KIAB ILS or LOC 19R

[denverpilot]

Picked this one up from another forum. Kinda fun.

You’re in the hold at KOSAC and ATC says, “Bugsmasher 54321, cleared ILS Approach Runway 19R.”

Can you accept that clearance?

How about Lost Comm?

I know after looking at it what I would do, and I also know from info on the other forum that Wichita area HMFWICs know this approach is screwed up. They’re thinking about it. They have it partially fixed via procedures if the radio is working.

But it’s a fun one to look at and scratch your head and wonder what the approach designer was thinking. You can even guess a little at what they were thinking, there’s a huge hint on the plate.

Legally however, you can get parked in that hold and have a bit of a problem if you have either of the above two scenarios happen to you. Relatively easy to solve in either case, but the plate could trick you into accepting or doing the obvious you’d have to do anyway if you lost comm there.

One for your collection of oddballs @aterpster ...!

 

[sourdough44]

Seems like plenty of time/room to get established on the arc, ATC is watching too. The runway is long enough to land over 4 times, not that it has a bearing on the approach.

With the clearance I would go do the approach, ATC shouldn’t be trying to trip up a pilot anyway.

 

[mscard88]

Request vector to final.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I wouldn't be intercepting the arc exactly at KAYEE but I would just intercept the arc on an outbound leg of the hold.

Sounds like a fun academic discussion, though.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Seems like plenty of time/room to get established on the arc, ATC is watching too.

You're assuming that lost comms only happen because of airplane malfunctions.

 

[Larry in TN]

KOSAC is an IAF. There is a bold procedure track line from KOSAC to the DME-arc. What more do you need?

 

[RussR]

Well, this may be a bit pedantic, but I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet. Holding at KOSAC would be impossible for the vast majority of civilian aircraft, since it's based on a TACAN fix. That also invalidates the DME arc and the missed approach. So, it's not a realistic scenario for any but military aircraft.

But, assuming that I did have a TACAN receiver in the airplane, I don't see a big problem. Holding at KOSAC, turn around at KOSAC and you even have 7 miles to intercept the published segment from KOSAC to KAYEE, then fly the arc. If you're already outbound on the hold when cleared, just intercept the arc. Lost comm - same thing.

The one thing I will say about this procedure that could be confusing upon first glance is that dark line from KOSAC to KAYEE pointing in the opposite direction from the holding pattern. Makes you wonder which direction you're supposed to hold until you look at it closer.

It's a lousy procedure. Why not move the holding fix out to KAYEE and avoid the issue?

 

[aterpster]

This procedure was designed by the USAF not the FAA. Note "USAF" near the top of the chart. This is an arrival holding pattern, which the Air Force uses a lot. The placement is poor, though. Then again, when you use military procedures you are in a different world, so to speak. The Jeppesen chart states "MILITARY" in upper case by the minimums.

 

[aterpster]

Well, this may be a bit pedantic, but I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet. Holding at KOSAC would be impossible for the vast majority of civilian aircraft, since it's based on a TACAN fix. That also invalidates the DME arc and the missed approach. So, it's not a realistic scenario for any but military aircraft.

But, assuming that I did have a TACAN receiver in the airplane, I don't see a big problem. Holding at KOSAC, turn around at KOSAC and you even have 7 miles to intercept the published segment from KOSAC to KAYEE, then fly the arc. If you're already outbound on the hold when cleared, just intercept the arc. Lost comm - same thing.

The one thing I will say about this procedure that could be confusing upon first glance is that dark line from KOSAC to KAYEE pointing in the opposite direction from the holding pattern. Makes you wonder which direction you're supposed to hold until you look at it closer.

It's a lousy procedure. Why not move the holding fix out to KAYEE and avoid the issue?

Seems to me like the procedure should have been annotated "Not for Civil Use."

