Lost Communication

[TeenDoc]

******** Cross-posted in the Red Board and the CPS Forum ********​

Doing some reading I came across this exercise. What would be your answers?

You depart John Wayne Airport (KSNA) in Santa Ana on your way to Montgomery Field in San Diego (KMYF). Your clearance is: BALBO V23 MZB. Approaching MZB in IMC you loose communication with ATC. Forecast conditions at KMYF are: ceiling 800 and visibility 1 ½ miles.

Which approach would you choose?
How would you navigate to shoot the approach?

The approaches available are attached.

 

[tonycondon]

seems to me, either way you would probably want to go to BAKEL and then follow the feeder into the approach. i would likely opt for the ILS. i would probably fly from the VOR to BAKEL at 3900

 

[ScottM]

******** Cross-posted in the Red Board and the CPS Forum ********​

Doing some reading I came across this exercise. What would be your answers?

You depart John Wayne Airport (KSNA) in Santa Ana on your way to Montgomery Field in San Diego (KMYF). Your clearance is: BALBO V23 MZB. Approaching MZB in IMC you loose communication with ATC. Forecast conditions at KMYF are: ceiling 800 and visibility 1 ½ miles.

Which approach would you choose?
How would you navigate to shoot the approach?

The approaches available are attached.

Are you sure this is the clearance 'BALBO V23 MZB' ??

It was not something more like,
You are cleared to the MFY airport viaBALBO V23 MZB

I ask because in your version the clearance limit is MZB and in mine it is the MFY airport. Technically that makes a difference in what you can do to stay within the letter of the FARs. But, IMHO, comms lost in IMC is an emergency so you can do whatever the heck you want. One choice being if you know where there is VMC and it is safe to do so, squawk 7600 and go there, once in VMC land safely and as soon as practicable. The other fly your clearance and land using the most appropriate approach that allows you a safe landing, even if that means that you will deviate from you clearance, it is an emergency after all.

Once you are lost comms ATC will be watching you closely. They will want you out of the way as fast as you safely can.

 

[Henning]

Are you sure this is the clearance 'BALBO V23 MZB' ??

It was not something more like,
You are cleared to the MFY airport viaBALBO V23 MZB

I ask because in your version the clearance limit is MZB and in mine it is the MFY airport. Technically that makes a difference in what you can do to stay within the letter of the FARs. But, IMHO, comms lost in IMC is an emergency so you can do whatever the heck you want. One choice being if you know where there is VMC and it is safe to do so, squawk 7600 and go there, once in VMC land safely and as soon as practicable. The other fly your clearance and land using the most appropriate approach that allows you a safe landing, even if that means that you will deviate from you clearance, it is an emergency after all.

Once you are lost comms ATC will be watching you closely. They will want you out of the way as fast as you safely can.

Actually, the proceedure is written even if given as MZB in the clearance (although without an EFC from MZB, you can't accept the clearance), and that is to proceede from the clearance limit as filed at the EFC.

 

[TeenDoc]

Are you sure this is the clearance 'BALBO V23 MZB' ??

It was not something more like,
You are cleared to the MFY airport viaBALBO V23 MZB

The question is really about the approach and how to navigate it!

 

[ScottM]

Actually, the proceedure is written even if given as MZB in the clearance (although without an EFC from MZB, you can't accept the clearance), and that is to proceede from the clearance limit as filed at the EFC.

good point. I was just trying to put an end to the file to the IAF discussion that never seems to end.

 

[Henning]

******** Cross-posted in the Red Board and the CPS Forum ********​

Doing some reading I came across this exercise. What would be your answers?

You depart John Wayne Airport (KSNA) in Santa Ana on your way to Montgomery Field in San Diego (KMYF). Your clearance is: BALBO V23 MZB. Approaching MZB in IMC you loose communication with ATC. Forecast conditions at KMYF are: ceiling 800 and visibility 1 ½ miles.

Which approach would you choose?
How would you navigate to shoot the approach?

The approaches available are attached.

