Again, I am not advocating "dive and drive" - my point was that staying
above the published altitudes was questionable.

wrote in message
...


Tim J wrote:

I was just trying to point out the obstacle clearances that the approach
charts provide.

I would like to see an accident report that found that the approach
chart
was incorrect and caused a crash. Does anyone have an example?

I think rather it is the (improper) execution of the approach that is
the
cause of the supposed huge set of examples of crashes. If you all find
it
easier to make up your own descent profiles, go right ahead. I will not
try
to convince you otherwise. I will continue to fly them as published.

What makes you think "as published" means dive and drive any more than it
means
constant angle or constant rate?