Changed missed approach gps 30 at klru. looking for old one

TheGolfPilot

TheGolfPilot

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 16, 2015
Messages
787
Location
Modesto, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Golfpilot
When I was doing my instrument checkride I was given the GPS approach to rwy 30 at klru. the missed approach was something along the lines of flying at 5000' (like 400 agl) to a waypoint about 5~ miles away. Anyway I refused to do it. It didn't seem safe, it didn't seem right.
Anyway I was just looking for that missed approach and It appears it has been drastically changed. Is there anybody on here who may have a copy of that approach when it had that goofball missed?
 
mscard88 said:
400' agl for 5 miles for a MA procedure? That, if true, is unbelievable. Current approach plate here. A lot of terrain to be tooling around IMC at 400' agl on a missed IMO.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1702/00869R30.PDF
Click to expand...
hence the reason I told the examiner I wasn't comfortable with it, we flew the ILS missed instead. Clearly something wasn't right because it has changed.
That was 5~ years ago
I guess I am looking for the approach plate from May 2012
 
TheGolfPilot said:
hence the reason I told the examiner I wasn't comfortable with it, we flew the ILS missed instead. Clearly something wasn't right because it has changed.
That was 6~ years ago
Click to expand...

How did the examiner feel about it? Man I wish I could see that old approach too. Can't imagine that the FAA TERPs shop nor Flight Check would design that and then approve it via Flight Check.
 
mscard88 said:
How did the examiner feel about it? Man I wish I could see that old approach too. Can't imagine that the FAA TERPs shop nor Flight Check would design that and then approve it via Flight Check.
Click to expand...
that is why I am looking for it!
 
I have a GPS Rwy 30 Approach from June of 2000, but it looks completely different.
 

Attachments

  • LRU GPS Rwy 30.png
    LRU GPS Rwy 30.png
    487.2 KB · Views: 27
TheGolfPilot said:
When I was doing my instrument checkride I was given the GPS approach to rwy 30 at klru. the missed approach was something along the lines of flying at 5000' (like 400 agl) to a waypoint about 5~ miles away. Anyway I refused to do it. It didn't seem safe, it didn't seem right.
Anyway I was just looking for that missed approach and It appears it has been drastically changed. Is there anybody on here who may have a copy of that approach when it had that goofball missed?
Click to expand...
I have the Jepp chart from November, 2014. It doesn't have any such restriction. Criteria doesn't permit a level-off with less than 2,000 feet of obstacle clearance in a designated mountainous area. Attached is that chart.
 

Attachments

  • KLRU RNAV 30 Amendment 1.jpg
    KLRU RNAV 30 Amendment 1.jpg
    333.2 KB · Views: 18
Attached is the original.
 

Attachments

  • KLRU RNAV 30 Original.pdf
    289.2 KB · Views: 43
Palmpilot said:
I have a GPS Rwy 30 Approach from June of 2000, but it looks completely different.
Click to expand...

That's probably the one they were flying. MDA 4849 (399' AGL) with the MA clibing to 5100' MSL then a left climbing turn to MSL to the holding fix. So initialy you'd be around 260' climbing to 5100' but then you start your turn to the holding fix, continuing the climb to 6400'. So you shouldn't be at that low altitude you're concerned about long as you're continuing the turn.

That means if you did it in 2012 you were using an outdated chart. If that's the case I'm surprised the DPE didn't question that.
 
mscard88 said:
That's probably the one they were flying. MDA 4849 (399' AGL) with the MA clibing to 5100' MSL then a left climbing turn to MSL to the holding fix. So initialy you'd be around 260' climbing to 5100' but then you start your turn to the holding fix, continuing the climb to 6400'. So you shouldn't be at that low altitude you're concerned about long as you're continuing the turn.

