![]() |
| 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 |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:13:18 -0500, J Haggerty
wrote: LPV's are actually built to a TCH. If the airport has an ILS installed, they'll aim for the same TCH. If they don't have ILS, they'll select a TCH based on the wheel height group, which is based on the type of aircraft expected at the runway. Wheel height groups can be found at the following link, on page 19 of 70. The smaller the aircraft, the lower the TCH requirement, which would make the touchdown point closer to the threshold. http://av-info.faa.gov/terps/Directi...es/8260.50.pdf The tables in AC 150-5300-13 (pages 48/49 of 57) at http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/f3e8f0f55c4ebcf986256e290071fd07/$FILE/AC150-5300-13chg6.pdf give an idea of runway lengths required. 3058' doesn't meet the criteria for LPV, so to answer your question, no LPV (unless criteria changes). Great references, thanks. I agree with your assessment - I don't think 3ck can expect to benefit from one of these approaches anytime soon. Too bad, as I would have liked the improved minimums... Not that I would have used them much, but the piece of mind of having an extra few hundred feet vs an alternate is nice. -Nathan |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|