Somewhere a little south of the halfway point between St. Louis and Indianapolis is Olney, Illinois. You might be asking, what makes this a relevant point for flying? Honestly, it has nothing to do with the town. Instead, it’s all about the airport’s instrument approach options and how you would know about them as an IFR pilot.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

You can fly at least one approach at this airport without the use of GPS, or even DME. And you don’t have to be psychic or sift through every airport and all the approaches they have to know this. You can tell by the note on the IFR enroute low altitude chart denoting “MON,” or minimum operational network, over the airport information box.

Transition to MON VORS

The FAA is decommissioning a significant number of VORs as we transition our national airspace system to rely upon performance-based navigation and area navigation systems. Most of us are familiar with these systems in the form of GPS.

There remains a potential for a GPS outage, signal blocking, or a failure of GPS systems onboard an aircraft. In each of these cases, a pilot should have a backup plan that doesn’t rely on GPS to get safely to the ground.

One of these options lies in the designation of MON-serviced airports. These airports are called out as a part of the FAA’s decommissioning of 30 percent of the VOR network by 2025.

What ‘MON’ Means on a Chart

MON airports are a relatively recent addition to IFR charts, indicating the airport offers an approach a pilot could complete without assistance from ATC, GPS, or DME systems. MON designations on low altitude enroute charts are the FAA’s method of indicating to a pilot that the airport has at least one approach not requiring GPS or DME systems.

These airports will ensure that a pilot will always be within 100 nm of an airport with an instrument approach not dependent on GPS or DME. The VOR MON is designed to be a reversionary service maintained by the FAA for use by aircraft unable to navigate using RNAV-based services during GPS outages. This is not to say all approaches at such an airport will be possible without using GPS or DME, but at least one approach will be available. The FAA’s goal is to ensure airports throughout the national airspace system are available in the event of a GPS outage.

MON Approach Options

The approach(es) not requiring GPS or DME might include straight-in and/or circling approach options. There is no guarantee that an available approach will be a precision one, however.

These airports may include an ILS approach to provide a glideslope option for lower approach minimums, or one without a glideslope, such as LOC-only or VOR-only approaches. In each of these cases, a pilot can get down to the lowest possible height above the ground in an emergency when one of these approaches becomes critically needed. With these options, the pilot will likely start the approach with a transition from the enroute environment to an approach utilizing a VOR as a transition point.

Longer Distances

A key part of making this transition possible has been the expansion of the ranges of use for remaining VOR stations. As the FAA has decommissioned some VORs, it has enhanced the service volumes of those that comprise the MON network.

The FAA included the new service volumes for VORs in the 2022 issue of the Aeronautical Information Manual. Most notable is that a pilot flying above 5,000 feet agl can expect the VOR service volume to be reliable for 70 nm from the station, an expansion from the previous 40 nm—which is still applicable when flying below 5,000 feet agl. This enhanced volume allows a pilot to transition to a VOR and onto an approach at greater distances than in the past.

About Alternatives

When we plan for alternate airports as IFR pilots, we most commonly think about weather requirement considerations. It might also be a good idea to research what navigation services an alternate airport might have.

Using a MON airport as an alternate allows a pilot to use a different navigation system if a transition to an alternate becomes necessary after a missed approach. Making MON part of your alternate selection process could become part of your best practices when filing IFR flight plans. Giving yourself all possible options isn’t a bad thing. While a MON airport might be slightly further away than another potential alternate, it does guarantee more navigation options.

A word of caution: It is always a good idea to make sure no NOTAMs are in effect that might affect your smooth transition to an alternate airport. Just because an airport is printed on the chart doesn’t mean it is always an option.

Non-WAAS GPS Aircraft

Some aircraft may be required to use airports that meet MON status. It may depend on the navigation systems and limitations of that particular aircraft.

For aircraft with GPS but not WAAS-capable systems, the benefit of filing alternate airports with approaches that do not require the use of GPS is still applicable. While many aircraft are equipped withWAAS-capable GPS navigators, some have not been upgraded. 

In these cases, a pilot seeking to file an alternate airport that doesn’t require GPS might find that MON airports are suitable—and handy—options.

