Impossible Approaches?

W

WeekendWarrior

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Feb 3, 2019
Messages
26
Display Name
Display name:
FlyKC
Okay, question for the group.
Columbus, GA (KCSG) has a VOR-A (Circling Only) approach https://www.faa.gov/aero_docs/dtpp/1904/00636VA.PDF#nameddest=(CSG)
which uses the CSG VORTAC as its FaF. That VORTAC is NOTAMed OTS, and has been for what looks like a long while. The approach itself is active, and continues to be updated. How can that be? How can a VOR approach without an operative VOR continue to be available? Sparing the ability to fly it using a GPS overlay (which also seems redundant, given precision or RNAV approaches available to 3 of the 4 runways), how can that approach still be considered usable?

Same thing at Appleton, MN (KAQP), where the NDB Rwy 13 approach (https://www.faa.gov/aero_docs/dtpp/1904/09142N13.PDF#nameddest=(AQP)) is served by the AQP NDB, which is also NOTAMed OTS and appears to have been for a while.

Neither approach has an "Approach NA" NOTAM.

Are these assumed to be available only to GPS systems as "overlays" since their primary navaids are both OTS and have been for some time? Would ATC still clear pilots for them if requested?
 
Are the Navaids just out of service or being decommissioned?? Out of service would imply that they are going to return at some point I would imagine. Would be curious what ATC would do. I don’t think they really track the NOTAM’s for an approach at an untowered field. It is on us to monitor that.
 
“Out of Service” as opposed to “Decommissioned” are a distinctly worded difference - these are Out of Service, however both have been that way for quite a while. It appears that they’ve just reissued the temporary FDC NOTAM for 6-12 months each time.
In either case, though, I’m curious why the approach NAVAID being unusable does not warrant a similar NOTAM making the procedure unusable. Seems counterintuitive to me
 
There is an estimated end date on the NOTAM so presumably the VOR will be back online at some point. If they didn't intend to fix it, the end date would be "PERM" such as with LVL VOR.
 
WeekendWarrior said:
Are these assumed to be available only to GPS systems as "overlays" since their primary navaids are both OTS and have been for some time? Would ATC still clear pilots for them if requested?
Click to expand...

No, there aren't any GPS overlay approaches anymore. They cannot be performed AFAIK.
 
benyflyguy said:
Are the Navaids just out of service or being decommissioned?? Out of service would imply that they are going to return at some point I would imagine. Would be curious what ATC would do. I don’t think they really track the NOTAM’s for an approach at an untowered field. It is on us to monitor that.
Click to expand...

Monitor means ATC is taking an active roll in determining a Nav aid is operational. ATC does not monitor the operational status of most VORs, meaning if the Nav aid fails they have no way of knowing.
Unmonitored ILS are noted in the Chart Supplement for the airport, “ILS unmonitored”.

Within their regional responsibility, Controllers should be aware of Nav Aid Notams and not assigning OTS Navaids. Including the Class T VORs, the average Tracon does not have many VORs.

The CSG VOR is not scheduled for shutdown until after 2021. So it will bee back in service.
 
Last edited:
With the right Nav system the VOR doesn’t need to be operational to do the listed VOR approach. That nav would likely not be in the average GA airplane, though they could do a GPS type approach.
 
benyflyguy said:
Are the Navaids just out of service or being decommissioned?? Out of service would imply that they are going to return at some point I would imagine. Would be curious what ATC would do. I don’t think they really track the NOTAM’s for an approach at an untowered field. It is on us to monitor that.
Click to expand...
The controllers here can give a better answer, but AFAIK, they do. If the approach is NA, they won't assign it.
 
Doug Reid said:
Under VOR-A in FF, the Notam shown on the plate does not show the VOR OTS. It pertains to circle to land at night. This would be an unwelcome surprise if you intended to use this VOR. Seems the OTS would be a priority. Yes, I can see the OTS if I research a bit..
Click to expand...

Scroll down.
 
Doug Reid said:
I am talking about looking at the approach plate in ForeFlight. It only shows the Notam about circling to land at night. The Notam about the VOR being OTS is not shown on the approach plate..you can find it if you look it up in the chart supplement. Seems light the OTS would take priority.
Click to expand...

You'd have to ask Foreflight what algorithm they use to determine what NOTAMs to show.
 
dmspilot said:
You'd have to ask Foreflight what algorithm they use to determine what NOTAMs to show.
Click to expand...
My guess is that they are only showing FDC NOTAM which mention the approach you are looking at. Which is why they add the logo that there may be other applicable NOTAM.