 

[Clark1961]

For the folks saying "military, military, military" there is a fair bit of civilian traffic into McConnell since Spirit is there. The civilian traffic is the large variety (freight) and every now and then one lands just a little short on the way there...

Anyway, if a course reversal is performed at KOSAC then you'd be opposite direction traffic in the hold enroute to KAYEE. Prolly safer to stay in the hold and intercept the arc on the outbound leg. Maybe not 'zactly kosher but I'm not Jewish.

 

[roncachamp]

Picked this one up from another forum. Kinda fun.

You’re in the hold at KOSAC and ATC says, “Bugsmasher 54321, cleared ILS Approach Runway 19R.”

Can you accept that clearance?

ATC won't issue that clearance.

 

[flyingron]

Civilians can get DME off TACAN stations. What you can't get is the azimuth. Of course, the FAA has never authorized GPS substitution for TACAN azimuth.

 

[aterpster]

For the folks saying "military, military, military" there is a fair bit of civilian traffic into McConnell since Spirit is there. The civilian traffic is the large variety (freight) and every now and then one lands just a little short on the way there...

Anyway, if a course reversal is performed at KOSAC then you'd be opposite direction traffic in the hold enroute to KAYEE. Prolly safer to stay in the hold and intercept the arc on the outbound leg. Maybe not 'zactly kosher but I'm not Jewish.

Nonetheless, this particular IAP is a "primrose path" for civilian aircraft.

 

[Clark1961]

Nonetheless, this particular IAP is a "primrose path" for civilian aircraft.

That response makes no sense.

 

[roncachamp]

Well, this may be a bit pedantic, but I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet. Holding at KOSAC would be impossible for the vast majority of civilian aircraft, since it's based on a TACAN fix. That also invalidates the DME arc and the missed approach. So, it's not a realistic scenario for any but military aircraft.

Many civilian aircraft have GPS.

It's a lousy procedure.

Absolutely.

 

[denverpilot]

KOSAC is an IAF. There is a bold procedure track line from KOSAC to the DME-arc. What more do you need?

Look closer at the hold direction.

 

[denverpilot]

ATC won't issue that clearance.

ATC *was* issuing that clearance, according to the source. Until the pilots called the supervisor and said, ummm.... hey....

The other source says some folks had to be told to issue radar vectors to the arc from the hold ONLY.

Which is why I asked the question as a lost comm question.

Fun, huh?

 

[aterpster]

That response makes no sense.

You are in an airplane with VOR/ILS/DME but no RNAV and no TACAN receiver.
How do you fly the DME arc? How do you fly the missed approach?

 

[RussR]

Civilians can get DME off TACAN stations.

Sure, but that's not a "normal" thing to do for most civilian pilots. I'd bet most wouldn't even know that was possible or where to look for the paired VHF frequency.

Of course, the FAA has never authorized GPS substitution for TACAN azimuth.

AC 90-108 specifically allows it, treating it the same as VOR.

 

[aterpster]

Sure, but that's not a "normal" thing to do for most civilian pilots. I'd bet most wouldn't even know that was possible or where to look for the paired VHF frequency.

Use Jepps.

 

[denverpilot]

You are in an airplane with VOR/ILS/DME but no RNAV and no TACAN receiver.
How do you fly the DME arc? How do you fly the missed approach?

Heh heh. That plate as messed up as it is, is a great training tool.

“The weather is dropping. Let’s divert and see if they’ll let us shoot a practice approach there...”

Could set up a couple of WTF moments for someone almost ready for their IR ride if they don’t brief unknown / unplanned approach plates very carefully.

Also good for ground work.

I like finding messy plates like that one with subtle gotchas in them for training. Stash notes on which ones have goofy stuff on them in a text file that’s available on my phone.

Not a fan of them in flight so much.

I still remember a favorite of one old DPE adound here. He had memorized a location on the sectional where the “O” in the word “Mountains” written on a mountain range fell.