Not Always the Biggest—or Busiest

I have noticed that airports designated as MON are not always the biggest or busiest. I suspect this is by design. If we experienced a period when a large number of aircraft needed to transition to a backup plan, we might not want them all going to airports with large traffic volumes. Also, the MON airports won’t always have runways long enough for larger aircraft.

Making the transition to considering MON airports and what that means for an IFR pilot may seem confusing at the outset, but through clear identification on enroute charts, pilots can quickly make planning decisions about alternates. Potentially more critically, a pilot can identify the best option to get on the ground during an in-flight loss of GPS service. Learning a little about MON airports might give you the information to safely manage a change of available navigation system service in flight. The LOC Runway 11 at Olney-Noble Airport (KOLY) in Illinois, with an approach you can fly without GPS or DME systems, might not be a location you planned to visit—but it might be where you end up if things didn’t go as planned at your original destination.

This approach can be established and flown without the help of ATC. An example of an approach critical to the MON system, it allows a pilot to get down safely in the event of a GPS outage. This approach is a critical part of the infrastructure of backup options and an example of many around the country in place to give pilots an option if they cannot complete an approach that requires DME or GPS services.

Establishing onto the Approach

A “full approach” is something most pilots don’t have to do often, instead taking advantage of air traffic control vectoring services to establish onto the final approach path of most procedures. But if ATC is unavailable or unable to offer those services, a pilot might need to get themself established. On the LOC Runway 11 approach at KOLY, this could be done by flying to either the Bible Grove (BIB) or Centralia (ENL) VORs that serve as initial approach fixes (IAFs). From either of these points, a pilot could travel in boundon feeder routes to intercept the localizer course of 110 degrees using the 110.5 localizer frequency.

LOC Only

This approach offers localizer (LOC) only services, therefore it does not include glide slope options. The approach is technically non-precision, but certainly more accurate laterally than just a VOR approach, and it guides a pilot along the 110-degree inbound course to the airport.

DME Available, but Not Required

While it is helpful if an aircraft is equipped with either an IFR-capable GPS or DME, it is not required for this particular approach. A pilot might choose to identify the ALAKE or LYMON waypoints using DME, but the final approach fix at LYMON could also be identified using a cross radial on the localizer with the BIB VOR on the 134-degree radial. This could identify the LYMON FAF from which the pilot could continue the descent to either the appropriate straight-in localizer minimums, or the circling minimums suited for their approach speed if they were circling to another runway for landing.

Timing Might Become Critical

Using a timer on this approach might be required and is a commonly overlooked item for many pilots when transitioning beyond the FAF. In the absence of DME or a GPS to help identify when to go missed, a pilot on this approach needs to rely on timing. 

A pilot starting a timer at the LYMON FAF needs to estimate their ground speed and use the table on the chart to determine when they would reach the missed approach point. A pilot flying the approach at 120 knots would fly for two minutes and 18 seconds while descending to their minimum descent altitude, and go missed if they had not seen the runway environment. This skill can easily get rusty for pilots who rely on GPS to tell them when to go missed. Practice the move in case you need it on an approach such as this.

Missed Via Radials

Even if the pilot goes missed, the DME (or substituted GPS) would not be required for flying the climbing right turn to 2,400 feet on a 290-degree heading, intercepting the BIB VOR R-172, and then holding at the ALAKE intersection where the BIB VOR and LOC have a holding pattern depicted. This might require a pilot to shake some rust off their cross-radial skills, but the process remains valid and potentially critical for use if GPS systems become unavailable.

A more traditional approach like those many old school pilots (a label I am identifying with more and more as years go by) flew as the standard still has strong validity in our current system. Keep your skills sharp for approaches such as this in case you ever need to use them.

This article was originally published in the February 2023 Issue 934 of FLYING.

The post Flying the MON appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

A destination in both the summer and winter, Jackson, Wyoming, is a city growing in its attraction and its aviation activity. With lots of high terrain around, an approach into this airport requires a pilot to closely follow altitude restrictions, especially if a missed approach becomes necessary.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

A. Turns From IAFS to Intercept

With official initial approach fixes (IAFs) at the DNW VOR and the MOSSS points, a pilot might choose to transition from these along feeder routes to the ZIBIV intermediate fix (IF) onto the approach. From here, there will be more turns after reaching ZOSUV and WOMRU to establish onto the final approach path of 187 degrees for the ILS or LOC. Be ready to make turns whether flying the approach by hand or making sure your autopilot properly transitions along the procedure.