The NOTAM for the VOR-A does not mention CSG being OTS; the NOTAM for the ILS/LOC 6 does. For whatever reason lies in the mysteries of NOTAM publication, the two procedures which both have the same missed approach procedure using CSG are treated differently. Here's the ILS NOTAM:

FDC 9/6505 (A0045/19) - IAP COLUMBUS, Columbus, GA.
ILS OR LOC RWY 6, AMDT 25C...
MISSED APPROACH: CLIMB TO 1300 THEN CLIMBING LEFT TURN TO 2500
DIRECT FENIX LOM AND HOLD (ADF REQUIRED).
RADAR REQUIRED FOR PROCEDURE ENTRY EXCEPT FOR AIRCRAFT EQUIPPED
WITH SUITABLE RNAV SYSTEM WITH GPS,
CSG VOR OUT OF SERVICE. 03 APR 16:00 2019 UNTIL 03 APR 16:00 2021 ESTIMATED.
CREATED: 03 APR 16:00 2019​

That's an FAA issue, not a ForeFlight one.
 
It looks to me like the VOR approach not being NOTAMed out of service is simply an oversight.
 
Doug Reid said:
I am talking about looking at the approach plate in ForeFlight. It only shows the Notam about circling to land at night. The Notam about the VOR being OTS is not shown on the approach plate..you can find it if you look it up in the chart supplement. Seems light the OTS would take priority.
Click to expand...

Ah. I see that now. If you go to the NOTAMS for the airport the VOR outage is there. I think @Palmpilot is on to something here. You could maybe do it using GPS. It’s an authorized substitute for just about everything except you have to ‘monitor’ the final approach course with the NAVAID. Or is that just if the final approach course is a Localizer. I don’t remember.
 
aterpster said:
Check KEMT.
Click to expand...

You got me. I see the FAF is named after you.

I was under the impression that they were all gone, but I might have had it mixed up with VOR/DME RNAV procedures. Any idea how many GPS overlay there still are? Or is this the only one?
 
luvflyin said:
Ah. I see that now. If you go to the NOTAMS for the airport the VOR outage is there. I think @Palmpilot is on to something here. You could maybe do it using GPS. It’s an authorized substitute for just about everything except you have to ‘monitor’ the final approach course with the NAVAID. Or is that just if the final approach course is a Localizer. I don’t remember.
Click to expand...
Last time I checked, the AIM said that you can't substitute GPS for a terrestrial navaid for lateral course guidance on the final approach segment. The one exception I know of is when the approach plate includes "or GPS" in the title, as is the case with the EMT VOR or GPS-B.
 
Palmpilot said:
Last time I checked, the AIM said that you can't substitute GPS for a terrestrial navaid for lateral course guidance on the final approach segment. The one exception I know of is when the approach plate includes "or GPS" in the title, as is the case with the EMT VOR or GPS-B.
Click to expand...

Yeah. That's what I thought. It's not just localizers
 
With any VOR outage, if the approach uses the VOR for final course guidance, then no "Procedure NA" NOTAM will be published. Reason - if the VOR itself is out, it is apparent that you cannot fly the approach. Sending a "procedure NA" NOTAM would be redundant.

Similarly, if an ILS is NOTAM'ed OTS, you won't also see a procedure NOTAM for "Procedure NA" either.

Now, if the VOR is used for something other than final course guidance, there may be a NOTAM. If, for example, the missed approach goes to that VOR, there will either be an alternate missed approach procedure given (what's happening in @midlifeflyer 's ILS example), or a NOTAM saying "Procedure NA except for aircraft equipped with suitable RNAV system with GPS" - because GPS substitution is allowed for the missed approach. A second example would be that the VOR is used for crossing radials for a stepdown fix in final. In that case, the NOTAM may read "XXXXX fix minimums NA except for aircraft equipped ... with GPS", or it could read DME required or some other thing depending on the particulars.

If, however, the VOR is just a feeder route into the procedure and there is another perfectly usable way to enter the procedure, then no NOTAM will be published. ATC should know which VORs are OTS and should not clear a non-RNAV aircraft to them. If, however, they do, it should become quickly apparent to the pilot that they are not receiving navigational guidance and therefore will ask for another approach.

