ILAFFT: Almost Killed my Family on an Instrument Approach

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Have you ever mis-read an approach chart altitude or turn, while flying it? I've made some mistakes, but never one so simple, and twice no less. So what is your number? How many screw ups, on something simple yet deadly, before you either call it quits, or kill yourself and family?

Something like that would scare the dickens out of me. Though I don’t think it would make me stop flying instrument. It would make me think very seriously about what I am doing wrong and how to change. I think I would have the same attitude even if I had made a similar issue error ago during training.

If I was repeatedly making mess ups like this, say several times per year, even after trying to fix it, I would probably seek cognitive testing.

People differ in their risk tolerances. Especially in GA. Goodness knows we’ve seen some real doozies described here on PoA. I don’t view the OP as being on the extreme end of the risk taking spectrum if he continues.

GA flying has some risk. That is why a lot of people enjoy it.

 

[tawood]

Something like that would scare the dickens out of me. Though I don’t think it would make me stop flying instrument. It would make me think very seriously about what I am doing wrong and how to change. I think I would have the same attitude even if I had made a similar issue error ago during training.

If I was repeatedly making mess ups like this, say several times per year, even after trying to fix it, I would probably seek cognitive testing.

People differ in their risk tolerances. Especially in GA. Goodness knows we’ve seen some real doozies described here on PoA. I don’t view the OP as being on the extreme end of the risk taking spectrum if he continues.

GA flying has some risk. That is why a lot of people enjoy it.

I agree completely and you expounded on what I meant as well…for me, that first time the op mentioned, during training, would have been the eye opener for me, then the second time? That would have made me feel like it’s too much risk for me (and my family).

 

[Jeff Oslick]

Have you ever mis-read an approach chart altitude or turn, while flying it? I've made some mistakes, but never one so simple, and twice no less.

"Never" is a strong word. Are you certain? How many approaches have you flown? Can you really be so certain you've never made an error and just not caught it? Maybe one that didn't seem, or may just wasn't significant at the time?

I absolutely have made errors while in training with a safety pilot or instructor regaining currency. Do those count? I busted a descent minimum on my first IFR checkride. Because I made that particular error, I'm quite confident I haven't busted an descent altitude on an actual instrument approach since then. I'll suggest that if you don't train, either in the plane or in a sim, to the point of saturation where an instructor gets you to make a mistake, you may not be challenged enough in training.

I fly in the LA Basin. Shooting approaches here in training far exceeds the demands of typical IFR flying, not with regard to weather, but with regard to unpredictability in what you'll get and when you'll get it (the reason for my checkride bust). When you're bouncing between airports that are only 10-15 miles away from each other (sometimes less), shooting multiple practice approaches with a lot of other traffic and complex airspace, it is not that hard to get oversaturated. Then throw in a partial panel sim to boot. I train for the saturation, knowing that it is extremely difficult to be perfect under these practice conditions. I do this so that my brain is far from saturation when flying "normal" IFR in IMC.

I am not arrogant enough to say I've ever had a "perfect" flight. There is always something I could have done better, smoother, more efficiently. My goal on every flight to try to identify those things and do it better next time.

 

[luvflyin]

"Never" is a strong word. Are you certain? How many approaches have you flown? Can you really be so certain you've never made an error and just not caught it? Maybe one that didn't seem, or may just wasn't significant at the time?

I absolutely have made errors while in training with a safety pilot or instructor regaining currency. Do those count? I busted a descent minimum on my first IFR checkride. Because I made that particular error, I'm quite confident I haven't busted an descent altitude on an actual instrument approach since then. I'll suggest that if you don't train, either in the plane or in a sim, to the point of saturation where an instructor gets you to make a mistake, you may not be challenged enough in training.