MZB then Outbound to Baret, pull a PT then inbound as per the ILS plate backing it up w/ the GPS if so equiped.. Either proceedure will look about the same to ATC and would be what the expect UNLESS you have (as is often the case) VFR at El Cajon, then I would proceed MZB to Baret and If I could see El Cajon (or other VFR) I'd squawk 1200, Ident, pick up my old squawk (or 7600), and head there. If my coms are out in most combined radios, my navs are automatically suspect as well, therefor if the option is available, I will default to VFR.

 

[Ken Ibold]

I'm with Tony. I'm flying MZB direct BAKEL at 3900, then a sharp right to get to MIBBY and shoot the ILS.

 

[Ken Ibold]

MZB then Outbound to Baret, pull a PT then inbound as per the ILS plate backing it up w/ the GPS if so equiped..

Why is a PT not authorized on the ILS plate? I would be concerned about terrain in a procedure turn given only the information at hand and I'm too lazy to look it up right now, so I would eliminate that as a course reversal. Maybe an 80/260 course reversal to the right between BAKEL and BARET, but more likely I'd be wary of the terrain and just crank a hard right at BAKEL.

 

[wsuffa]

I'm with Tony. I'm flying MZB direct BAKEL at 3900, then a sharp right to get to MIBBY and shoot the ILS.

I'd stay above 5000 to BAKEL, though technically you'd be in the 7600 section of the chart.

 

[ScottM]

I'd stay above 5000 to BAKEL, though technically you'd be in the 7600 section of the chart.

yep, although the course from BARAT to BAKEL has a min of 5500.

 

[TMetzinger]

I'd go to BAKEL at 5000 or higher, and then make the right turn, descend to 3900 and intercept the localizer.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

I generally like what Tony said. If one flies east from MZB on the 076 radial, that is part of V66. Might be good to check the MEA on that airway. Lots of cumulogranite just east of this approach. Baret is the feeder for the Loc D into KSEE (which is just a bit north and more east of MYF. There is a normal feeder from V66 into MYF on these approaches which Tony has picked up.

Don't be surprised if the routing is more like above except PACIF V 208 JLI V460 CANNO V66 MYF. That gets one out of the busy Class B San Diego airspace. Still, the approach would be made off V-66 and the ILS contemplates vectors to final.

Watch those altitudes <g>

Best,

Dave

 

[flyingron]

Baret isn't a "feeder" it's a fix in the middle of the approach. Technically you need to go to BARET (The R-076 is actually also a victor airway, so there is a published route out there).

 

[wsuffa]

Baret isn't a "feeder" it's a fix in the middle of the approach. Technically you need to go to BARET (The R-076 is actually also a victor airway, so there is a published route out there).

Correct. But I'd consider lost comms headed into the mountains to be an emergency, which allows deviation from the rules *IF* you think you can make the turn safely.

But then again, with the fires and all, there just might not be an airport anymore.

 

[flyingron]

Correct. But I'd consider lost comms headed into the mountains to be an emergency, which allows deviation from the rules *IF* you think you can make the turn safely.

But then again, with the fires and all, there just might not be an airport anymore.

I didn't say I disagreed, just quibbling over the terminology. I'm not sure I'd fly uphill (the MEA going EAST towards BARAT is 8000).

 

[TeenDoc]

****** LONG *******​

I'm throwing this out for discussion not as the answer. I don't think there is just one right answer.

I looked at it for a long time sitting comfortably in my office with all the time in the world, a lot longer than I would have been able in the plane in the soup.

Assuming that I would have been flying my own plane equipped with GPS certified for terminal operations, this is how I would have done it.

1. I would have been flying towards MZB using NAV 1 for course guidance and COM 1 to communicate with ATC when both COM 1 & 2 failed. As Henning wrote, if both my COMs failed I would have not trusted my NAVs either. (It’s not about electronics, just gut feeling and adrenaline.)

2. The MEA for V23 between the BALBO intersection and the OCEANSIDE VORTAC (OCN) is 040 and for my direction of flight the lowest altitude available would have been 050. So, I would have been most likely flying at 050 or 070. I would have stayed at or above 050.

