Search results

Actually, I meant -- why do you need the stepdown fix if you want a lower MDA -- but you answered it anyway, so thanks. It's most likely the stacks at the plant -- and that also explains why the first segment of the final approach is at a more shallow angle -- to clear the obstacles. So next...

Thanks for the IFP Gateway link...that's cool. Regarding the stepdown fix, I'm confused. Why is it necessary to get an MDA lower than 4800? I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to TERPS and the design of procedures. I do have a copy of TERPS but wouldn't know where to look for something like that.

Hmmm, so (1) how do you know that (no step down reqd)? I'm not questioning your answer, but I'd like to know more...I assume they don't just thrown in a step down fix just for grins. And (2) how do you know that? Where do you look to see scheduled revisions? And is there a sneak preview...

I think you raise a couple of questions which could perhaps be explained by someone who knows a lot about TERPS and the design of these approaches. BTW, it's worth reading the first few pages of AC120-108 if you haven't. There's not too much bureaucratic non-sense to wade through. Anyway, I...

Well, I think this gets into a very subjective topic. I won't argue with your viewpoint, but here's mine. With a 90 kt ground speed on this approach the descent rate to trace a straight line from HIKLO to JAMID is 522 fpm. That increases to 597 fpm after JAMID. See the image of a typical VSI...

Yes, that's the other way the FAA says you can fly this approach. Instead of having a change of descent angle at JAMID, delay the start of descent (about 1/2 NM in this case) so that the entire descent is at the VDA of 3.75 degrees. You still cross JAMID at the proper altitude, but a change in...

I agree that your math is correct.

So, can you run that again, and stop the simulator at about 1/2 NM before RW20? Just set the airspeed to zero...can you do that with xplane? Once it's stopped then bump the a/c altitude up by 80 or 100 feet and see what happens to the vertical deviation diamond? I was able to do that with the...

You've got it backwards. The dot is exactly like the CDI needle on an ILS approach. The middle line is you and when the needle goes low, you increase descent rate to catch it. No, I don't believe the G1000 will do that. It will track the shallower descent angle from HIKLO to JAMID, and then...

Well, there's a non-instrument rated pilot flying, trying to follow the VDI and that's going to be far from ideal. The video doesn't provide us with a constant view of the VDI, so we don't know what it's doing most of the time. It might have already been at or close to the bottom as they...

Centering the dot would indeed keep you on the 3.75 degree slope, and if the stack height we are assuming (100 AGL) is correct it would be at 4261 MSL (give or take a couple feet). The 3.75 degree slope would clear the tower by about 93 feet by my calculations. That's not much but it would...

I don't really know how G1000 displays this, but his suggestion that it just "snaps a chalk line" from one point to the next makes sense. That would result in the published 3.75 degree descent angle. I'm not sure what else it might do. With the chalk line in space, it would be the equivalent of...

Just found this article from 2016, when the potato plant stacks were installed. Pilots were complaining about it then, and the FAA was trying to get the airport relocated. Don't know what ever happened with the relocation effort...

My apologies...I figure that most would not be interested. Here's the count as I have it -- facts only and ignoring opinions: 1) Tower was not properly painted or lit. Correct (if we believe him that the light was not connected) 2) Light should have been high intensity white strobe. False. An...

Regarding Gryder, after a lot of review and analysis, I've concluded that of the four main points he makes about this accident, three are incorrect. I'll spare you the details and plan to send him a letter describing the errors he made. However, highlighting the FAA's inability to enforce...

It's worse than that. He doesn't even read the documents he claims the FAA is violating. AC120-108 specifically describes (rare) cases where the visual descent angle (VDA) may be calculated from a step-down fix (e.g. JAMID) instead of the FAF (e.g. HIKLO), and that the descent angle will...

I'm trying to learn more about how the FAA deals with these problems. At t ime code 32:08 in the Gryder video, he shows some sort of FAA obstacle review (attached below) which lists obstacles violating the "approach surface area" for the RNAV 20 approach. I cannot find this document anywhere on...

I like the Jeppesen depiction a lot better if the goal is a constant rate descent....however.... If you trace the 40' TCH backwards at 3.75 degree angle to the stack (2632 feet) that puts you at 4364 MSL. The stack is supposedly 100 AGL (if you believe the FAA data) and the ground is 18 ft...

There's this, with lots more info and speculations: http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2022/04/cessna-208b-grand-caravan-n928jp-fatal.html

If smoke was obscuring the stack, it would have been a "cloud" and would likely have obscured the runway environment...flying through it would not be allowed.