ILS OR LOC/DME Y RWY 19 at KRUT

J

Joegoersch

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
110
Display Name
Display name:
JoeGoersch
Maybe I'm missing something, but this approach seems confusing to me, at least using NACO charts. If you are flying the ILS without DME (and without GPS in lieu of DME) how could you identify FAROX on the missed ? I don't see any note that says DME or RADAR required for the ILS ?
 
Joegoersch said:
Maybe I'm missing something, but this approach seems confusing to me, at least using NACO charts. If you are flying the ILS without DME (and without GPS in lieu of DME) how could you identify FAROX on the missed ? I don't see any note that says DME or RADAR required for the ILS ?
Click to expand...
DME is in the name of the approach. FAROX can only be identified by DME.
 
Last edited:
Gheesh at least give a link for the approach plate.
 
Doesn't the DME apply to LOC approach only ?
 
Joshuajayg said:
Nope. The "or" is for localized or ILS. DME applies to both.
Click to expand...
How would the approach be called if the DME applied only to the LOC portion?

Anyone have an AIM reference which indicates DME applies to both?
 
How would you determine the FAROX fix on the missed approach procedure without DME assuming no GPS substitution? I agree DME isn't required to actually fly the ILS but......
 
Last edited:
tsts4 said:
How would determine the FAROX fix on the missed approach procedure without DME assuming no GPS substitution?
Click to expand...
You wouldn't. You can't. But it'd be pretty easy to miss this point when you briefed the ILS approach. You'd want an easy way to know DME required. Certainly no note in the plan view...
 
Joegoersch said:
You wouldn't. You can't. But it'd be pretty easy to miss this point when you briefed the ILS approach. You'd want an easy way to know DME required. Certainly no note in the plan view...
Click to expand...

I dunno--it seems relatively clear to me since it's clearly part of missed approach procedure. My first clue is it says FAROX 7.5 DME vs just FAROX (which to me means the fix is defined by radials or multiple methods). In any event if I have no distance measuring equipment that fix would definitely have me digging into how the fix is defined, note or not. YMMV.....
 
DME will no longer be in the title when this approach is revised. In the briefing strip it will say "DME Required."
 
Joegoersch said:
How would the approach be called if the DME applied only to the LOC portion?

Anyone have an AIM reference which indicates DME applies to both?
Click to expand...

You might try the chart legend, or the FAA Instrument Handbooks.

Having said that if DME were only required for the LOC approach they would either split the procedures or have a note "DME required for LOC only."
 
I thought the DME applied only to the LOC part of the plate. If flying ILS, there is no MAP, you don't need one, you have a DH/DA.
 
BigBadLou said:
I thought the DME applied only to the LOC part of the plate. If flying ILS, there is no MAP, you don't need one, you have a DH/DA.
Click to expand...
There's no named fix corresponding to the Missed Approach Point (MAP) on the ILS, but there's still a MAP, it's defined by the glideslope and the DH/DA as you said. But there's still a need for a Missed Approach Procedure, so DME is still required. (Well, unless they define a separate missed procedure for the ILS that didn't require DME, but in that case I'd think they would split the approach rather than show both misseds on the same plate.)
 
Also, currently there is a NOTAM saying GPS required and CAM VOR/DME out of service. I don't see and fixes referencing a CAM DME distance.
 
The problem is without DME (or GPS in lieu thereof) no way to fly published missed.
What is strange to me, too, is that a similarly named approach--ILS or LOC/DME RWY 16 at KECP (pasting the link below before you yell at me...)
http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1702/10416ild16.pdf#search=KECP

states "DME required" in TWO places, notes AND plan view. So if it was obvious from the title, why mention it TWICE ?
 

Attachments

  • 10416ild16.pdf
    631.6 KB · Views: 3
Joegoersch said:
The problem is without DME (or GPS in lieu thereof) no way to fly published missed.
What is strange to me, too, is that a similarly named approach--ILS or LOC/DME RWY 16 at KECP (pasting the link below before you yell at me...)
http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1702/10416ild16.pdf#search=KECP

states "DME required" in TWO places, notes AND plan view. So if it was obvious from the title, why mention it TWICE ?
Click to expand...

It's required for two different reasons. The FAA has come to understand that can be confusing so as IAPs are revised there will no longer be DME in the title, rather a procedural note "DME required."
 
BigBadLou said:
I thought the DME applied only to the LOC part of the plate. If flying ILS, there is no MAP, you don't need one, you have a DH/DA.
Click to expand...

There is a hole in that logic. If you decide, or ATC instructs you to execute the missed approach early, and the missed approach procedure has a turn, you are required to proceed to the missed approach point before beginning the turn. Yeah, you can just keep descending to the DH/DA. That isn't going to work very well if the reason you decide to miss is the glideslope flagged. Or you decide to miss because for some reason you've gotten way to high. You need to know where the missed approach Point is.
 
Last edited:
aterpster said:
It's required for two different reasons. The FAA has come to understand that can be confusing so as IAPs are revised there will no longer be DME in the title, rather a procedural note "DME required."
Click to expand...

Yeah. And there other things about charting that this happens. It's really important to thourghly brief approach's and not jump to conclusions. Revisions are sometimes measured in years. This head scratchin over what's the logic behind how they build approaches and other charts is going to be around for awhile.
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah. And there other things about charting that this happens. It's really important to thourghly brief approach's and not jump to conclusions. Revisions are sometimes measured in years. This head scratchin over what's the logic behind how they build approaches and other charts is going to be around for awhile.
Click to expand...

It all took a quantum leap in complexity when GPS RNAV came along. Then WAAS: airlines using approach-certified Baro VNAV and well-equipped light airplanes using WAAS for LPV and LNAV/VNAV. Plus, you give government enough time, and they will build a more complex mousetrap, so to speak.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top