3. I would have switched to GPS for course guidance and squawked 7600.

4. After passing MZB, I would have turned and flown direct to DEORO.

5. Reaching DEORO I would have turned outbound toward NESTY.

6. Immediately after passing NESTY outbound I would have done a procedure turn on the north side of the approach course.

7. Once established inbound I would have started the descent and flown the approach (GPS RWY 28R).

Assuming that I would have been flying in a plane not equipped with GPS, I would have flown the same course relying on the NAVs and would have shot the ILS.

My main reasons for doing it this way were:

1. Using the GPS for course guidance which I consider more reliable equipment for navigation under the circumstances.

2. Staying above the MSA altitude at all times.

3. Staying within the 10 NM ring.

4. There is no standard feeder route from MZB. Any course chosen to reach the approach course would be non-standard. My choice, in my judgment, is the safest and most expeditious way to get on the ground. In an emergency situation I as PIC am the final authority regarding the safety of the flight and I would have exercised that authority this way.

 

[ScottM]

The only thing that I would add is that probably the only common failure point for a dual comm loss would be a loss of power. Therefore even you GPS would be tango uniform, in which case you are in a world of excrement!

 

[wsuffa]

3. Staying within the 10 NM ring.

4. There is no standard feeder route from MZB. Any course chosen to reach the approach course would be non-standard. My choice, in my judgment, is the safest and most expeditious way to get on the ground. In an emergency situation I as PIC am the final authority regarding the safety of the flight and I would have exercised that authority this way.

The 10 mile ring is centered on NESTY (MY, the LOM), so you could go further out on the radial, as long as you don't go past MIBBY. If you're using GPS, you'll know when you're getting close. Having the extra distance to descend from 5000 would be desirable and lead to a more stabalized approach.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Baret isn't a "feeder" it's a fix in the middle of the approach. Technically you need to go to BARET (The R-076 is actually also a victor airway, so there is a published route out there).

Excusa me. Yes, Baret is on V66 and is on the approach. I mistakenly used the term 'feeder'. When arriving at Baret on V66 is where one turns to intercept the localizer inbound. I mistakenly called it a feeder because that's where one normally turns in.

Best,

Dave

 

[poadeleted20]

First, I don't like the NDB or GPS 28R approach at all in this situation. If I don't have DME and/or an IFR GPS, with the weather forecast at 800 and 1-1/2, the NDB approach with its 900+ foot HAT is a waste of time -- even if I break out, I'll be too high to land by the time I see anything. Even if I do have the equipment to get to the PALOS mins, with a 400 HAT, I need a mile to get down from there once I do see the runway, and the actual vis when I get there could be significantly less than the 1-1/2 forecast vis. All in all, not my favorite choice for a "trick or treat" pass at the runway.

That leaves the ILS 28R approach. To be sure of staying on a published route for terrain/obstacle and descent gradient reasons, I'd have to go all the way out to BARET, turn around, and fly back in -- and with an airplane so sick I cannot receive any ground-air communications via any of the receivers I have aboard (comm, nav, handheld), I'd rather get myself on the ground by any means sooner (using my 530's TIS and obstacle clearance displays to help with traffic and terrain avoidance) than go flying out NORDO into the high terrain east of San Diego.

Therefore, in my plane, with my GNS530, I'd probably proceed direct DEORO at last assigned, go out on the localizer descending to 3300 MSL, perform a course reversal (yes, I know it says "Procedure Turn NA," but this is an emergency) at NESTY at 3300 MSL (after checking the sectional for any obstructions not apparent on the approach chart and also using the 530's built-in obstacle clearance function), and then fly the published approach from there. Alternatively, I might use the 530 to put myself on a wide downwind leg and give myself vectors to the ILS final approach course a couple of miles outside DEORO, again relying on the sectional and 530 for obstacle clearance and the TIS for traffic.

