Established on the approach - Checkride question

It's a good example of the terrible, disfunctional disonnect within
the FAA between Flight Standards and Air Traffic Service.

I was afraid you'd say something like that. ;-)

I suppose the easiest thing to defend to an examiner is to say 200
knots for 1 minute equates to 6 nm.

BTW, an article I read a while back said that "IAP course-reversal
holds will always be limited to 200 knots to preserve minimums in
existing canyon IAPs".

However, the AIM still says that normal holding speeds apply to these
hold-in-lieus.

Greg Esres wrote:

It's a good example of the terrible, disfunctional disonnect within
the FAA between Flight Standards and Air Traffic Service.

I was afraid you'd say something like that. ;-)

I suppose the easiest thing to defend to an examiner is to say 200
knots for 1 minute equates to 6 nm.

BTW, an article I read a while back said that "IAP course-reversal
holds will always be limited to 200 knots to preserve minimums in
existing canyon IAPs".

However, the AIM still says that normal holding speeds apply to these
hold-in-lieus.

....which is 200 knots, 6,000 and below. It was decided that 230 works
above 6,000 for mountain-bowl airports; which, of course, requires
templates larger than P4.

How would you know when you're at the 10nm circle? Not sure, but I'll throw
this in for debate: lay your plotter's compass rose on KITSAP and line up
the 203 bearing. Read the radial off the compass rose that points to the
circle's edge. It looks like 180 might do it. Fly the final approach
course at 2000' until you intercept the 180 bearing from KITSAP and you're
at the 10nm ring.

Some might say that what's outside the circle is not to scale. But the
fact that there's no squiggly line in front of KITSAP says to me that it is
to scale.

Personally, this is the best reason to pick up that Garmin 295 or 196. You
can't use it for the approach, but you can use it for situational awareness
and identifying certain fixes that would otherwise be allusive.

Kobra
PP-SEL IA
"endre" wrote in message
om...
I did my instrument checkride the other day and passed...

Question for this group.

I was being radar vectored for the SHN NDB approach. I was cleared in
the following way: Cessna 61786 14 miles from NDB descend and maintain
2000 until established.

The problem: I was outside the 10 mile ring on the plate, established
on the inbound course, no way to tell when I would be inside 10 mile.
However, I would need to descend to 1400 before the NDB to have a
chance to descend to MDA of 900.

What would you all do?

Endre

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
news

This is a difficult question when the ATC guy doesn't understand the
approach. Like the case I mentioned at my own airport, ATC vectored
us at 2,500, but expected us to descend to 2,000 once on the
localizer, even though the chart didn't permit the descent.

My requests for "lower" were met with a bit of disdain when the
controller told me to fly the approach chart, which he *thought* said
2,000.


You're referring to the OLV LOC/DME RWY 18 approach. The controller was
right, the procedure does permit a descent to 2000 once on the localizer. I
posted a scan of this procedure to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation for the
benefit of the non-packrats among us.



Some of your suggested dialog makes me a little uncomfortable, because
it seems to lend itself to some miscommunication between ATC and the
pilot about who is providing terrain clearance. (This was the essence
of the TWA514 accident.)


The essence of the TWA 514 accident was a misunderstanding of the clearance
by the pilot.

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...

Yes, it is. Still, sometimes we get "until established on the
localizer", but it has the same meaning as "established on the
approach". ATC just doesn't understand the difference.


Assuming that you're being vectored to a localizer, what is the difference?

Assuming that you're being vectored to a localizer, what is the
difference?

Because the localizer extends out *much* further than does the
intermediate segment.

The controller was right, the procedure does permit a descent to
2000 once on the localizer.

Wrong. There is no intermediate segment. The approach begins at
MANDD, period.

I've already discussed this approach with the Flight Procedures folk,
who all agree that the chart doesn't permit a descent until you get on
a black line, which starts at the FAF.

How could you conceivably think otherwise?

The controller has already admitted he was wrong; after making a lot
of phone calls, he found the guy that designed the approach.

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...

Because the localizer extends out *much* further than does the
intermediate segment.


So what?

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

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...

Because the localizer extends out *much* further than does the
intermediate segment.


So what?

I think his point was just becuase you are on the localizer doesn't
mean you're on the published approach (and allowed to descend). Is ATC prohibited form
vectoring you farther out on the localizer than the approach begins?

"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...

OLV Loc 18.

It's been replaced now by an ILS, so it's no longer an issue.

The approach started at the FAF. No intermediate or initial segment.


You misunderstood that approach. I have a US Terminal Procedures book SC-4
dated 26 Feb 1998, I scanned and posted a copy of this procedure to
alt.binaries.pictures.aviation so you can review it. ATC cleared you to
2500 until established on the localizer because that's the MVA in that area.
Once you were cleared for the approach and had joined the localizer you were
to descend in accordance with FAR 91.175(i) to the 2000 minimum altitude
until MANDD, upon reaching MANDD you descend to the MDA, 800 feet. See the
profile view.