy at
the exclusion of everything else on the chart pertaining to the missed approach
procedural track and altitude requirements. That wasn't the plan when the Volpe
briefing strip concept came into use.

wrote:
You continue the climb in the holding pattern.

Roy Smith wrote:
What holding pattern? There is no such pattern shown on the chart.

wrote:
Huh?

Sure is on my KSZT LDA chart? On the 231 radial of the VOR.

I was talking about what if you didn't reach 8000 by I-RPO 10 DME.
There's no hold depicted at that fix.