BTW, the only thing the 10nm ring is good for is telling you what part of the chart is shown to scale -- it has no other function or purpose, and provides no terrain or obstacle clearance information.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

That leaves the ILS 28R approach. To be sure of staying on a published route for terrain/obstacle and descent gradient reasons, I'd have to go all the way out to BARET, turn around, and fly back in -- and with an airplane so sick I cannot receive any ground-air communications via any of the receivers I have aboard (comm, nav, handheld), I'd rather get myself on the ground by any means sooner (using my 530's TIS and obstacle clearance displays to help with traffic and terrain avoidance) than go flying out NORDO into the high terrain east of San Diego.

Would you be kind enough to explain why you need to go to BARET? It would seem to me if you headed east on the MZB 076 radial, you would be on V66 and have to follow those MEAs. At BAKEL, you could turn right and intercept the localizer by turning to the Julian (JLI) 196 radial.

I do like Docs approach and yours, just don't understand why if you did go out on V66 you would be uncomfortable to BARET: as a matter of fact, the terrain gets higher there and there's no way to do a 180.

Of what's been discussed, I believe going east on V66 as Tony suggested works, but the altitudes are higher and trickier. The MEA steps up to 5500 between RYAHH and BARET to 8,000 going east.

I prefer the routes Ron and Doc suggest because one can stay lower in that southern sector. Going east on V66 NORDO would screw up all incoming traffic to San Diego and the surrounding airfields. Once Approach saw you heading to the LOM and making the procedure turn inbound, they'd be able to let other traffic arrive and depart from those other facilities.

Great exercise!!

Best,

Dave

 

[poadeleted20]

Would you be kind enough to explain why you need to go to BARET? It would seem to me if you headed east on the MZB 076 radial, you would be on V66 and have to follow those MEAs. At BAKEL, you could turn right and intercept the localizer by turning to the Julian (JLI) 196 radial.

In order to assure yourself of both terrain clearance and making all the descent gradients, you have to start from the IAF. If the MEA east of BARET is 8000, and there's an eastbound crossing restriction at BARET, then yes, you'd have to climb higher until crossing BARET westbound.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

In order to assure yourself of both terrain clearance and making all the descent gradients, you have to start from the IAF. If the MEA east of BARET is 8000, and there's an eastbound crossing restriction at BARET, then yes, you'd have to climb higher until crossing BARET westbound.

Thanks for the insight. It looked to me like there was a 3,600 MEA on the segment I mentioned. Did you just think one would find it difficult to turn there and would be in too close? I see it wouldn't get you out to the IAF as you stated.

Best,

Dave

 

[bbchien]

I would do none of the above. I would do one of two things, and this requires general knowledge of the weather prior to lost COM:

If the weather at Gillespie were adequate, I would climb to 7000, fly direct to BARET, and fly the LOC-D into SEE.

If the weather sucked, it'd be a "Hail Mary" from MZB on the 237 radial thence to procedure turn and thence the ILS 9. I would not mess with improvising obstacle clearances, this is a LOST COM emergency, they will figure it out, I'll have to call the tower and then be done with it. I would be alive to call the tower. SOCAL will figure out what I'm doing as I enter the procedure turn and two airlines will have to hold one round each.

If I were fortunate and hadn't passed Oceanside yet, I'd go to Palomar and shoot the ILS from HOMLY.

Go to lower ground with good runways and defined safe corridors that do not depend on radar, which is now SO USELESS to you.

Everybody lives.

Late Add: As Fast 'n Furious points out, good time to have had an alternate on your Flight Plan.....

 

[Dave Siciliano]

When I do fly out to this area to Gillespie (KSEE), MYF is my alternate because of the ILS approach. KSEE Localizer D minimums are essentially VFR. On short final, one passes some large hills; you need to be right on that localizer or visual!

If MYF was socked in, San Diego Intl would be my next stop as Bruce said.

Because I really know the area, going to MYF instead of going right into San Diego International wouldn't bother me. I do like staying in that southern sector where altitudes can be 5,000 feet instead of higher.