The existing NOTAM for the CSG VOR-A is a permanent change to the procedure, as shown by the "This is VOR-A, Amdt 23B". You should manually make the edit to your approach chart until Amdt 23B is actually published. This has nothing to do with the VOR outage. The VOR being out, however, is (at least officially) a temporary condition.
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
You got me. I see the FAF is named after you.

I was under the impression that they were all gone, but I might have had it mixed up with VOR/DME RNAV procedures. Any idea how many GPS overlay there still are? Or is this the only one?
Click to expand...

Wally has squatters rights on that approach. Only he can decide to change it:D
 
WeekendWarrior said:
Okay, question for the group.
Columbus, GA (KCSG) has a VOR-A (Circling Only) approach https://www.faa.gov/aero_docs/dtpp/1904/00636VA.PDF#nameddest=(CSG)
which uses the CSG VORTAC as its FaF. That VORTAC is NOTAMed OTS, and has been for what looks like a long while. The approach itself is active, and continues to be updated. How can that be? How can a VOR approach without an operative VOR continue to be available? Sparing the ability to fly it using a GPS overlay (which also seems redundant, given precision or RNAV approaches available to 3 of the 4 runways), how can that approach still be considered usable?

Same thing at Appleton, MN (KAQP), where the NDB Rwy 13 approach (https://www.faa.gov/aero_docs/dtpp/1904/09142N13.PDF#nameddest=(AQP)) is served by the AQP NDB, which is also NOTAMed OTS and appears to have been for a while.

Neither approach has an "Approach NA" NOTAM.

Are these assumed to be available only to GPS systems as "overlays" since their primary navaids are both OTS and have been for some time? Would ATC still clear pilots for them if requested?
Click to expand...

Not unless the approach states something like "VOR/DME or GPS RWY27"
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah. That's what I thought. It's not just localizers
Click to expand...
Localizers and VORs are treated a bit differently under the most current guidance. With VOR, you can use GPS for primary final approach segment guidance so long as you also monitor the VOR (something we can't do in this scenario because it's OTS). There us no similar guidance allowing that for localizers.

It's in AIM 1-2-3.
 
IK04 said:
The NOTAM system is soooo efficient and accurate... [HINT: wrong.]
Click to expand...
LOL!

Accuracy is not the problem. There is a NOTAM the VOR us OTS.

!CSG 02/019 CSG NAV VOR OUT OF SERVICE 1902141145-2001032000EST​

Overdone is more the problem, with important information often buried among trivia.
 
Clip4 said:
Dinosaur. All overlay approaches are being phased out.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But, someone claimed no overlays exist today. This particular one will still be around for at least the end of the year.
 
Clip4 said:
Just don’t ask him questions on four course range.
Click to expand...
What are the two types of range stations? What is a range station called when the four legs aren't perpendicular to each other?
When do you do a fade perpendicular orientation? A true fade orientation?

When we're through with that, then tell me the requirements for an RNP AR approach? When is single-string acceptable? Dual-string? What's the difference?
 
dmspilot said:
No, there aren't any GPS overlay approaches anymore. They cannot be performed AFAIK.
Click to expand...

There's still a few. But unless it says "or GPS" in the title, you can't substitute the GPS for FAC guidance.

RussR said:
With any VOR outage, if the approach uses the VOR for final course guidance, then no "Procedure NA" NOTAM will be published. Reason - if the VOR itself is out, it is apparent that you cannot fly the approach. Sending a "procedure NA" NOTAM would be redundant.
Click to expand...

Where this is annoying, though, is when using new tech that at least attempts to make the NOTAM system work better by highlighting relevant NOTAMs in places where you most need them.

For example, in ForeFlight if there's a procedure NOTAM, there'll be a red button right at the top of the plate stating so, and you can tap to see it immediately.

With the primary navaid OTS and no procedure NOTAM... Well, you don't have any notation on the approach, and since it's an FDC NOTAM and not an airport one, you won't see it on the airport either, so we've got it back to being buried deep in a briefing and very easy to miss.

IMO, there should be a procedure NOTAM for a procedure whose navaid(s) are OTS issued at the same time and with the same effectivity as the FDC NOTAM for the navaid outage.

aterpster said:
What are the two types of range stations? What is a range station called when the four legs aren't perpendicular to each other?
When do you do a fade perpendicular orientation? A true fade orientation?