He would point at the grey circle and say, “What kind of airport is that?” Most folks would eventually get it after they zoomed their eyeballs out a bit.

 

[mscard88]

He would point at the grey circle and say, “What kind of airport is that?” Most folks would eventually get it after they zoomed their eyeballs out a bit.

An IP in the training department on pro checks would do similar on a pictorial preflight. Had one where something on the jet lined up with a ramp light pole that had the illusion it was on the plane. Took me a few seconds n then I said you sob! Good times w/ good IPs.

 

[tonycondon]

For the folks saying "military, military, military" there is a fair bit of civilian traffic into McConnell since Spirit is there. The civilian traffic is the large variety (freight) and every now and then one lands just a little short on the way there...

Anyway, if a course reversal is performed at KOSAC then you'd be opposite direction traffic in the hold enroute to KAYEE. Prolly safer to stay in the hold and intercept the arc on the outbound leg. Maybe not 'zactly kosher but I'm not Jewish.

The only civilian traffic that I'm aware of at McConnell is the Dreamlifter and Doc. They are working on building a hangar for Doc at Eisenhower so that won't last much longer.

 

[Larry in TN]

Look closer at the hold direction.

I see the hold direction. Hit the fix, right turn to join the outbound course, left turn to join the arc.

 

[tonycondon]

yea so for those of us not wanting to read through a billion facebook posts, what is the reason you can't fly the approach as published from the holding fix out to the arc and then in?

 

[denverpilot]

yea so for those of us not wanting to read through a billion facebook posts, what is the reason you can't fly the approach as published from the holding fix out to the arc and then in?

The “thick line” approved route from KOSAC to KAYEE using KOSAC as an IAP is behind you if you’re making right turns in the hold at KOSAC.

There’s no thick line from the hold on to the arc or a waypoint there attaching the two.

As others have said, it’s obvious if you have to do it that you just fly the outbound leg of the hold and intercept the arc anyway, if you’re lost comm or can’t get a vector for whatever reason, but it’s not a legal way to get there, according to the plate.

To legally get from KOSAC to the arc, you need a course reversal and with the plate saying both “RADAR or DME Required” and the hint to the left and below the hold of “Radar required for holding above 4000” is a big one.

They really want to say “RADAR *and* DME Required” but that triggers other problems for the approach. So they’ve kinda fiddled with it to make RADAR required for the hold instead. Vectors to the arc.

But... that leaves you with a PIC command decision in a lost comm scenario. Do you fly to the arc and shoot the approach or just fly any number of other approaches (or to an alternate) in the area.

Technically if you were in the hold, in IMC and went lost comm AND didn’t notice that flying the missed would be problematic too... you’d likely just fly to the arc and shoot it. But then you go missed and have the TACAN problem noted.

Like @aterpster said. The plate can lead you down a primrose path to a couple of different problems if you’re not paying close attention.

And as others have said, Wichita uses that hold to stack military aircraft with TACAN for the most part. It’s not really used MUCH by civilians.

You know because you’re there too, that airspace is a mess of overlaid approaches. Jabara is there under all of that, and numerous others. Most civilians are shooting those approaches, even for training, which is probably why this plate went unquestioned by anyone for quite a while.

Wichita Approach has stated they will not issue anything but a radar vector out of that hold now. That’s a start. Next step is to decide if the missed should make the plate say “TACAN Required”. That’d kill issuing it to the civilians going in there though who are just being vectored to final and “Cleared ILS” most days.

And hey @aterpster it does say “Military” above and left of the minimums box. Don’t need the Jepp.

That plate is just all sorts of fun as an eye chart and comprehension test. You can almost see the convolutions the designer keeps adding to it trying to make it sane.

 

[Clark1961]

You are in an airplane with VOR/ILS/DME but no RNAV and no TACAN receiver.
How do you fly the DME arc? How do you fly the missed approach?