B. DME from the LOC

DME notations along the descent on this approach are listed as from the source IJAC; this is the localizer. With a VOR that is closely situated to the runway, selecting the wrong source would get a pilot close, but not give them the correct distance when identifying waypoints along the localizer path.

• READ MORE: Destination Jackson Hole

C. Climb Rate in FPNM, Not FPM

Going missed requires a pilot to fly a path, but in this case it has vertical climb requirements. There are two notes here that depend on if the pilot is flying the ILS or just the LOC approach. They require that a pilot can maintain at least a 241 or 248 feet per nautical mile climb gradient to designated altitudes (9,600 and 9,800 feet, respectively) if a missed approach is needed. This climb gradient is not a “feet per minute” climb that we see on the VSI, but “feet per nautical mile,” which requires you to get into the performance charts for the aircraft to determine if you can meet or exceed this requirement at the local density altitude.

D. VOR for the Missed

Going missed on this approach has a pilot transition their navigation source from the inbound using the LOC to using the VOR 192 degree radial to the KICNE waypoint. Be ready to switch that nav source and turn from the 187 degree inbound to a 192 outbound course from the VOR if needed.

E. Check Those MSAS

Many airports will have minimum safe altitudes around them a couple of thousand feet above the airport elevation. These altitudes will typically give 1,000 feet of obstacle clearance within a 25 nm radius of the point depicted. These are to be used in the event of an emergency where a pilot needs to get clear of terrain if off of a published segment of the approach. On this chart, altitudes of 14,900 feet to the northwest and 12,700 to the south and east would be needed to get to a clear altitude. For an aircraft not turbocharged or turbine powered, these might be unreachable altitudes.

F. Terrain All Around

An approach with a lowest decision altitude of 6,651 feet, there is no doubt that the pilot is going to find themselves well below terrain in the surrounding area. Numerous pinnacles above 10,000 feet msl—and a famous one to the northwest at 13,770 feet msl—might give a pilot pause when thinking about doing this approach in all but the best of conditions. The proximity of high terrain and its significantly higher levels than the approach in the valley makes it critical that a pilot not stray off course. A conservative one might choose to significantly increase their personal minimums at such an airport.

This article was originally published in the February 2023 Issue 934 of FLYING.

The post ILS Z or LOC Z Rwy 19 Jackson, Wyoming appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The Bahamas are a common international destination for many pilots in the eastern parts of the U.S., especially in the winter months when a little sunshine and warmth are welcome. Nassau is one of the few airports in the Bahamas with radar services and instrument approaches. While much of the cruising between islands might be done VFR, a pilot might shoot an approach if it is the final destination for their stay; if there are weather concerns; or as a way to sequence into the airport to clear customs before venturing further.

A. Transitions From En Route To Approach

HINZY, MAJUR, MELON, and KURAY are all waypoints from which this approach might be started, which then transitions into the MUNIE waypoint. All of these waypoints are also found on low-altitude en route charts and are on victor airways that might be used to transition en route to the ILS Runway14 approach into Nassau. A pilot planning ahead might choose their en route path to transition to one of these points. One of the most commonly used is the MAJUR intersection, which falls on BR22V-54V-57V, a victor airway that transitions off from the Palm Beach (PBI) VOR, taking the pilot from the East Coast of the U.S. into the Bahamas with the help of Miami Approach.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

B. DME Arc

A pilot choosing to transition onto this approach from either the HINZY or KURAY intersection might find themselves assigned a DME arc. While not as common in many locations as in the past, an arc such as this can be used by ATC to sequence traffic from multiple points onto a final approach path, as in this ILS Runway 14. Remember to use the turn-10, twist-10 (degrees) process to feed onto the approach while flying the 14 DME arc from the ZQA VOR until intercepting the final approach path of 143 degrees inbound on the ILS. For many pilots, an IFR-capable GPS can select the initial fix and help feed the aircraft around the DME arc. Don’t forget to make the ILS frequency active and switch to VLOC when flying this approach, though, if you are using the GPS to feed your aircraft from the initial fixes onto the final approach path.