When we're through with that, then tell me the requirements for an RNP AR approach? When is single-string acceptable? Dual-string? What's the difference?
Click to expand...

OMG! I know nothing! Where do I go to surrender my instrument ticket? :eek:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Where this is annoying, though, is when using new tech that at least attempts to make the NOTAM system work better by highlighting relevant NOTAMs in places where you most need them.

For example, in ForeFlight if there's a procedure NOTAM, there'll be a red button right at the top of the plate stating so, and you can tap to see it immediately.

With the primary navaid OTS and no procedure NOTAM... Well, you don't have any notation on the approach, and since it's an FDC NOTAM and not an airport one, you won't see it on the airport either, so we've got it back to being buried deep in a briefing and very easy to miss.

IMO, there should be a procedure NOTAM for a procedure whose navaid(s) are OTS issued at the same time and with the same effectivity as the FDC NOTAM for the navaid outage.
Click to expand...

The VOR outage NOTAM is in the NOTAMS>Airports tab in Foreflight. You do have to scroll down a bit, it's in 'older,' after last 7 and last 30 days. I agree that it not appearing in the 'Tap to view 1 NOTAM' on the plate view can be misleading. But if you've already read the Airport NOTAMS, which you should have, you should be aware that the Approach is not available to be flown. But I do agree you shouldn't have to 'put the pieces together' like this. For Foreflight to write an algorithm to catch this may or may not be easy, I dunno. I think the FAA is being negligent by not NOTAM'ing the Approach OTS until the VOR is in service again.
 
luvflyin said:
The VOR outage NOTAM is in the NOTAMS>Airports tab in Foreflight. You do have to scroll down a bit, it's in 'older,' after last 7 and last 30 days. I agree that it not appearing in the 'Tap to view 1 NOTAM' on the plate view can be misleading. But if you've already read the Airport NOTAMS, which you should have, you should be aware that the Approach is not available to be flown. But I do agree you shouldn't have to 'put the pieces together' like this. For Foreflight to write an algorithm to catch this may or may not be easy, I dunno. I think the FAA is being negligent by not NOTAM'ing the Approach OTS until the VOR is in service again.
Click to expand...

And that last sentence is exactly my point. It's not ForeFlight's job (or Garmin's or anyone else's) to come up with workarounds for the FAA's terrible NOTAM system, though we're lucky they have.
 
luvflyin said:
The VOR outage NOTAM is in the NOTAMS>Airports tab in Foreflight. You do have to scroll down a bit, it's in 'older,' after last 7 and last 30 days.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tip. I see that page in the iPad version of ForeFlight, but do you know if it's in the iPhone version? If so, I haven't found it.
 
luvflyin said:
I think the FAA is being negligent by not NOTAM'ing the Approach OTS until the VOR is in service again.
Click to expand...
My guess is that the FAA’s position would be, “you’re instrument rated. That means you should know what equipment, whether on the ground, in space, or in your airplane, is required to fly a particular approach.”
 
Palmpilot said:
Thanks for the tip. I see that page in the iPad version of ForeFlight, but do you know if it's in the iPhone version? If so, I haven't found it.
Click to expand...

It was there. Airports>CSG. Up at the top there are 3 buttons, Taxi Diagram, 3D View and NOTAMS/TFRs. Click NOTAMS/TFRs and its there. You have to scroll down a little past future, last 7 days, last 30 days to older. It's the second one.
 
luvflyin said:
It was there. Airports>CSG. Up at the top there are 3 buttons, Taxi Diagram, 3D View and NOTAMS/TFRs. Click NOTAMS/TFRs and its there. You have to scroll down a little past future, last 7 days, last 30 days to older. It's the second one.
Click to expand...
ACK! I don't know how I missed that! :redface:
 
Clip4 said:
Dinosaur. All overlay approaches are being phased out.
Click to expand...

I can't see that one phasing out for a while, or the one at KAVX. Those VORs aren't going anywhere and SoCal still treats even /Gs like /As half the time. There's really no reason for any VOR approach to also not be a GPS approach.
 
N1120A said:
I can't see that one phasing out for a while, or the one at KAVX. Those VORs aren't going anywhere and SoCal still treats even /Gs like /As half the time. There's really no reason for any VOR approach to also not be a GPS approach.
Click to expand...
Except the overlay program was implemented to jump start GPS/RNAV. When a runway or CTL-only IAP is supplemented by an RNAV approach, any overlay is cancelled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top