I fly in the LA Basin. Shooting approaches here in training far exceeds the demands of typical IFR flying, not with regard to weather, but with regard to unpredictability in what you'll get and when you'll get it (the reason for my checkride bust). When you're bouncing between airports that are only 10-15 miles away from each other (sometimes less), shooting multiple practice approaches with a lot of other traffic and complex airspace, it is not that hard to get oversaturated. Then throw in a partial panel sim to boot. I train for the saturation, knowing that it is extremely difficult to be perfect under these practice conditions. I do this so that my brain is far from saturation when flying "normal" IFR in IMC.

I am not arrogant enough to say I've ever had a "perfect" flight. There is always something I could have done better, smoother, more efficiently. My goal on every flight to try to identify those things and do it better next time.

Ah, life in SoCal. I did my IR there, and an IPC years later after about 30 years off from flying. Throw in GPS is new. You learn how to manage your time.

 

[tawood]

"Never" is a strong word. Are you certain? How many approaches have you flown? Can you really be so certain you've never made an error and just not caught it? Maybe one that didn't seem, or may just wasn't significant at the time?

I absolutely have made errors while in training with a safety pilot or instructor regaining currency. Do those count? I busted a descent minimum on my first IFR checkride. Because I made that particular error, I'm quite confident I haven't busted an descent altitude on an actual instrument approach since then. I'll suggest that if you don't train, either in the plane or in a sim, to the point of saturation where an instructor gets you to make a mistake, you may not be challenged enough in training.

I fly in the LA Basin. Shooting approaches here in training far exceeds the demands of typical IFR flying, not with regard to weather, but with regard to unpredictability in what you'll get and when you'll get it (the reason for my checkride bust). When you're bouncing between airports that are only 10-15 miles away from each other (sometimes less), shooting multiple practice approaches with a lot of other traffic and complex airspace, it is not that hard to get oversaturated. Then throw in a partial panel sim to boot. I train for the saturation, knowing that it is extremely difficult to be perfect under these practice conditions. I do this so that my brain is far from saturation when flying "normal" IFR in IMC.

I am not arrogant enough to say I've ever had a "perfect" flight. There is always something I could have done better, smoother, more efficiently. My goal on every flight to try to identify those things and do it better next time.

So all errors are errors of same significance? Sorry, I don't see it that way at all.

 

[sarangan]

Have you ever mis-read an approach chart altitude or turn, while flying it? I've made some mistakes, but never one so simple, and twice no less. So what is your number? How many screw ups, on something simple yet deadly, before you either call it quits, or kill yourself and family?

I would be skeptical of any claims about never having made simple mistakes. Chances are they didn't realize the mistakes because the flights all ended well. People who self-analyze tend to find more mistakes in themselves despite the endings. In the long run, these people will make better pilots.

Regarding mistakes made during training, I would not count them as real mistakes. Training is when you push the boundaries. Its part of the learning process. If a student never made a mistake during training, chances are the instructor did not push the student to their task saturation limit. I would consider that as inadequate training.

 

[TommyG]

I would be skeptical of any claims about never having made simple mistakes. Chances are they didn't realize the mistakes because the flights all ended well. People who self-analyze tend to find more mistakes in themselves despite the endings. In the long run, these people will make better pilots.

Regarding mistakes made during training, I would not count them as real mistakes. Training is when you push the boundaries. Its part of the learning process. If a student never made a mistake during training, chances are the instructor did not push the student to their task saturation limit. I would consider that as inadequate training.

Like when people say they have never violated and FAR, or drove over the speed limits.

 

[Arnold]

Your thoughts?

No Mistakes = Confidence
Mistakes = Learning

 

[sarangan]

Your thoughts?

No Mistakes = Confidence
Mistakes = Learning

I would say
Mistakes = Learning & Confidence
No Mistakes = Either blissfully unaware or has superior abilities

 

[Albany Tom]

I often ask the question "Describe a serious mistake you've made" as an interview question in IT. Someone who can't own up to making mistakes isn't a good fit for any team I've been on. The only people I've heard of who never make mistakes are mythological or historical, depending on your viewpoint.

 

[Arnold]

I often ask the question "Describe a serious mistake you've made" as an interview question in IT. Someone who can't own up to making mistakes isn't a good fit for any team I've been on. The only people I've heard of who never make mistakes are mythological or historical, depending on your viewpoint.