C. Mixing With Big Aircraft

With many different aircraft of various sizes and speeds using this approach, be ready to mix it up in the airspace. With that said, you may be asked to maintain your aircraft’s best forward speed; to be vectored around a little bit if there are bigger aircraft needing to land; or to get out of the way quickly when landing. With an airport with runways of over 8,000 and 10,000 feet of landing distance, Nassau brings in big aircraft to use the facilities. You might be flying your GA aircraft on the approach between a Gulfstream ahead of you and a Boeing 787 behind you. Be honest if you can’t maintain something assigned to you. It’s certainly better than getting run over by a faster aircraft.

D. DME From the ILS

While a pilot using a traditional DME source will be using the ZQAVOR (112.7) for DME fixes, if using an intersection or the DME arc to feed onto this approach, they will need to transition to using the DME on the ILS frequency (110.1) once they pass the IZQA waypoint (the final approach fix). This can be confusing because prior to this, the pilot would be using the VOR. They need to swap the frequency for the DME source to the ILS (as denoted by the D6.9 IZQA notation at the final approach fix) for the last part of the approach.

E. Correct GPS Database?

GPS systems in aircraft have databases that include approach procedures for selected areas. Make sure if you are going here and planning on using approaches at all—anything beyond basic VFR—that your database subscription is not only current but includes the places you want to go. A subscription for a database that includes “United States” might include Puerto Rico, but not the Bahamas. A subscription for “North America” might be needed to get the right data. Verify this well ahead of your trip or plan on being a VFR-only operator for your time in the Bahamas.

This column was originally published in the December 2022/January 2023 Issue 933 of FLYING.

The post Nassau, Bahamas ILS 14 (MYNN) appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

A trip into Norfolk, Virginia (KORF), might just find you flying the ILS or LOC Runway 5 on a drippy, low visibility, overcast day like I needed to do a couple of years ago when dropping off friends for a series of meetings. Norfolk’s primary airport sits nestled in some pretty active airspace with a variety of airports nearby, so expect a busy approach radio environment.

A. RADAR REQUIRED

Many approaches have a method to establish onto the approach without the use of ATC vectoring assistance. This approach does not. Note 2 specifically indicates: “Radar required for procedure entry” in order to get the pilot established onto the approach. While many GPSs are likely to be able to navigate directly to the CALEY waypoint, it is worth noting that this is an “IF” (intermediate fix), not technically an “IAF” (initial approach fix). So, even if your GPS can get you there, ATC needs to be providing radar services as you are vectored onto the approach or navigate directly to CALEY in order to set you up on the approach somewhere outside of the PEAAY waypoint.

B. DME FROM THE LOC

The DME on this approach is sourced from the ILS receiver, but it doesn’t count down to “zero” like many do. In this case, it is because there is also an ILS approach to the opposite runway, 23, and that is where the DME transmitter is located. If you were flying the ILS to Runway 23, it would count down to a DME point closer to zero, but since this approach is using the DME source from the opposite end of the runway, your missed approach point when flying the approach as a localizer would be at 1.5 nm. This is also helpful to refer to as you fly the ILS and descend to the decision altitude. It’s also worth noting that it could be easy to have aDME source selected to the ORF VOR, which is located on the field, but that would also generate an incorrect DME datapoint to use when flying this approach.

C. GS AND AP LIMITATIONS

A small note in this approach indicates: “Glide slope unusable for coupled approach below 744 [feet].” For many pilots who actively utilize automation, this is an easily missed note. This is an indication that by the time they reach this altitude, they need to transition to hand flying the aircraft. Technically, allowing the autopilot to remain coupled to the glide slope beyond this altitude is not authorized. For an approach with a decision height down to 226 feet and a TDZE of 26 feet, it means a pilot is going to need to keep those hand-flying skills ready to take over for a portion of the descent after passing the FAF at PEAAY and before reaching the DA.

