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 |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
VOR approach SMO
"B" wrote in message ...
Dave Butler wrote: karl gruber wrote: I have never used NACO charts, ever. From the NACO chart I downloaded, there are four identical asterisks. It is very easy to read the chart as I did, as one of the asterisk points to crossing at the lower altitude. Another poster read it that way as well. The Jeppesen charts show no such ambiguity. I agree, Karl. With the benefit of all this discussion and sitting comfortably at my workstation, the chart is unambiguous. If I were prepping the approach while trying to fly the airplane (which *does* happen sometimes) I'm not sure I couldn't have been similarly misled. I think NACO could find a better way to convey the correct information. DB This was brought to the FAA's attention. The asterisk has no business being associated with the 1120 minimum altitude. That does suggest the minimum altitude is conditional. Here is the FAA response: "They are going to remove the asterisk by the stepdown fix altitude and leave it at the fix and with the minimums line. Don't know where they got it, but they will check their source to see where it came from." If this is the case, this whole discussion has produced 'A Good Thing' (tm). Thanks to all. -- Doug Semler a.a. #705, BAAWA. EAC Guardian of the Horn of the IPU (pbuhh). The answer is 42; DNRC o- Gur Hfrarg unf orpbzr fb shyy bs penc gurfr qnlf, abbar rira erpbtavmrf fvzcyr guvatf yvxr ebg13 nalzber. Fnq, vfa'g vg? |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
VOR approach SMO
On Jul 23, 12:39 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
However, while taxiing back, I noticed a Gulf Stream land right on the numbers. There is no way you can tell me he properly flew the approach and was able to touch on the numbers. After reading the 123 messages in this thread, I am convinced the Gulfstream pilot had CFII Gruber for Instrument flight training In all seriousness, when I first looked at the chart, I read it correctly, but after examining the multiple astericks, I can now see how it's possible that this could be confusing. This is just the sort of example of how the ASRS is useful in identifying safety issues relating to charting. I wonder if this sort of thing was ever reported? Nevertheless, I glad to hear someone got NACO charting involved. |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
VOR approach SMO
Brad wrote:
On Jul 23, 12:39 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote: However, while taxiing back, I noticed a Gulf Stream land right on the numbers. There is no way you can tell me he properly flew the approach and was able to touch on the numbers. After reading the 123 messages in this thread, I am convinced the Gulfstream pilot had CFII Gruber for Instrument flight training In all seriousness, when I first looked at the chart, I read it correctly, but after examining the multiple astericks, I can now see how it's possible that this could be confusing. This is just the sort of example of how the ASRS is useful in identifying safety issues relating to charting. I wonder if this sort of thing was ever reported? Nevertheless, I glad to hear someone got NACO charting involved. Yes, it has recently been reported. You missed one of the 123 messages. ;-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VOR approach SMO | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 124 | August 3rd 07 02:17 AM |
first approach in IMC | G. Sylvester | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | July 12th 05 02:14 AM |
No FAF on an ILS approach...? | John Harper | Instrument Flight Rules | 7 | December 24th 03 03:54 AM |
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 45 | November 20th 03 05:20 AM |
Brief an approach | Ditch | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | October 14th 03 12:10 AM |