Do wives 1 & 2 count?

 

[IK04]

Do wives 1 & 2 count?

Yes.

 

[midwestpa24]

Your thoughts?

No Mistakes = Confidence
Mistakes = Learning

Ignorance is bliss.

 

[somorris]

Hi Truconfessions.

Lots of advice here, most of it good.

The only thing I can think of to offer you is to study the approaches and the enroute charts before you leave the ground. It seems to me you would likely have picked up both the training oops and the actual flight oops because there was something a little different. That would likely have stuck in your mind.

Be careful out there!

 

[Rushie]

I’d say Tim has a valid point, that IFR isn’t for everyone, and maybe it was okay to float the idea for consideration in the interest of discussing it from all angles, but none of us here can decide if that applies to the OP. That’s something only he (she? they?) can determine, centering on risk tolerance.

Here’s a great article about risk and learning avalanche skills. I’d say it applies pretty well to single pilot IFR flying:

http://mountainacademy.salomon.com/en/demo/1588/learning-and-risks

There’s a risk/benefit calculation involved in every flight, or maybe every decision you make in life. All single pilot IFR flying is riskier than say, booking the trip with American Airlines. Does that mean we should never do it? Maybe, for some. Depends on you and your spouse’s level of acceptable risk. The spouse should be fully informed, and we all know non-pilots are often in the blissfully ignorant zone in that article’s chart when it comes to GA flying.

And you have to accept the risk on behalf of your children in any case. But do you deprive your children of GA travel because they’re too young to consent to the risk? Most of us do not. We know it’s something of a gift to our children. We may limit it to VFR but your weekend VFR bugsmasher flying is still more risky than staying on the ground.

It is my firm belief that an IR makes you a safer pilot. Yes it can result in overconfidence about going into weather but I don’t think anyone can claim that getting the instrument rating has resulted in more crashes than it has saved. Generally the IR makes you a far more precise and attentive pilot. Maybe in my opening sentence I should have said that Tim has a valid point in that hard IMC, not IFR per se, flying might not be for everyone.

OP says conditions were IMC but benign, maybe not what we’d consider “hard”. I don’t know, I wasn’t there. If he had used the color zone chart in the avalanche analogy, would it have been the green, yellow, or red zone? Geosync has said he never flies IMC with the family. That doesn’t make him right and OP wrong, it just means we all have different levels of acceptable risk coupled with our perception of our own competence.

Right now OP is suffering a loss of confidence after a “close call” as shown in the avalanche chart. All of us in GA know well how “accident, death of a friend, or close call” affects us, we all experience them repeatedly in this activity. Doesn’t necessarily mean we should stop doing it.

 

[Albany Tom]

Do wives 1 & 2 count?

Absolutely. And if anyone has a number higher than 4, they shouldn't be in IT anyway...they're far too optimistic for that. Those people need to be in sales, marketing, or customer service.

 

[Clip4]

Had radar service been terminated before the IAF?

 

[Piperonca]

Absolutely. And if anyone has a number higher than 4, they shouldn't be in IT anyway...they're far too optimistic for that. Those people need to be in sales, marketing, or customer service.

Knew a guy just like that. Best salesman you ever saw.

 

[TruConfessions]

Hi everyone, OP here – I’m back. I let this thread go for a while but it looks like there’s still significant activity here and I’ve recovered a bit, so I’ll fill in some of the blanks.

- My panel is GTN 650, G5 HSI and GPSS going to an old Century single-axis autopilot. I also use Foreflight on an iPad with a “professional” (I think?) subscription – the second-level subscription that gives you geo-referenced charts.

- On the approach in question, I was post-IAF, pre-IF. So I guess that must be why I didn’t get the altitude callouts on Foreflight or on the GTN that I might have otherwise. No, I had not received a “radar services terminated” and highly doubt I was outside of radar or altitude coverage (per @brcase's comment).

