Thread: Legal or not?
View Single Post
  #24  
Old August 31st 06, 04:56 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
JPH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Legal or not?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Brad" wrote in message
ups.com...

Nope, you're correct, its just a feeder route to the IAF. If MKP was
an intersection, you'd see MKP INT on the profile and plan view. The
076 line and arrow would extend all the way to the fix, rather than
just pointing towards the fix as the feeder route does. Distance and
angle did not meet the terps requirement to serve as a radial to
identify it as a intersection fix.



Why would the feeder route need to do any more than that? All the ADF does
on this approach is allow the pilot to navigate to the localizer. The
feeder route does that and so does a radar vector.


The feeder route from AGC takes the aircraft to the localizer, but the
intersection of that feeder route and loc does not provide enough
divergence to meet criteria for holding in lieu of PT (minimum 45
degrees divergence), so you can't do a course reversal without the NDB
(or suitable substitute) being operational. The feeder from NESTO is NA
without the NDB. It does appear that the planview note should read
"RADAR or DME required" since radar vectors from approach control to
intercept the final would work as long as they had coverage at suitable
altitudes.

JPH