Search results

I have a question for anyone. I brought up the fact that KHTH does not have takeoff minimums because of terrain. It does have a VCOA which requires circle-climbing the airport some 4,000 feet to 8,300, then proceed to MVA VOR via the MVA R-251 to MVA at 11,500. (attached is the original FAA...

That is an FAA printing error. "Std" is missing.

Yes. I see source on occasion. More significant, I am conversant in Jeppesen charts, not FAA charts. Jeppesen provides standard takeoff minimums as a value added service. The pilot who uses FAA charts has to be conversant with 91.175 (f)(2), which complements the DCS takeoff minimums. The...

There is an FDC NOTAM on IFR takeoff minimums for that airport.

That’s USAF, not FAA. It’s not a good example. It’s obvious that diverse departures are not possible at that location. And, yes, the 8260-15 has to state the takeoff minimums even if they are standard. (caveat: I don’t know what regulations or forms the military uses.)

Here is the 8260.15A for KHTH. It's about terrain and a gravel runway.

Jepp doesn't say "NA ATC" for 15/33. The FAA does. But, it is because it is a turf runway. Jepp figured that out. They part company with the FAA when they see an obvious error.

Runway 13-33 is NA because it is not paved. Runway 10-28 is VCOA only, which means the VCOA criteria fit, but instrument departure criteria did not. So, you are responsible for your obstacle clearance and you should remain within 3 s.m. until leaving 4,200. No. It wouldn't have to have...

Yes, provided there are published takeoff minimums for the runway. KHTH is an interesting case study.

NFDC doesn't know about it: SOLBERG-HUNTERDON (faa.gov)

That's an old takeoff minimums. It's pre-VCOA because there is no statement to notify ATC. In any case, all four runways are diverse IFR departures. 3 of the 4 are nominal 200 feet per nm. Runway 31 is 405 feet per nm to 1,400 to use standard takeoff minimums. The alternative of 1300 and 2...

I am sure the USAF and FAA have several, if not many, regulatory and policy differences.

What is the opposite in this case?

Could we call it an airways legend?

It's still in TERPs: Military IFPs that deviate from standards because of operational necessity, and in which an equivalent level of safety is not achieved, must be marked “NOT FOR CIVIL USE.”

Don't know. What I do know is that a lot of civilian airplanes fly into and out of Edwards AFB. You have to be on a contract to do it. I did it in the early 1960s for JPL. If I were going there today, I could certainly use the ILS to Runway 23 if the weather required it. I couldn't use it...

Just guessing. Not Part 97 rather some USAF regulation.

Using that logic, on an IAP that has A and B only, can a Category C airplane fly it if the pilot doesn't exceed 120 knots, IAS?

I believe we are in agreement.

Yes, you are correct. If only takeoff minimums are established for a given runway, without either a prescribed track or climb gradient, that runway does not have a ODP. Having said that, nonetheless even with a diverse departure runway, you cannot turn below 400, afe. So, is that a procedure?