D. CORRECT VOR FOR THE MISSED

A pilot who chooses to go missed on this and proceed with the published missed approach can easily mix up exactly what they need to do. Seeing the ORF VOR denoted on the approach plan view, and a radial denoted to the JHALL intersection just to the right of it on the chart, a pilot might initially assume this is what they will do. But a note on the box indicates this is an “Alternate Missed APCH Fix.” This would be applicable only if the pilot was doing something other than the expected published missed approach procedure, had been assigned the alternate missed approach, or requested it. A pilot would be expected to fly directly to the CCV VOR and hold on the 029-degree inbound course. This requires a pilot to use a frequency and navigation source they had not used until this point on the approach. A savvy pilot might have this frequency in the standby well ahead of time if they thought there was any chance they might go missed.

The post Norfolk (KORF) ILS RWY 5 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

A bucket list trip for many pilots, flying an aircraft up to Alaska can involve some of the most scenic flying in a pilot’s lifetime. For many who are following the coastal route, Ketchikan becomes a first major stopping point for fuel when heading north from the continental U.S. Being next to the ocean, weather conditions may require a pilot to fly an RNAV (GPS) approach. As a potentially unfamiliar mountainous area, flying this approach might be a good idea even in VFR conditions to guarantee a clear shot to the airport

A. Use Feeder Waypoints

Waypoints such as DWARF, GIRTS, and LATRY are good points to consider using when establishing onto this approach. With minimum altitudes depicted from these points to the final approach path, a pilot can be assured they will remain clear of obstacles around the airport. An approach like this might be used even in marginal VFR—or even fully VFR conditions—to help guarantee obstacle clearance.

B. Check Descent Angle

A standard instrument approach will have a 3-degree angle of descent. This has a much steeper one. A note in the table that compares approach speeds in correlation to descent angle and fpm descent required shows a 6.49-degree descent angle. If you are flying an aircraft that approaches at 100 knots, this means you will need a 1,152 fpm descent rate after passing the ROZMO final approach fix to get down to the minimum altitude in time. This is certainly steeper than the typical 700 to 800 fpm descent rate we most often use when flying a nonprecision approach that doesn’t include a glide slope.

C. High Approach Minimums

While there are other approaches at this airport that have straight-in minimums, if a pilot selects this approach, only circling minimums are available. By allowing a descent no lower than 1,888 feet agl, the approach might not be the one to select in low weather conditions. A pilot should use this approach for a descent from the en route environment with a higher layer of clouds and to help sequence the airplane on a path aligned with the airport.

D. Circling-Only Minimums

While the approach path looks to be aligned with a runway, the procedure only offers circling minimums. This approach should help a pilot transition to visually maneuvering for a landing. There is also a note that indicates circling is not authorized northwest of Runway 11/29. The terrain features climb at one point to 3,285 feet—well above the lowest potential circling minimum of 1,980 feet—leaving a pilot below terrain that is close to the airport to the northeast.

E. Faster Approach Speeds?

The lowest minimums on this approach are available for aircraft capable of flying at or below 90 knots for their approach speed. If you are going between 90 and 120 knots on your final approach, it will increase minimums to 2,620 feet, a bump of 640 feet. Don’t cheat on this, because the faster speeds mean you might not clear terrain during a missed approach if you descend too low and need to climb out. The lowest published minimums on this approach may not be applicable for your particular aircraft’s approach speeds.

F. Patience on the Missed

From the airport, a pilot transitions to the CLOYD intersection and then to DOOZI where a 5-nm-leg hold would be entered if needed. The approach plate has the pilot doing this at 5,000 feet msl, and a total distance of 23 nm (16.3 nm beyond CLOYD) is needed to get to DOOZI from the PAKT airport. The goal is to get the aircraft into a location clear of obstacles where a pilot can hold while they decide what to do next.

The post Ketchikan, Alaska RNAV (GPS)-B (PAKT) appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Planning a little flying around Honolulu, Hawai‘i? Following along like the aviation dork I am on an airline flight, as you check out the approach plates the crew might be using; or just looking for a busy approach to test your knowledge? You might run across the LDA approach to Runway 26L at Daniel K. Inouye International Airport (PHNL). It’s an approach plate with lots going on—but don’t forget to look ahead if you break out high enough, as you’ll be aimed at the historic grounds of Pearl Harbor, before you follow the flashing lights on in to Runway 26L.