If you go out to Baret, you'll have to climb higher and make a procedure turn over the mountains in some safe manner. When being vectored in from the east, they usually bring you down to 6600 at Baret, but that would be hairy to do yourself. It's a challenging approach at the lower altitude. You really need to watch your speed or you'll never get to the MDA, and if you do get to the MDA, it's near the threashold. So, KSEE would only be an option to me if weather was very good.

Best,

Dave

 

[TeenDoc]

Ed Guthrie and other posters here or on the Red Board pointed out that R-076 from MZB leading to BARET, the IAF for both approaches, is V66.

With this new information, I would turn towards BARET and start climbing to 080 after passing MZB on V66. The MEA on V66 east of RYAHH is 080. Reaching BARET I would do a procedure turn staying at 080 and then after passing BARET inbound would start descending to shoot the ILS or the GPS.

A Victor airway width is 4 NM either side of the centerline. If I turn 45° either side of V66 and fly outbound for the procedure turn, I would have to fly 5.66 NM (Pythagoras' theorem) before I reach the boundary of the airway. Even at a GS of 300 knots I can remain within the boundary if I fly for a minute. Because of this reasoning I wouldn’t have to climb to the OROCA (099 for the quadrant where BARET is located) to remain at a safe altitude, follow standard procedures and comply with applicable regulations.

 

[poadeleted20]

With this new information, I would turn towards BARET and start climbing to 080 after passing MZB on V66. The MEA on V66 east of RYAHH is 080.

Unless there's an MCA of 080 at BARET for eastbound traffic, you should not climb above your last assigned altitude until crossing BARET. Sure, it's an emergency, you can do what you need, etc., but there is no safety reason for climbing to 080 before BARET unless there's an eastbound MCA.

A Victor airway width is 4 NM either side of the centerline.

The protected area for obstacle clearance is 4nm either side of the centerline; that does not mean the airway is 4nm wide. There is also an additional buffer zone of another 2 nm each side with half-standard obstacle clearance at 4nm fading to zero clearance at 6nm. However, this is all based on the surveyed centerline, and does not include any extra allowance for VOR or other navigation errors unless you're more than 51nm from the station, so don't ever count on that extra distance when you're considering off-airway operation.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Geesh Doc; guess my posts weren't clear. I stated BARET is on V66 in my first post and later discussed that is an intersection on the way into KSEE.

Best,

Dave

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Unless there's an MCA of 080 at BARET for eastbound traffic, you should not climb above your last assigned altitude until crossing BARET. Sure, it's an emergency, you can do what you need, etc., but there is no safety reason for climbing to 080 before BARET unless there's an eastbound MCA.[/size][/font][/size][/font]

The protected area for obstacle clearance is 4nm either side of the centerline; that does not mean the airway is 4nm wide. There is also an additional buffer zone of another 2 nm each side with half-standard obstacle clearance at 4nm fading to zero clearance at 6nm. However, this is all based on the surveyed centerline, and does not include any extra allowance for VOR or other navigation errors unless you're more than 51nm from the station, so don't ever count on that extra distance when you're considering off-airway operation.

I've flown this many times. Minimum vector altitude at BARET is 6,600 feet. If one stays below that, we will very likely be reading about them in a NASA report. Has anyone looked at the Low Altitude Enroute Chart? I'd sure stay with the posted MEAs in that area.

Best,

Dave

 

[poadeleted20]

I've flown this many times. Minimum vector altitude at BARET is 6,600 feet. If one stays below that, we will very likely be reading about them in a NASA report. Has anyone looked at the Low Altitude Enroute Chart? I'd sure stay with the posted MEAs in that area.

Whatever the posted MEA is on that airway west of BARET, fine, go there, but absent a higher MCA, there's no need to go to 080 until you pass BARET eastbound. BTW, there may be reasons for the MVA to be 6600 that have nothing to do with obstruction clearance, so when one is operating NORDO, one should stick with whatever MEA/segment altitude is printed on the relevant L-charts or approach plates as the "M" portion of the lost comm "MEA" triad (MEA, Expected, Assigned), whether that is higher or lower than the Minimum Vectoring Altitude (which you in the cockpit don't know anyway).

