Extra Hold Depicted on Plate?

We are getting a brand new ILS 26 at KANE and I just downloaded the plate. The
miss is what I expected to see and is a hold at the GEP "Gopher" VOR a few miles
to the west. But there is also a hold depicted at the PNM NDB, which is a long
ways away. That hold is not mentioned on the plate.

I am wondering why it is there. My only guess is that it might be an alternate
hold that ATC could assign if things were busy at GEP. GEP is the FAF for at
least two other approaches and is on at least one STAR into KMSP.

Anyone?

Mitty wrote:
We are getting a brand new ILS 26 at KANE and I just downloaded the
plate. The miss is what I expected to see and is a hold at the GEP
"Gopher" VOR a few miles to the west. But there is also a hold depicted
at the PNM NDB, which is a long ways away. That hold is not mentioned
on the plate.

I am wondering why it is there. My only guess is that it might be an
alternate hold that ATC could assign if things were busy at GEP. GEP is
the FAF for at least two other approaches and is on at least one STAR
into KMSP.

Anyone?


Where the procedure has two missed approach procedures (only the primary
one is charted) there is a fairly recent policy change to chart the
holding pattern at the end of the second/alternate missed approach
procedure.

Jeppesen lables them as such. I have no idea whether NACO does. They
certainly didn't with this one.

I'll get ahold of the Jepp chart soon and let you know.

On 1/9/2007 6:13 PM, Sam Spade wrote the following:
Mitty wrote:
We are getting a brand new ILS 26 at KANE and I just downloaded the
plate. The miss is what I expected to see and is a hold at the GEP
"Gopher" VOR a few miles to the west. But there is also a hold
depicted at the PNM NDB, which is a long ways away. That hold is not
mentioned on the plate.

I am wondering why it is there. My only guess is that it might be an
alternate hold that ATC could assign if things were busy at GEP. GEP
is the FAF for at least two other approaches and is on at least one
STAR into KMSP.

Anyone?


Where the procedure has two missed approach procedures (only the primary
one is charted) there is a fairly recent policy change to chart the
holding pattern at the end of the second/alternate missed approach
procedure.

Jeppesen lables them as such. I have no idea whether NACO does. They
certainly didn't with this one.

I'll get ahold of the Jepp chart soon and let you know.

That's probably it then. The charted hold at GEP is at 2700, so having someone
there would make both the KANE VOR 9 and the KMIC VOR-A unusable. PNM is a
pretty good haul but it is out in the weeds, trafficwise.

Mitty wrote:
ahold of the Jepp chart soon and let you know.


That's probably it then. The charted hold at GEP is at 2700, so having
someone there would make both the KANE VOR 9 and the KMIC VOR-A
unusable. PNM is a pretty good haul but it is out in the weeds,
trafficwise.

Here is the source document for the procedu

http://tinyurl.com/y39o4b

On 1/10/2007 5:13 AM, Sam Spade wrote the following:

Here is the source document for the procedu

http://tinyurl.com/y39o4b

Slick. Where does one find those pages?

& the more I look at it, the screwier it seems to be. First, there is no ADF
requirement on the plate, so I guess ATC would have to ask before assigning the
alternate miss. Then, there is little hope of being able to actually navigate
to the NDB without getting vectors (or having a GPS) due to the 30 mile distance
and the fact that you are starting from 200 feet AGL.

And ... there is a perfectly good NDB at CBG which is 5 miles closer and _not_
on an airway as is the PNM NDB. So now I wonder why we aren't going there? ...

All that being said, it is mostly irrelevant to real operations anyway because
MSP Approach assigns an initial heading and altitude for the miss before you get
handed off and then provides vectors when you check back in.

Mitty wrote:


On 1/10/2007 5:13 AM, Sam Spade wrote the following:


Here is the source document for the procedu

http://tinyurl.com/y39o4b


Slick. Where does one find those pages?

The FAA posts them on their IAP coordination web site during
coordination. Sometimes they forget to remove them after coordination
is completed. That is the case with this one.

http://www.avn.faa.gov/acifp.asp

Here is the Jepp chart:

http://tinyurl.com/y4q777

Note Jepp is more descriptive about the "dangling NDB."

So, I guess the astute pilot would infer "ADF Required" when flight
planning because it is unkown when the unkown alternative missed
approach might be assigned.

The NACO chart user wouldn't know the NDB hold is for an alternate
missed approach, though.

Goofy or what?

Looks like this is another of those ILS or LOC/DME procedures. Is
there no requirement for an outer marker or equivalent these days?
Without DME there is no way to check the glideslope over BOKYA.


Sam Spade wrote:
Here is the Jepp chart:

http://tinyurl.com/y4q777

Note Jepp is more descriptive about the "dangling NDB."

So, I guess the astute pilot would infer "ADF Required" when flight
planning because it is unkown when the unkown alternative missed
approach might be assigned.

The NACO chart user wouldn't know the NDB hold is for an alternate
missed approach, though.

Goofy or what?

wrote:

Looks like this is another of those ILS or LOC/DME procedures. Is
there no requirement for an outer marker or equivalent these days?
Without DME there is no way to check the glideslope over BOKYA.

The FAA decided several years ago that a G/S check is not required.