And how does that response relate to the “primrose path” comment which was a response to my note that civilian traffic goes there too? Of course a tacan arc can’t be flown without a tacan receiver. The pilot has to use the “unable” word. No primrose, no path, no cutesy but pointless remark.

 

[denverpilot]

And how does that response relate to the “primrose path” comment which was a response to my note that civilian traffic goes there too? Of course a tacan arc can’t be flown without a tacan receiver. The pilot has to use the “unable” word. No primrose, no path, no cutesy but pointless remark.

He’s saying the pilot could easily miss the missed equipment requirement of needing a TACAN and be cleared for the approach and never notice it until needing to go missed.

Primrose path. The plate looks visually at first glance like any “normal” ILS with a missed off of a VOR. You get it. You have to read closer.

Here’s the fun question. Does the Dreamliner ever accept this ILS and do they have TACAN aboard, or is their plan to just declare emergency authority to make up where they go next, if they go missed and lost comm at the same time?

I suspect the only reason this approach isn’t completely removed from civilian view is the civilians are cleared for this ILS all the time and never notice they can’t fly the missed as published.

Could also accept the approach if you ask for alternate missed instructions and maybe that’s what Wichita is actually doing for civilians.

“Cleared ILS, amend missed approach procedures, fly runway heading to XXXX altitude, intercept the 15 DME arc, then as published.”

 

[Clark1961]

He’s saying the pilot could easily miss the missed equipment requirement of needing a TACAN and be cleared for the approach and never notice it until needing to go missed.

Primrose path. The plate looks visually at first glance like any “normal” ILS with a missed off of a VOR. You get it. You have to read closer.

Here’s the fun question. Does the Dreamliner ever accept this ILS and do they have TACAN aboard, or is their plan to just declare emergency authority to make up where they go next, if they go missed and lost comm at the same time?

I suspect the only reason this approach isn’t completely removed from civilian view is the civilians are cleared for this ILS all the time and never notice they can’t fly the missed as published.

Could also accept the approach if you ask for alternate missed instructions and maybe that’s what Wichita is actually doing for civilians.

“Cleared ILS, amend missed approach procedures, fly runway heading to XXXX altitude, intercept the 15 DME arc, then as published.”

Nice story but the “primrose path” response was nonsequitur to my post which pointed out civilian traffic goes into McConnell. Assigning a hold which can’t be flown without tacan leads exactly nowhere. The pilot must use the “unable” word or fly the hold illegally using gps in which case they may as well fly the arc using gps.

 

[denverpilot]

Nice story but the “primrose path” response was nonsequitur to my post which pointed out civilian traffic goes into McConnell. Assigning a hold which can’t be flown without tacan leads exactly nowhere. The pilot must use the “unable” word or fly the hold illegally using gps in which case they may as well fly the arc using gps.

I think he was in the “analyze plate as a designer” mode when he said that. Not really addressing your statement.

It’s a fun plate. Nice and messed up for handing to someone and going over. Even more fun if you could set them up in VMC training for the gotchas on it. Not so fun if you’re given it as a surprise in turbulence and you’re trying to read all the multiple things on it and miss the details of the missed.

Not everybody has an autopilot so they can peruse the plate at their leisure. Single pilot hand flying you could probably trap even very proficient Instrument pilots with this plate if you set up the scenario correctly and they weren’t expecting this approach.

That’s what I think he’s saying about a primrose path. No, they shouldn’t accept it. But I bet a CFII could get someone to.

Whether they could get the Approach folks to purposely issue the published missed to a civilian aircraft would be the next step of springing that trap.

I suspect not. Especially since someone brought the plate to the attention of the supervisors and they’ve already told the controllers always to issue the vector out of the hold. They probably analyzed it and made sure to reiterate that civilians need alternate missed procedures, too.

Could be fun to listen to LiveATC and see if the civilians are accepting the ILS without those. The 134.85 frequency is fed. Doesn’t look like the other two on the plate are. Not sure which sector would actually issue the approach clearance.