 

[TeenDoc]

Geesh Doc; guess my posts weren't clear. I stated BARET is on V66 in my first post and later discussed that is an intersection on the way into KSEE.

Best,

Dave

Sorry Dave, I did not look back carefully enough.

Ron,

The MEA east of RYAHH prior to BARET is 080.

 

[TeenDoc]

Has anyone looked at the Low Altitude Enroute Chart? I'd sure stay with the posted MEAs in that area.

Best,

Dave

It's available on line here.

 

[TeenDoc]

Eastbound I would climb to 080 after RYAHH towards BARET. Coming back westbound I would start descending to 056 after BARET and fly the procedure. MOCA is 055 and the distance from BARET to the 22 NM point where reliable signal for course guidance is guaranteed is only 5 NM. Even at a GS of 60 KNOTS, I'll reach that point above MOCA and will have reliable signal for navigation all the way down.

The concern about staying within protected airspace during the procedure turn east of BARET is a valid one. In our situation BARET is located 27 NM from MZB. Based on the numbers provided in the example on the Instrument Procedures Handbook referenced by DTURI on the Red Board, if we take into consideration only the allowable off-course deviation (3/4 CDI needle deflection) the error can be 3.5 NM off the airway centerline at BARET. If we add the maximum receiver tolerance for IFR operations (4°) the error can be 5.5 NM off the airway centerline.

The flip side and what was not mentioned in the referenced example is that if you take into consideration only the maximum receiver tolerance for IFR operations (4°) the error would be less than 2 NM off the airway centerline and almost 0 if you eliminate both.

That is why the same reference lists accurate flying (CDI needle in the center) and accurate navigation equipment in the aircraft first and second among the conditions on which staying within protected airspace depends.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Sorry Dave, I did not look back carefully enough.

Ron,

The MEA east of RYAHH prior to BARET is 080.

I was trying to be subtle so as to not make folks that aren't familiar with approaches in this area feel bad about voicing their opinions. That's why I made some observations and provided some hints and data without rendering a hard opinion Guess I was a bit too subtle

Notice some of the info like: there is a normal feeder off V66 for this approach. Baret is on the approach to KSEE and please look at the MEA on V66 for this area.

I don't disagree with anything that would reasonably get one on the ground safely in this scenario, but have tried to caution about altitudes several times.

Best,

Dave

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Eastbound I would climb to 080 after RYAHH towards BARET. Coming back westbound I would start descending to 056 after BARET and fly the procedure. MOCA is 055 and the distance from BARET to the 22 NM point where reliable signal for course guidance is guaranteed is only 5 NM. Even at a GS of 60 KNOTS, I'll reach that point above MOCA and will have reliable signal for navigation all the way down.

The concern about staying within protected airspace during the procedure turn east of BARET is a valid one. In our situation BARET is located 27 NM from MZB. Based on the numbers provided in the example on the Instrument Procedures Handbook referenced by DTURI on the Red Board, if we take into consideration only the allowable off-course deviation (3/4 CDI needle deflection) the error can be 3.5 NM off the airway centerline at BARET. If we add the maximum receiver tolerance for IFR operations (4°) the error can be 5.5 NM off the airway centerline.

The flip side and what was not mentioned in the referenced example is that if you take into consideration only the maximum receiver tolerance for IFR operations (4°) the error would be less than 2 NM off the airway centerline and almost 0 if you eliminate both.

That is why the same reference lists accurate flying (CDI needle in the center) and accurate navigation equipment in the aircraft first and second among the conditions on which staying within protected airspace depends.

I've flown into all three of the airports mentioned above: San Diego, Montgomery and Gillespie. One thing to note is the localizer signal can get distorted. Several folks I know that routinely fly into San Diego have cautioned me that one could get a false localizer signal. So, your comment about being concerned about being very careful about protected airspace is important.