- I somewhat resent @tawood's comments about quitting IFR flying, but I’m taking it as tough love and appreciate the honesty. It’s worth a thought, but for the moment I’m not willing to give it up. No offense taken, @tawood.

- Regarding the two mis-reads. The time I mis-read the turn in the VOR was probably 850 hours and 20 years ago. The fact that I still remember it to this day speaks to the impact it had on me. This was back before the era of widespread GPS usage; my panel was dual VORs and an NDB so situational awareness was so much harder to maintain. I’m happy to share that approach: it was the VOR 26 at KTNP (Twentynine Palms) in California on my instrument cross-country. I tracked into the VOR on a 255 bearing, and outbound at 255 as well… He who did not bust an approach during their instrument training feel free to throw the first stone.

- @Rushie Thanks for your supportive comments. You asked about "benign" conditions. To me that means no icing potential in particular. A couple bonuses are that there was very little turbulence and no precip, storm, or convective activity. We're talking thick haze layers that reduce visibility only. This and SoCal marine layer are about the most ideal practice "benign" IMC environments I can think of.

- For now, I have decided not to let this horse buck me off without getting right back on. To that end, this weekend I filed and took another IFR flight in marginal VMC (down low) to IMC in haze (up higher) and executed another IFR flight and IFR approach, this time with a bunch of traffic conflicts in a non-radar, mountainous environment. Got to fly a couple laps around a hold in IMC, got re-routed, the whole deal. Nothing that knocked me off-kilter and I’ll promise you, I damn well made sure I understood every single leg along the way and implemented the strategies discussed below:

- Some takeaways from this thread: I can do a better job briefing approaches on the ground. Also, there are also some technologies I can take better advantage of: for instance, using Terrain Mode on the 650 which I did this weekend. I can also (and did) double-check the altitude callouts on the GTN (per @eman1200's comment). I don’t love that they’re only in the Flight Plan view, by the way, but it’s worth the reference. @Arnold's careful consideration of the MSA and double-check before descending below it is useful, and I added that as a check item on my descent this weekend.

Thanks to everyone for helping me learn from and process this experience. Open to further discussion or thoughts.

 

[Another Guy]

I've come to the conclusion that I need to brief on the ground for approaches at my intended destination even when VFR weather is forecast, if there is ANY chance of IFR conditions, because I have found that trying to do so in the air during single-pilot IFR, especially with no autopilot, raises the risk of overlooking something important. On one flight a few years ago, the "something important" was briefing the missed approach procedure for the ILS at North bend, Oregon (KOTH). Not only did the forecast VFR conditions not come to pass, but even the METAR was wrong, such that a reported 400 foot ceiling turned out in reality to be about 250 feet! I realized afterward that I came very close to needing to fly a challenging missed approach procedure that I had not briefed!

The Pacific Ocean provides a very large obstacle free area, but I imagine that if I was in RADAR contact at that point, ATC would have wondered what the heck I was doing.

 

[geezer]

IFR magazine is a great thought provoker, and increased my skills at chart reading. They throw charts with quirks, that teach you to look for such on every chart you use Chart used here includes L charts Approach plates, SID's, and STARS.

Through that and other magazines, I have learned a wealth of information from OTHER PEOPLES mistakes. Much cheaper that way. I have acquired some of that from pilots that I knew personally, 2 of whom I avoided flying with. Both of them voluntarily quit before they had a serious event, and at less than 100 hours.

Flying the approaches on a sim before the trip is a great idea, and has only one 'gotcha' in it. The real approach plate may be different than the one in the sim!

The government books of plates were what I used, and marked with a highlighter for the critical items, before departing. If the conditions were even vaguely poor, I briefed at least the most likely approach at each airport that I would pass enroute. Thus, I was prepared to shoot an approach into any place enroute, with the plate marked up to match my needs.

The modern electronic system makes this impossible, unless you can "print screen' the relevant plates in advance, mark them up, and include them in your knee board sheets.

Deteriorating weather resulted in landing prior to my destination several times, and was considered as part of the choice of flying GA, instead of commercial or driving. I just equated it to a flight cancelation due to weather, the same as I would if I were at the terminal, and my flight did not go.