 

[luvflyin]

ATC won't issue that clearance.

Shouldn't. Betcha it's been done though.

 

[luvflyin]

Picked this one up from another forum. Kinda fun.

You’re in the hold at KOSAC and ATC says, “Bugsmasher 54321, cleared ILS Approach Runway 19R.”

Can you accept that clearance?

How about Lost Comm?

I know after looking at it what I would do, and I also know from info on the other forum that Wichita area HMFWICs know this approach is screwed up. They’re thinking about it. They have it partially fixed via procedures if the radio is working.

But it’s a fun one to look at and scratch your head and wonder what the approach designer was thinking. You can even guess a little at what they were thinking, there’s a huge hint on the plate.

Legally however, you can get parked in that hold and have a bit of a problem if you have either of the above two scenarios happen to you. Relatively easy to solve in either case, but the plate could trick you into accepting or doing the obvious you’d have to do anyway if you lost comm there.

One for your collection of oddballs @aterpster ...!

Radar required for holding above 4000 is quite a hint. NORDO, I'd just get on the Arc and do the Approach

 

[aterpster]

And how does that response relate to the “primrose path” comment which was a response to my note that civilian traffic goes there too? Of course a tacan arc can’t be flown without a tacan receiver. The pilot has to use the “unable” word. No primrose, no path, no cutesy but pointless remark.

I certainly had no intention of offending you. I've worked with this stuff too long to be cutesy. Too many smoking holes in my work history for that.

 

[denverpilot]

Radar required for holding above 4000 is quite a hint. NORDO, I'd just get on the Arc and do the Approach

Yeah it’s a toss up. Do whatever results in a successful outcome of the flight. If the entire plate was “RADAR Required” you’d probably go elsewhere. But it’s not.

And then there’s the missed if you go missed and you’re already NORDO without a TACAN receiver.

If you realize there’s two problems with the plate and go lost comm in the hold in IMC, you probably just want to pick some other approach to fly.

Or at least have a plan for your own obstacle clearance for a missed. And that’s a pretty big risk to take on when that area is littered with all sorts of approaches that won’t put you in that situation.

I’m curious why the plate doesn’t just use the localizer back course out to 15 miles.

Is there an obstacle out there or is 15 miles too far for a back course? @aterpster might be able to answer that. The TACAN azimuth is only a few degrees off of the backcourse. But at 15 miles that’s a fair distance apart. Not huge but it’s not the same point in space.

And admittedly I’m asking that question without looking at the enroute or VFR chart in that area. Lazy.

 

[denverpilot]

I certainly had no intention of offending you. I've worked with this stuff too long to be cutesy. Too many smoking holes in my work history for that.

Hopefully in someone else’s work history at an adjoining desk area and not yours! Ouch. Haha.

 

[mscard88]

This approach wouldn't be issued to a civilian aircraft as there are 2 ILS/LOC approaches, 4 RNAV approaches, and 4 TACAN approaches. So plenty other approaches available. As a former Air Force controller this was the SOP at bases I was assigned to. If by mistake a TACAN was issued then the pilot should, as Clark mentioned, state unable.

 

[aterpster]

Hopefully in someone else’s work history at an adjoining desk area and not yours! Ouch. Haha.

Nope. After the fact as an ALPA accident investigator and technical safety committee. My day job was flying.

 

[roncachamp]

Shouldn't. Betcha it's been done though.

It's obscene.

 

[Palmpilot]

Sure, but that's not a "normal" thing to do for most civilian pilots. I'd bet most wouldn't even know that was possible or where to look for the paired VHF frequency.

Use Jepps.

It's also on government low altitude enroute charts and area charts.

 

[luvflyin]

The only civilian traffic that I'm aware of at McConnell is the Dreamlifter and Doc. They are working on building a hangar for Doc at Eisenhower so that won't last much longer.

Doc?????