Wonderful discussion of this stuff!!

Best,

Dave

 

[TeenDoc]

Wonderful discussion of this stuff!!

Best,

Dave

I agree Dave. I've learned a lot and have been reading as much as I do when I get an interesting and puzzling patient.

 

[poadeleted20]

One thing on which I think we can all agree is that there is a myriad of factors which must be considered when coming up with a plan of action after total communications loss in flight in IMC, and it's not nearly as simply as the "canned" solution from 91.185(c) makes it seem (and even that ain't that simple). It's a situation in which you must examine all information available to you in the cockpit, your own skills, the accessible equipment (IFR-certified, hand-held, or even your GPS-equipped cell phone), and what you know about what ATC expects from you, and use all of it to come up with a plan of action which gets you to earth safely and expeditiously. Further, there may well be more than one good solution to the problem, so what works best for one person may not be the same as what works best for another, and just because another person's solution is different than yours doesn't mean it's wrong for that other person.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

You depart John Wayne Airport (KSNA) in Santa Ana on your way to Montgomery Field in San Diego (KMYF). Your clearance is: BALBO V23 MZB. Approaching MZB in IMC you loose communication with ATC. Forecast conditions at KMYF are: ceiling 800 and visibility 1 ½ miles.

Which approach would you choose?
How would you navigate to shoot the approach?

Well, I read some of the arguing before I looked at the plates or the L-chart, and I decided to just answer the questions on my own before reading the rest.

So, we're on V23 northwest of MZB in IMC when we lose comm... First item of business, which approach to fly? There's no point in the NDB or GPS 28R unless we can identify PALOS, given the weather.

If I can determine that my Navs are working despite the loss of comm, I'd rather do the ILS. In any case, it looks like the sticking point is how to do a valid course reversal, as everything is "PT NA". For those who say "it's an emergency, I'd do one anyway" I reply that the rocks don't care if you're having an emergency - I'll try to stick to charted courses, thankyouverymuch.

So, we're wanting to do the ILS. The question didn't say (I don't think) what altitude we were flying when we lost comm. If we're at the MEA on V23 of 3000 feet, we'll need to climb to 4000 upon crossing MZB and head eastbound on V66. If higher, I'd begin descending to 4000 upon crossing MZB.

Now, I see that BAKEL and RYAHH are pretty much in the same place (0.6nm apart on V66). If I'm still much higher than 4000 I'll enter the hold depicted at RYAHH on the enroute chart to continue descending. Otherwise (or after descending to somewhere near 4000 in the hold), I'll make the turn from BAKEL down the feeder route on the 196 radial of JLI and descend to 3900, and continue the approach as charted.

If failures require that I fly the NDB or GPS approach, it looks like I could pretty much do the same thing. FWIW, I could fly the localizer on my Sporty's handheld, and flip back and forth to MZB to identify PALOS. So, if I have complete electrical failure, that's probably option 1 if I can get it to receive well enough.

The last-ditch option if I've had a complete electrical failure would be to make a compass turn to 270 and descend until I see water, then turn back around and proceed visually back toward land. If visibility allows, find an airport. If not, fly parallel to the shoreline and ditch in shallow water.

There's plan B, C, D, and E. Do I pass?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Immediately after passing NESTY outbound I would have done a procedure turn on the north side of the approach course.

Gil,

Following through I think you have a good plan, with one teensy possible exception: Why would you do your PT to the north side? It may feel comfortable because there's an airway there, but I would choose to do the PT to the south if I followed your method.

Why? Look at the MSA circle. If you do your PT to the north, you're flying towards an area with an MSA 2600 feet higher than you are.

Also, note that if you are going to fly the ILS, and you're still at 5000 when you get established near NESTY, you're going to have to drop 600 feet per nautical mile to get down to 2100 by DEORO so you can pick up the glideslope. Either way, it's going to be a "fall-out-of-the-sky" descent rate. Good thing you're a Cessna driver.

Is it bad that my preferred course reversal would be a half cuban eight?