The guys and gals here have given you some excellent pointers on how to get more out of the technology you have in your plane, so best wishes for future flights!

 

[benyflyguy]

My instructor used to really screw with me quite a bit. Purposely he would strike up a conversation or ask a question that was usually not flight oriented, something I would like to talk about. He would do it at critical
Parts of flight to get me behind the airplane a bit. Let me dig a whole so to speak. Still does it.
the distraction forces me to make sure I brief, snd repeat what I’m reading a couple of times. Mini-rebrief after crossing a fix.
Does the GTN give you the altitude for the fixes?? I trained in 182 with 430w for my IFR and that doesn’t. But currently flying in a lance with a KSN-770, pita box but once you learn it-it’s pretty nifty. Gives you the altitude for those fixes right on the box.
I’d go up with your instructor- or possibly a new one that doesn’t know you and ask them to try to mix you up a bit. Divert. Work on briefing something you didn’t expect. Only through some pressure will you find the weak points and overcome!!

 

[Rebel]

Twenty years in sims watching crews brief approaches. Many pilots just read out loud the approach info; not very helpful. The pros brief how they will fly the approach, while incorporating all the chart info into the story. Often, there's a significant difference in the results. For example, the pros will always describe the approach light configuration they expect to see as they break out of the weather. The "readers" almost never mention the approach light configuration.

 

[dtuuri]

...the pros will always describe the approach light configuration they expect to see as they break out of the weather.

What do you expect them to do if they break out and see something else instead?

EDIT: Never mind, I covered it myself on slide #27 here.

 

[Rushie]

My instructor used to really screw with me quite a bit. Purposely he would strike up a conversation or ask a question that was usually not flight oriented, something I would like to talk about. He would do it at critical
Parts of flight to get me behind the airplane a bit.

My instructor did that once. I hit the pilot isolate switch.

 

[tawood]

My instructor used to really screw with me quite a bit. Purposely he would strike up a conversation or ask a question that was usually not flight oriented, something I would like to talk about. He would do it at critical
Parts of flight to get me behind the airplane a bit. Let me dig a whole so to speak. Still does it.
the distraction forces me to make sure I brief, snd repeat what I’m reading a couple of times. Mini-rebrief after crossing a fix.
Does the GTN give you the altitude for the fixes?? I trained in 182 with 430w for my IFR and that doesn’t. But currently flying in a lance with a KSN-770, pita box but once you learn it-it’s pretty nifty. Gives you the altitude for those fixes right on the box.
I’d go up with your instructor- or possibly a new one that doesn’t know you and ask them to try to mix you up a bit. Divert. Work on briefing something you didn’t expect. Only through some pressure will you find the weak points and overcome!!

While getting my instrument, my friend and safety pilot used to do something similar to that...when I was flying the approach under the hood, suddenly he needed the pen in my side pocket, or he'd drop the approach plate in the back seat, and ask me to pick it up, or point out something about my shoe, or whatever...finally after two or three approaches, I caught on what he was doing (I'm a little slow sometimes). If anything, it taught me to ignore passengers at times.

 

[Arnold]

While getting my instrument, my friend and safety pilot used to do something similar to that...when I was flying the approach under the hood, suddenly he needed the pen in my side pocket, or he'd drop the approach plate in the back seat, and ask me to pick it up, or point out something about my shoe, or whatever...finally after two or three approaches, I caught on what he was doing (I'm a little slow sometimes). If anything, it taught me to ignore passengers at times.

Passengers are a big danger. Short of diverting because they are dying or experiencing and uncontrolled panic attack passengers are best ignored except during cruise.

 

[EdFred]

Pilot. Iso. Switch.

 

[Hang 4]

The modern electronic system makes this impossible, unless you can "print screen' the relevant plates in advance, mark them up, and include them in your knee board sheets.