A. LDA: At an Angle

An LDA approach is a localizer-type directional aid that isn’t necessarily aligned with a specific runway. In this case, it’s designed to approach Runway 26L even though the final approach course is 304 degrees—a change of roughly 40 degrees to the final direction of landing. Why would they do this? From the plan view, you can see terrain features topping out at 3,121 feet msl to the east of the airport, so a straight-in approach isn’t going to work.

B. Flashing Lights?

Note 6 indicates that a pilot may “follow the flashing lights to Runway 26L.” Using this approach, as a pilot transitions to the minimum altitude and breaks out of the clouds there will be a sequence of flashing lights that will lead them to the intended landing runway, 26L. This is presumably to help reduce confusion on which runway you will be landing as the localizer course is based at the end of 26R and a landing is intended to be on 26L. Make sure you line up with the correct runway if flying this approach.

• READ MORE: Bucket List: Hawaiian Islands

C. GPS Required?

You can establish onto this approach using one of several initial approach fixes (IAFs). A pilot might choose to use NBODY, CUDEK, SHLAE, or even the SAKKI intersections to feed their aircraft onto the approach. Most of these will require the pilot to use the GPS even though the primary inbound navigation source for this approach will be a localizer frequency. While it is possible to use vectors—and VHF navigation sources for the missed approach—GPS sure makes this one easier to manage.

D. Mandatory Crossing Altitudes

Many fixes on approaches have “minimum” crossing altitudes. On this approach, many of the crossing altitudes are “mandatory.” We can see that at NBODY and CUDEK there are mandatory crossing altitudes of 6,000 feet, and at SHLAE it’s 4,000 feet. This is typically done on approaches where overlying airspace traffic would not allow a pilot to transition over these fixes at higher altitudes.

E. Confusing Missed Approach

The missed approach asks a pilot to climb, then turn and follow the Honolulu VOR (HNL) 171-degree radial to intersection ALANA using HNL and Molokai VORTAC (MKK). Initially, a pilot might think this means to fly over the HNL VOR, but with the missed approach point being 1.8 miles from the runway—a DME point of 2.2 from IEPC—the turn will actually take the pilot left and south of the HNL VOR to intercept this radial.

F. Pick the Correct DME

While most pilots will fly this with the approach loaded in the GPS system and get their DME from there, there is a note to use DME from IEPC when on the localizer course. When flying this approach with a more traditional instrument package, a pilot might accidentally use the HNL VOR DME, which is not located at the same position.

G. Unique Circling ‘Limitations’

There’s a note that this approach cannot be used to circle to Runway 22R. But this isn’t the only note. In the bottom right corner of the plate where circling minimums are listed for different aircraft speed categories, another note indicates that circling is not authorized to “Sea Lanes 4W, 8W, 22W, and 26W.” The “W” in each of these is an indicator that there are “runways” of water designated for seaplane operations at this airport. The upshot? You can’t use this approach to land on the designated water runways.

The post The Unique Approach to Honolulu’s LDA RWY 26L (PHNL) appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Nestled on the western end of the Appalachian Mountains, Chattanooga allows you to take advantage of plentiful outdoors activities while still having the opportunity to visit some great city options. As a pilot, who wouldn’t want to fly themselves there, right?

If you choose to do so, one approach you might use is the ILS or LOC to Runway 2 at Lovell Field (KCHA). The approach holds a few less-common features to watch for as you fly in. This approach is an example of many around the U.S. that are changing as VORs are decommissioned. Keep an eye out for these at other approaches you fly.

A: NDB Still Used?

In note No. 1 of the chart, and as depicted in the plan view section, you’ll see that an ADF is required to identify the NDB. For this particular approach, a pilot might choose to cross the DAISY NDB to establish themselves onto the approach, or it may be used if you need to go missed. The missed approach point (MAP) takes the pilot back to the NDB for the hold. The good news is you can use a current and IFR-certified GPS to identify this point; or, if you happen to still have a functional ADF in your aircraft, you could choose to do it the old-fashioned way. The note that an ADF is required confuses pilots as to whether or not they can make the approach using a GPS. Since the NDB is not being used as the primary navigation source for the inbound approach course, the answer is yes.

