Thanks - I will have to look into that later - it is the best answer I have
seen yet.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Richard Hertz" wrote in message
et...

Right, but why should that force the odd differences in the final
segments
of the approaches?
e.g. - the "Fly visual 2.5 nm" on the LOC/DME 19 and the 1600 and 2
(loc/dme
19) vs the 1580 and 1 1/4 minima (loc 19 with dme)?

I suppose there is no good reason for the differences (the different
minima
and MAPs)


I'm not a TERPS expert, I'm pretty much just guessing. There is higher
terrain to the south, southwest, and west of KRUT. Climbing to 2600 via
the
RUT VOR/DME 221 radial allows you to avoid these rocks until you're above
them. Without the positive course guidance provided by RUT VOR/DME you're
left with climb gradient requirements that can't be met with the MAP at
I-RUT 1.9 DME so the MAP must be pushed back to 3.4 DME.