That means if you did it in 2012 you were using an outdated chart. If that's the case I'm surprised the DPE didn't question that.
Click to expand...
The original was valid until November, 2014. In any case there was no intent in the missed approach instructions to level off at 5,100. 5,100 is the climbing altitude at which the turn should commence. The FAA understands, though, that such text has been misunderstood by some. So, today, the would place the final altitude first. Something like "Climb to 9,000, turn left direct COSES leaving 5,100."
 
yes, that original is the one!
The examiner even agreed with me that it is 5100' to FIPAK. Nobody, but the person who wrote it, would interpret that missed approach in any other way. 5100' via 304 to FIPAK (which you MUST fly over) The only instruction to climb higher than 5100' requires you to do so in a climbing left turn. You can't do a climbing left turn to 9000' and cross directly over FIPAK

Thank you a ton aterpster for providing that! I have been telling people about that missed and everyone calls me crazy
 
Last edited:
I dunno about being misunderstood. "Climb to 5100 via 304 course to FIPAK WP THEN climbing left turn to 9000 direct COSES WP and hold" is pretty clear. I capitalized, boldened and underlined then. It's wrong, but that is exactly what it said. There have been other controversies with that approach.
 
luvflyin said:
I dunno about being misunderstood. "Climb to 5100 via 304 course to FIPAK WP THEN climbing left turn to 9000 direct COSES WP and hold" is pretty clear. I capitalized, boldened and underlined then. It's wrong, but that is exactly what it said. There have been other controversies with that approach.
Click to expand...
It was never intended for you to level off. It means climb to 9,000, when leaving 5,100 then turn left to COSES. You and your DPE indeed misunderstood it if you leveled off.
 
This is the policy that Flight Standards provides to approach designers about the use of "and" and "then" in missed approach text:

To standardize and clarify altitudes and the meaning of “and” or “then” when used as connecting words between segments of the missed approach, “and” means a continuous climb to the stated altitude; “then” means the altitude condition must be reached at the point prior to the connecting word “then”, and either is maintained through the remaining missed approach or a second altitude will be stated. (FAA Order 9260.19G)
 
aterpster said:
This is the policy that Flight Standards provides to approach designers about the use of "and" and "then" in missed approach text:

To standardize and clarify altitudes and the meaning of “and” or “then” when used as connecting words between segments of the missed approach, “and” means a continuous climb to the stated altitude; “then” means the altitude condition must be reached at the point prior to the connecting word “then”, and either is maintained through the remaining missed approach or a second altitude will be stated. (FAA Order 9260.19G)
Click to expand...
which could quite logically be interpreted as they want you to level off at 5100 to FIPAK, since the "and" that proscribes a continuous climb is not used; "then" says the altitude must be reached "at" FIPAK, which is the point prior to the connecting word "then".

I think the FAA needs to hire some competent technical writers.
 
MauleSkinner said:
which could quite logically be interpreted as they want you to level off at 5100 to FIPAK, since the "and" that proscribes a continuous climb is not used; "then" says the altitude must be reached "at" FIPAK, which is the point prior to the connecting word "then".

I think the FAA needs to hire some competent technical writers.
Click to expand...
That area of the U.S. has had it share of crummy designers. As I said several messages ago the wording was poor.

I loaded a 2012 database into my G5000 trainer. Both the pertinent portion of the IAP's flight plan and the MFD preview screen. Jeppesen shows the 5100 as at or above.

G5000 2012 database.jpg G5000 MFD Preview.jpg
 
aterpster said:
It was never intended for you to level off. It means climb to 9,000, when leaving 5,100 then turn left to COSES. You and your DPE indeed misunderstood it if you leveled off.
Click to expand...

That means you never level off until you're at 9000', but when you cross COSES that's when you begin your turn.

You understand this now Golfpilot? I can see where you'd be confused though. Hope you understand it now.
 
mscard88 said:
That means you never level off until you're at 9000', but when you cross COSES that's when you begin your turn.

You understand this now Golfpilot? I can see where you'd be confused though. Hope you understand it now.
Click to expand...
You might look at the plate again...kinda tough to get to COSES without turning. ;)
 
Is there even one missed procedure out there that has a step climb?
Seems like they all have 'climb til reaching the holding altitude'.
 
aterpster said:
It was never intended for you to level off. It means climb to 9,000, when leaving 5,100 then turn left to COSES. You and your DPE indeed misunderstood it if you leveled off.
Click to expand...