B: DME Arc

Another method to establish onto the approach is to use the DME arc. You begin by flying to the Choo Choo VOR and then outbound on the 126 radial to intercept the ZIROB waypoint at 12.0 DME from the VOR—or a pilot could navigate directly to ZIROB using GPS. Once reaching this point, the pilot would begin a right-turning DME arc until they inbound onto the ILS/LOC course. Key points include that you fly the DME arc using the VOR (on 115.8) as the nav source, and then transition to the ILS/LOC (on 108.3) once you turn inbound on the course of 022 degrees.

C: DME or No DME?

While a DME point of D12.0 R-214 GQO is listed for the QUIDS intersection, note that this DME is from the GQO VOR and not a DME fix along the final approach path. This particular ILS/LOC does not indicate that it has DME, so when you are traveling inbound on the course, any DME reporting would need to come from a GPS. This is also noted by the fact that no DME point is given for the MORRT intersection or a MAP along the final approach path. So when do you go missed? Well, if you are flying this as an ILS, the decision height will be important. If you are making a localizer approach, you will need to do it the old-school way: using a timer from your final approach fix (FAF). An example would be using the table in the bottom left of the chart and flying 2:46 at 100 knots from MORTT to the MAP.

• READ MORE: Chart Wise

D: The VOR Is Still There

The Choo Choo VOR still plays a big part in this approach, for now. The VOR could be used to start the approach, orient for the DME arc, or to help identify the FAF at MORTT using the 258-degree cross radial. It might even be used as an alternate MAP, if the DAISY NDB was unavailable or if ATC needed to create some traffic separation. This is going to change, though, and at some point this approach will change as well. The Choo Choo VOR is not a part of the plan for the minimum operational network (MON) of VORs that will be maintained as a part of the FAA’s Next Gen process of airspace modernization. So it’s unlikely that updated versions of this approach will still have a DME arc, and it might become necessary to have GPS to fly this particular ILS/LOC approach in the future.

This article was first published in the 2022 Southeast Adventure Guide of FLYING Magazine.

The post Chart Wise: Chattanooga ILS or LOC RWY 2 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

For those heading to the Denver area—especially those who plan to explore the north side of town—Rocky Mountain Metro Airport (KBJC) gives pilots a great option. More frequently used by general aviation traffic, this airport offers parallel runways and multiple FBOs. In the event of IFR weather, a pilot might choose to use the RNAV (GPS) Rwy 30R approach. In the spring-time, pilots should watch for mountain wave-induced winds that can hammer the mesa upon which the airport sits. Summer brings the thunderstorm season, though cells are often widely spread and easy to spot visually. A few other things stick out on this approach that a pilot should note before they head inbound.

A. Multiple IAFs

Approaching from the south, a pilot might choose NSPYR or if from the north or east, ROKXX as the first point they select on their GPS to transition onto the courses for this approach. Each of these waypoints offers a pilot an opportunity to select a most efficient position from which to get established onto the approach and continue inbound.

B. Mandatory Altitude at LAWNG

Not something you see on all approaches, this approach has an inter-section that has a “Mandatory” altitude noted. When a pilot transitions from the PLAAY fix to the LAWNG intersection, they’re expected to be at 7,000 feet msl, not above or below it. It is not a minimum altitude—in this case, it is a mandatory altitude. This is most commonly used when ATC needs to route traffic across points where over- or underlying air-space may have other traffic transiting at different altitudes.

[elementor-template id=”143209″

C. Minimums For WAAS and Non-WAAS

Knowing what approach minimums are applicable for the equipment in your aircraft is important. In this case, the two main approach minimums that most aircraft have to choose between are LPV and LNAV. Offering both of these options, the approach allows an air-craft capable of receiving WAAS to fly to LPV minimums that are lower than those for an aircraft not equipped with WAAS. Those without must fly to the LNAV minimums. A pilot will need to know what equipment they have and use it to select the proper minimums as they fly down the approach. In lower weather conditions, it might be the difference between getting in or not. Plus, the LPV will offer the pilot a GPS/WAAS-derived glideslope they can follow for a stabilized approach.