Both Foreflight and Garmin Pilot (and maybe others) will let you mark up a plate electronically. Either with a finger or with a stylus. You can even use colors to differentiate things like magenta for GPS, Green for VOR/ILS etc.

 

[Albany Tom]

You can download pdf's of plates directly from the FAA, too.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

There has never been a perfect flight. No matter how hard we try or how close we get… never perfect. There are some guys here that think way to much of themselves.

 

[WDD]

Thanks for sharing. I'm trying to visualize what the plate looks like, what was missed, etc. Check me out on this:

• The plate shows an entry altitude for IAF at 5000. FAF is 2000
• What you missed was the intermediate fix that also was at 5000?
• Was that shown on the side view of the approach?

 

[jpskies]

have a nice GTN panel with GPSS and single-axis autopilot

Thanks for sharing. GTN is really a capable navcom. I wonder did you turn on the terrain warning overlay? It overlays yellow and red for those higher terrain near by while in the map mode. I always have terrain warning turned on for my GTN650 and Garmin Pilot and they are always in my scan. This increases the situation awareness of the surrounding area and could be a better way to discover an error earlier than looking outside.

 

[Datadriver]

what airport/approach was this?

 

[TruConfessions]

Thanks for sharing. I'm trying to visualize what the plate looks like, what was missed, etc. Check me out on this:

• The plate shows an entry altitude for IAF at 5000. FAF is 2000
• What you missed was the intermediate fix that also was at 5000?
• Was that shown on the side view of the approach?

For #1 - the IAF is technically not on the chart. It is plotted on the chart, but with those hashed lines that show the distance to the next fix is not charted to scale. Accordingly, (and this relates to #3), it's not on the side view of the approach and it doesn't have an altitude per se. The segment following it has an altitude assignment of 5000, but that value is not on the line, it's got a squiggly line that points to that segment where, a couple inches away, it notes "5,000 NoPT".

Essentially, it's a feeder route (published approach segments) where it goes IAF (5,000' noted via the squiggly line) --> stepdown fix (2,000') --> IF (holding/procedure turn fix, also 2,000').

For #2 - what I missed was the squiggly line showing the altitude at 5,000. For the segment from the stepdown fix to the IAF it is plotted on the line at 2,000'.

For #3 - the side view has the inbound and outbound segment to the procedure turn / holding fix, and it's altitude is charted, also at 2,000.

Not as an excuse, but just in retrospect, I think I just saw the 2,000' published on the feeder route and 2,000' on the side view, and just got it in my head that the altitude to fly for that whole segment was 2,000', missing the squiggly line that shows that the altitude from the IAF to the stepdown fix is actually 5,000.

Sorry... I know it would be easier to discuss if I just gave the approach, but I really don't want to do that for privacy reasons.

 

[Rushie]

For #1 - the IAF is technically not on the chart. It is plotted on the chart, but with those hashed lines that show the distance to the next fix is not charted to scale. Accordingly, (and this relates to #3), it's not on the side view of the approach and it doesn't have an altitude per se. The segment following it has an altitude assignment of 5000, but that value is not on the line, it's got a squiggly line that points to that segment where, a couple inches away, it notes "5,000 NoPT".

Essentially, it's a feeder route (published approach segments) where it goes IAF (5,000' noted via the squiggly line) --> stepdown fix (2,000') --> IF (holding/procedure turn fix, also 2,000').

For #2 - what I missed was the squiggly line showing the altitude at 5,000. For the segment from the stepdown fix to the IAF it is plotted on the line at 2,000'.

For #3 - the side view has the inbound and outbound segment to the procedure turn / holding fix, and it's altitude is charted, also at 2,000.

Not as an excuse, but just in retrospect, I think I just saw the 2,000' published on the feeder route and 2,000' on the side view, and just got it in my head that the altitude to fly for that whole segment was 2,000', missing the squiggly line that shows that the altitude from the IAF to the stepdown fix is actually 5,000.

Sorry... I know it would be easier to discuss if I just gave the approach, but I really don't want to do that for privacy reasons.

