Help interpreting an approach chart (KCCR LDA Rwy 19R)

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Bee" wrote in message ...

JOANS is identified by the SGD 074 and the CCR 004. From there inbound
the course is prescribed by the locaizer.



Incorrect. JOANS is identified on this IAP in two ways; the SGD 074R and
the LOC, the LOC and CCR 8.1 DME. The CCR 004R is not depicted.

Well, I use Jeppesen charts an the CCR 004 radial is on there. It was
ommitted from the NACO chart in error and will be correct on the 12/20
chart cycle.


KANAN is the five letter identifier for the NDB, but you knew that.



Of course I did. Did you? You wrote, "...from COLLI it is NDB to KANAN."
So what's the length of that NDB to KANAN segment?

NDB navigation.



"No doubt there are serveral assition suitable non-radar routes
available?"

Oh really, where would we find those?



IFR enroute low altitude charts L-2 and L-3.



The IAP has to begin without radar at either REJOY or COLLI. Now, if you
mean something else is "suitable," as opposed to meeting the requirements
of FAA directives, including 7110.65R, then "suitable" would equal "roll
your own.



Incorrect. Without radar an appropriate nonradar route to an IAF must be
assigned. From the northeast, V6 to REJOY is the way to go. From the south
V6 to COLLI and then direct to KANAN is fine, but so is any other route to
KANAN from another navaid that remains within navaid altitude and distance
limitations. For example, traffic from the northwest could be assigned V108
to SGD and then direct to KANAN. The distance between SGD and KANAN is 18
miles, well within limits.

The limit on the LOM is 15 miles, so any airway fix within 15 miles of KANAN
can provide a usable route. At and below 12,000 MSL an L or H class VOR is
good for 40 miles and a T class VOR is good for 25 miles. So any direct
route to KANAN from an L or H class VOR within 55 miles of it is within
limits, and any direct route to KANAN from a T class VOR within 40 miles of
it is within limits, assuming there are no service limitations on the
affected radials. If you examine the charts and use a bit of imagination
you will no doubt find several additional suitable non-radar routes.


http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...4/atc0401.html

http://skyvector.com/

http://www.airnav.com/depart?http://...5320LDA19R.PDF

John Godwin wrote:

Bee wrote in :


JOANS is identified by the SGD 074 and the CCR 004. From there
inbound the course is prescribed by the locaizer.


Where is it charted that JOANS is defined by the CCR 004?

On the Jeppesen chart for this IAP. NACO screwed up and will correct it
on the 12/20 chart cycle.

Ron Natalie wrote:

Bee wrote:

COLLI and REJOY via JOANS are the only authorized non-radar
transitions to this AIP.


REJOY isn't a transition, it's an IAF. You can't to from COLLI to
JOANS (if that is what you are attempting to say). The COLLI
transition sends you to the KANAN (LOM)

From the north it is VOR to LOC, from COLLI it is NDB to KANAN.


WHAT? You can start at REJOY or you can start at KANAN.
You can't start at the CONCORD VOR and joint he localizer.

You didn't understand me or I didn't make it clear. The transition from
the north begins at REJOY, then via JOANS and the LOC NoPT.

From the south it charts at COLLI feeder fix and proceeds via NDB
navigation to KANAN.

Steve is technically correct that the IAP could begin at KANAN NDB, but
I doubt NorCal would ever do that. The only feasible routing would be
V-108 from the west to CCR, then direct KANAN. That would require ADF
equipment just as would the feeder route from COLLI. ADF isn't required
for this procedure, so for the non-ADF aircraft the only non-radar entry
is viar REJOY.

John Godwin wrote:

Bee wrote in :


Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

JOANS intersection IS identified in that manner, the 074 radial
of SGD. No similar line is drawn from CCR because no CCR radial
is used to define JOANS on this IAP.

Incorrect.


No, Steven is correct. The CCR VOR-DME is NOT on the LDA Localizer.
The DME portion, however, may be used to define JOANS at 8.1 DME (in
lieu of the 074 SGD radial).

You got to jet Jepps, that have less errors than NACO charts.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"John Godwin" wrote in message
...

No, Steven is correct. The CCR VOR-DME is NOT on the LDA Localizer.
The DME portion, however, may be used to define JOANS at 8.1 DME (in
lieu of the 074 SGD radial).



True, but you're going to be using the SGD 074R anyway if you're using the
REJOY IAF. Using CCR DME to also define JOANS doesn't seem particularly
useful. DME from SGD would be better as it would provide distance and time
to JOANS.


The legal method of identifying JOANNS is the SGD 074 and the CCR 006.
The DME is charted but useless for fix identification because of the
angle. Some piloting/interpretive skills are presumed by the FAA designers.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Bee" wrote in message ...

JOANS intersection IS identified in that manner, the 074 radial of SGD.
No similar line is drawn from CCR because no CCR radial is used to define
JOANS on this IAP.


Incorrect.



How so?



NACO failed to properly chart the JOANS 8260-2. As a result of this
thread that was brought to the attention of AVN, and NACO has been
directed to correct the chart.

Sam Spade wrote:
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Bee" wrote in message
...

JOANS intersection IS identified in that manner, the 074 radial of SGD.
No similar line is drawn from CCR because no CCR radial is used to
define
JOANS on this IAP.


Incorrect.



How so?



NACO failed to properly chart the JOANS 8260-2. As a result of this
thread that was brought to the attention of AVN, and NACO has been
directed to correct the chart.

As a result of this newsgroup, the FAA has issued the following NPRM:

FAA NPRM
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING (NPRM)
Part 69, Section 007 (a) 1(c)

Section I - No pilot or pilots, or person or persons
acting on the direction or suggestion or supervision
of a pilot or pilots may try, or attempt to try or
make, or make attempt to try to comprehend or
understand any or all, in whole or in part of the
herein mentioned Aviation Regulations, except as
authorized by the Administrator or an agent appointed
by, or inspected by, the Administrator.

Section II - If a pilot, or group of associate pilots
becomes aware of, or realizes, or detects, or
discovers, or finds that he or she, or they, are or
have been beginning to understand the Aviation
Regulations, they must immediately, within three (3)
days notify, in writing, the Administrator.

Section III - Upon receipt of the above-mentioned
notice of impending comprehension, the Administrator
shall immediately rewrite the Aviation Regulations in
such a manner as to eliminate any further
comprehension hazards.

Section IV - The Administrator may, at his or her
discretion, require the offending pilot or pilots to
attend remedial instruction in Aviation Regulations
until such time that the pilot is too confused to be
capable of understanding anything.

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

Well, I use Jeppesen charts an the CCR 004 radial is on there. It was
ommitted from the NACO chart in error and will be correct on the 12/20
chart cycle.


It was the NACO chart that was referenced in the OP. Omitting it seems like
a good idea, what purpose does it serve?



NDB navigation.


What about it?

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

The legal method of identifying JOANNS is the SGD 074 and the CCR 006. The
DME is charted but useless for fix identification because of the angle.
Some piloting/interpretive skills are presumed by the FAA designers.


JOANS is identified by the intersection of the SGD 074R and the LOC.

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...

Steve is technically correct that the IAP could begin at KANAN NDB, but I
doubt NorCal would ever do that.


It COULD begin at KANAN? KANAN is an IAF, do you know what an IAF is?



The only feasible routing would be V-108
from the west to CCR, then direct KANAN. That would require ADF equipment
just as would the feeder route from COLLI. ADF isn't required for this
procedure, so for the non-ADF aircraft the only non-radar entry is viar
REJOY.


There are several feasible routes, as I explained in an earlier message.