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 |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: wrote in message ... That approach was effective 22 May 1997, and has not been amended since. What's your point? Your assertion was, "Any RNAV IAP developed in the past 3 years, or more, has its IAFs anchored on Victor airways unless there are no IAFS (I.e., radar required)." May 1997 was six and a half years ago, that's more than three years. It should be apparent that l meant within the last three years, or so. Unlike you, I am not a perfect typist at all hours of the day. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: wrote in message ... Why don't you contact Brad W. Rush, Deputy Manager of AVN-100. He can tell you all you want to know about centers and TAAs. When Brad W. Rush posts a dubious claim in this forum I'll ask him to support it. While Mr. Rush may be able to tell me something about TAAs, it's very unlikely he's in a position to tell me anything about ARTCCs. He has to argue with AT types at work. I doubt he wants to to it for "fun." |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Greg Esres wrote: Considered by AFS-420 and AVN-100, not to mention common sense. I agree that it's common sense. One thing about TAA's that bothers me is the definition of the sectors. The distance is to the IAF in the right or left base, but the bearings are to the IF. GPSs don't display the bearing to the IF, when you're headed to one of the "T" IAFs. (But you can get it on the KLN-94 by scrolling through the fixes in the active flight plan.) I have a modified version of the Garmin 530 trainer that works with MSFS 2002. I loaded the RNAV (GPS) RWY 21 approach for KPRC and set myself up to enter the right-base TAA from the southwest. This would require DUKIW to be the first active waypoint. I will remain within protected airspace (within 30 miles of DUKIW) by using the 028 clockwise to 118 bearings off DUKIW. All I do is exclude using the airspace east of the 118 bearing from DUKIW to PEVYU. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... It should be apparent that l meant within the last three years, or so. Unlike you, I am not a perfect typist at all hours of the day. You're saying you misspelled "so" as "more"? What's apparent is you don't know what you're talking about. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: wrote in message ... It should be apparent that l meant within the last three years, or so. Unlike you, I am not a perfect typist at all hours of the day. You're saying you misspelled "so" as "more"? What's apparent is you don't know what you're talking about. You just love being an antagonistic jerk. You bring discredit upon your craft. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: wrote in message ... Considered by AFS-420 and AVN-100, not to mention common sense. Considered by AFS-420 and AVN-100 perhaps, but not by anyone with common sense. That comment says legions about you. Now, if only the FAA would recognize your talent, you would be Administrator tomorrow. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Greg Esres" wrote in message news I don't have the enroute charts for this area, but from my national map, it looks as if V191 and V217 pass through both TAAs at AIG. Yes? As for BCK, V246 would seem to be in the straight-in sector of the TAA, and V345 might be in both base sectors. Yes, but that's not the issue. None of the IAFs are on airways. That's not the issue, either. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Greg Esres wrote: None of the IAFs are on airways. Steven, get over it. g The dispute has brought forth knowledge, just like it's supposed to, and both Airperson and you have contributed. Accept a pat on the back and let's move on. ;-) Greg, it's his nature to be argumentative. What he has constructively provided to this thread escapes me. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Greg Esres" wrote in message ... Steven, get over it. g The dispute has brought forth knowledge, just like it's supposed to, and both Airperson and you have contributed. Accept a pat on the back and let's move on. ;-) If you don't want your questions answered, don't ask them. If there was a way to kick you out of the "room" that would be the most positive contribution to the forum. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RNAV approaches | Kevin Chandler | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | September 18th 03 06:00 PM |
"Best forward speed" approaches | Ben Jackson | Instrument Flight Rules | 13 | September 5th 03 03:25 PM |
Logging instrument approaches | Slav Inger | Instrument Flight Rules | 33 | July 27th 03 11:00 PM |
Suppose We Really Do Have Only GPS Approaches | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | July 20th 03 05:10 PM |
Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | July 18th 03 01:43 PM |