My problem with that interpretation is that FIPAK was a cross over point. starting your turn at 5,100 you would never cross FIPAK and the plate is very clear that you must cross it. That is what the circle around the waypoint means. Then there is this part of the chart to further define that climb from 5,100 to 9,000 is supposed to happen AFTER crossing FIPAK. There is nothing that says you can climb past 5100 feet before reaching FIPAK, and FIPAK is a FlyOVER point so turning when reaching 5100' would be incorrect as well.

Your interpretation would read, climb to 9000 via 304, upon climbing through 5100 turn left direct COSES WP and hold. In which FIPAK shouldn't even exist

Or to go through FIPAK, "Climb through 5100' via 304 course to FIPAK wp then climbing left turn to 9000 direct coses wp and hold"

upload_2017-2-4_15-33-1.png

Had I flown the missed without addressing the issue, and did NOT level off, I would be telling you about how I once failed my instrument checkride.

At the end of the day the feds realized it was incorrect and fixed it. And I thank you for finding it for me!
 
Last edited:
TheGolfPilot said:
My problem with that interpretation is that FIPAK was a cross over point. starting your turn at 5,100 you would never cross FIPAK and the plate is very clear that you must cross it. That is what the circle around the waypoint means. Then there is this part of the chart to further define that climb from 5,100 to 9,000 is supposed to happen AFTER crossing FIPAK. There is nothing that says you can climb past 5100 feet before reaching FIPAK, and FIPAK is a FlyOVER point so turning when reaching 5100' would be incorrect as well.

Your interpretation would read, climb to 9000 via 304, upon climbing through 5100 turn left direct COSES WP and hold. In which FIPAK shouldn't even exist

Or to go through FIPAK, "Climb through 5100' via 304 course to FIPAK wp then climbing left turn to 9000 direct coses wp and hold"

View attachment 51243

Had I flown the missed without addressing the issue, and did NOT level off, I would be telling you about how I once failed my instrument checkride.

At the end of the day the feds realized it was incorrect and fixed it. And I thank you for finding it for me!
Click to expand...

I've worked with this stuff for many years. I can tell you that not all approaches are created equal. The current RNAV 30 at Las Cruces has serious issues as to entry to the approach. But, I don't want to go there.

Let's turn the clock back to early 2014 when the original was in effect. If I had been flying the approach my briefing to myself would have been, "Odd missed approach. They don't want me turning below 5,100 (probably an obstacle issue) and they don't want me turning prior to FIPAK." Further, let's say I am in a Citation CJ4, which has sterling climb performance. I miss at MDA because of weather and I set 9,000 in the altitude window. I am on auto-pilot in LNAV mode and vertical speed. I pass through 5,100' 1 mile prior to FIPAK. But, the auto-pilot continues to FIPAK to do a fly-over then turn. Perhaps I leaving 6,000 as the flyover is completed and the turn commences. No big deal. Case 2: I decide to do the missed approach 2 miles prior to the MAP and 500 feet above MDA. In this case I reach and level off at 9,000 well prior to FIPAK. The auto-flight would still take me to FIPAK and do the fly-over, followed by the turn, all level at 9,000.

Upon further reflection I see where the "specialists" who designed the original screwed up. 5,100 is a minimum turn altitude for obstacles on the west side of the missed approach area. It has to be stated for an approach that doesn't go to a FO waypoint. But, in this case, there was no need to state "5,100" because the FIPAK FO waypoint assured that altitude would be achieved prior to the turn. I am presuming the designers did properly evaluate the missed approach obstacle clearance surface (OIS). (The missed approach OIS assumes the pilot misses at MDA at the MAP and climbs not less than 200 feet per mile.)
 
Further comment on the 5,100 altitude: The current ILS Rwy 30 missed approach states in pertinent part, "Climb to 5100' then climbing LEFT turn to 9000'...."

For this approach the 5,100 turning altitude is simply a heading to an altitude to achieve prior to turning to the west. There is a reason for it in this case: terrain in the outer edge of the ILS OIS. I have the TERPs maps for the latest revision because my group got embroiled over the current designs with the flight procedures manager who has oversight of the central U.S. Attached is the missed approach OIS for the ILS 30.
 

Attachments

  • NM_KLRU_ILS OR LOC RWY 30_A3_S-9.jpg
    NM_KLRU_ILS OR LOC RWY 30_A3_S-9.jpg
    355.4 KB · Views: 6
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top