I’ve been thinking all along that part of the reason this happened was imperfect notation of the information on the approach plate. Maybe it should be big bold red letters or something to indicate, “Hey, normally you’d expect to begin your descent here but there’s high terrain, so HERE is a step down.” Instead you have a thin little line and a note off to the side. Not to absolve you completely for not seeing it, but to explain why. Humans tend to see what they expect to see.

Of course we’re all curious where this is but I completely understand your wish for privacy and in my opinion you should stick to that. It’s enough to be telling this story in the first place. The lesson could be applied to every approach.

 

[EdFred]

Evidently they must be the only person that has flown that approach since we would know exactly who it is if the approach was listed.

 

[Palmpilot]

For #1 - the IAF is technically not on the chart. It is plotted on the chart, but with those hashed lines that show the distance to the next fix is not charted to scale. Accordingly, (and this relates to #3), it's not on the side view of the approach and it doesn't have an altitude per se....

It seems to be typical for segments before the intermediate fix (IF) to be absent from the profile view. There may or may not be stepdowns before the IF, and the only place to find those is on the plan view. The approach for my home field is like that. It has two IAFs, and one of them has a stepdown and one doesn't (although on this chart, both initial segments are shown to scale).

On the chart you describe, it sounds like the initial higher altitude is less obvious. I think a key point is that if you see a fix depicted between the IAF and the IF, you should assume that the reason that fix exists is because of a change in the minimum altitude. (I suppose it could be because of a dogleg, but I don't know whether that ever happens on an initial segment.)

 

[luvflyin]

For #1 - the IAF is technically not on the chart. It is plotted on the chart, but with those hashed lines that show the distance to the next fix is not charted to scale. Accordingly, (and this relates to #3), it's not on the side view of the approach and it doesn't have an altitude per se. The segment following it has an altitude assignment of 5000, but that value is not on the line, it's got a squiggly line that points to that segment where, a couple inches away, it notes "5,000 NoPT".

Essentially, it's a feeder route (published approach segments) where it goes IAF (5,000' noted via the squiggly line) --> stepdown fix (2,000') --> IF (holding/procedure turn fix, also 2,000').

For #2 - what I missed was the squiggly line showing the altitude at 5,000. For the segment from the stepdown fix to the IAF it is plotted on the line at 2,000'.

For #3 - the side view has the inbound and outbound segment to the procedure turn / holding fix, and it's altitude is charted, also at 2,000.

Not as an excuse, but just in retrospect, I think I just saw the 2,000' published on the feeder route and 2,000' on the side view, and just got it in my head that the altitude to fly for that whole segment was 2,000', missing the squiggly line that shows that the altitude from the IAF to the stepdown fix is actually 5,000.

Sorry... I know it would be easier to discuss if I just gave the approach, but I really don't want to do that for privacy reasons.

I'm having trouble getting the picture here from your descriptions. Not sure what you mean by "Essentially, it's a feeder route (published approach segments)." A Feeder is a Feeder. Thin black line, there's no 'essentially' about it. An Approach Segment is an Approach Segment, bold black line.

 

[TruConfessions]

Evidently they must be the only person that has flown that approach since we would know exactly who it is if the approach was listed.

Hey, you know, when it's your error, you just go ahead and feel free to post it with your name, address, and social security number if that's your kind of thing!

The approach for my home field is like that. It has two IAFs, and one of them has a stepdown and one doesn't (although on this chart, both initial segments are shown to scale).

The example you provided is actually pretty good. It's the same basic scenario, but with more IAFs and less obviously plotted altitude / distance information between SAPID and YERKS vs. YERKS to DOCAL (using your example approach).

I'm having trouble getting the picture here from your descriptions. Not sure what you mean by "Essentially, it's a feeder route (published approach segments)." A Feeder is a Feeder. Thin black line, there's no 'essentially' about it. An Approach Segment is an Approach Segment, bold black line.

You are correct, I put the "(published approach segment)" trying to differentiate between an actual feeder route (thin black line) vs. a, let's say... non-straight in but NoPT initial approach segment.