Because you didn't, I could've drowned. Got up to let the dog out at 3:00 AM and decided to check email. Got interested in this discussion and stayed up the rest of the night looking at different charts, TERPS, AIM and stuff. Got cold because the thermostat was set back, decided to take a hot bath and fell asleep in the tub.
Better information is source: the 8260-2, which you can download from the FAA's NFDC site:
I appreciate that. Having said that, most of the commercial ops there are NetJets.
I managed to come across a shot if it searching Google images. It's a LOC DME 15, rather than a letter, so it's a straight in rather than circling approach. Accordingly, minimums are lower. About 1,000 AGL rather than 2,000 AGL.
Is there a nonstandard missed approach climb requirement?
Look at the Aspen Seven departure for departure minimums. 650 ft/nm to 13k, then 840 ft/ nm
Ok...325 ft/mile to 11k on the missed. Not huge, but since the MDA gets you down in the immediate vicinity of terrain (the other approaches really don't), it makes sense that you'd have to claw your way up for a bit.
Also, LINDZ intersection is gone. There goes your GPS missed option--they want you on the back course for sure.
As Wally said, that would be debatable.
Note the date on this chart. On the latest update on Foreflight, this approach no longer exists. The new one is LOC/DME-E. Or did I miss the discussion on the evolution of the approach? Wouldn’t be surprised.
There's also an RNAV version of the special apprach.
You missed this part in the discussion: It's a special approach, privately created and vetted. It never has been part of the publicly-available set of approaches. You have to undergo special training and, after raining, Jepp will supply you with the approach for use. From the above chart:
If GPS can't be used to track localizers, then what is this? Do you have the chart for LOC DME RWY 15?
No. I don't have the chart. And, it's the LOC Rwy 15 because LOC/DME is obsolete naming convention. I'm sure there is a note in the Jepp briefing strip that states "DME Required."
I thought the ILS/DME naming convention is what is obsolete.
You would think they'd rather have "/DME" in the title than "DME REQUIRED" plastered in the plan view, assuming that's how they'll be revising this approach.
Apparently, they are going to say what DME is require for in the notes box.
That note section is becoming a real dumping ground, the titles are getting longer and the plan and profile views are covered with capital letters, asterisks and footnotes. I think the lawyers took over the asylum.
You can see the discussions in the charting forum - the guys who write the charts - about the reasons. Currently, "required" is required for the approach no matter the reason, although, if you happened to have memorized it, you can theoretically tell by where the required is written; plan view, title, or notes box. I think a lot of folks will welcome the change, although I know it's much more fun for old people to be negative about any changes and blame lawyers.
Oh yeah? Next time you're in the area bring your roller skates. We'll see who's older, you or me.
"They" decided otherwise.
(No, it wasn't lawyers. Rather FAA operational types and pilot reps from industry.) You can probably track the history on the FAA's ACF site.
Oh I was just poking a little good-natured fun toward Mark. No doubt the ACF committee wanted to make room in the title space for easy to pronounce titles that trip right off the tongue like, "Cleared for the ILS Z or LOC Y RWY 18 approach." Say what?"They" decided otherwise.
We'll have a contest to see who falls down most. Be sure to bring our helmets!Oh yeah? Next time you're in the area bring your roller skates. We'll see who's older, you or me.
Google "roller skating circle waltz" without the quotes, I should be at the top of the list (not to be confused with a top notch skater). No helmets required.
Waaaayyyyy too off topic for me. But I guess I'm older. You started skating about the time I stopped.
It keeps you young and is way more fun than riding that toboggan down the LOC approach at ASE, landing with a tailwind and trying not to have to make a go-around. For a minuscule fraction of the cost too. Aaand, you have a lot less farther to fall.