D. When To Go Missed

With “going missed climbing arrows” depicted at multiple points from the1.0 nm point with a “1”number note and a “V”(visual descent point)and, beyond it, an “M” at the RW30R point, a pi-lot might get confused at when they really need to go missed on this approach. To determine which missed approach point (MAP) to use, re-fer back to the question of which minimums apply. For the “1” note indication, going missed would happen only if the pilot was flying the approach as an LNAV (non-WAAS) approach. The RW30R point would be applicable to LPV or LNAV/VNAV approach minimums and would require the pilot to go missed at the decision altitude along the glideslope—if the runway environment was not in sight.

E. Missed Procedure Not to Scale

The missed approach takes a pilot first on a climb straight ahead to 6,300 feet and then up to 10,300 feet after aright turn to the HYGEN intersection—and it has a note that says it is “Not to Scale.” This is a hint to the pilot that there maybe “some distance” be-tween the missed and the missed approach holding point. To get the depiction to fit on the chart, they need to do this some-times. It means the pi-lot will need to be ready for a small—or in some cases longer—distance to where they will arrive at the holding point. You’ll want to be ready to read the distance from your GPS box as you transition.

Editor’s Note: This article originally appeared in the Q2 2022 issue of FLYING Magazine.

The post Rocky Mountain Metro (KBJC), Denver RNAV (GPS) Rwy 30R appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

THE POMONA VOR on the VOR-A approach to El Monte, California (KEMT), may not be on the FAA’s “keep list,” when considering the eventual transition to a minimum operational network (MON) of VORs. But it’s a good example of a VOR approach for our analysis.

A VOR approach procedure may look simple at first, but it can get a little complex. For as long as the VOR serving this approach remains in service, if you happen to fly it, take your time and understand the details.

A: Feeding Onto The Approach

A pilot might choose to use the PDZ VOR or the PRADO intersection from the enroute environment when establishing themselves onto the approach. Both points serve as initial approach fixes (IAFs) with feeder routes (denoted by the heavy black arrows) to the POM VOR, from which a pilot would transition in bound to KEMT.

B: Altitudes for Holding

If a pilot is planning on holding at the POM VOR, either to establish onto the approach or just to create time to prepare before shooting the approach, there are both minimum and maximum altitudes. A minimum altitude of 4,000 feet msl is listed, and like most cases is there to keep you clear of terrain. But a maximum al titude is also listed. In this case, it’s 6,000 feet msl. The most common reason to do this on an approach is to keep an aircraft in the hold from becoming a concern for aircraft flying over at higher altitudes. In this case, the fact that Los Angeles airport (KLAX) is just over 20 miles to the west is one likely reason for overflights.

C: Hold/Feeder Route

A major gotcha on this approach for a pilot that goes missed is that the holding inbound course—which also happens to be the course inbound from the PDZ VOR—isn’t the same course that the pilot flies outbound from the POM VOR to the KEMT airport. Only some approaches have such a turn on them, and failing to make it here can lead a pilot into terrain. The inbound course from the POM VOR or in the hold is 292 degrees, and then the pilot must transition to the 258- degree radial. Continuing on the 292 radial outbound won’t get the pilot to the airport, and might cause an impact with terrain north of the airport.

D: VOR Not The FAF

On many approaches, a VOR serves as a final approach fix and the beginning of the descent to the airport. In this case, passage of the VOR does indeed allow a pilot to start descending, but it is not the FAF. The FAF is a DME point along the 258-degree radial at 6.3 DME from the POM VOR, SE LAW. If you have an aircraft using traditional DME sources—not substituting GPS for DME points—make sure you have the DME selected to the correct VOR. You could also identify SELAW using a third VOR, the SLIVOR with the 006 radial. This is especially important if you had transitioned
from the PDZ VOR to the POM VOR along the approach. Oh, and don’t forget to start that timer when you pass SELAW.

E: No Straight In, Circle Only

This particular approach offers only circling minimums. With the minimums only getting a pilot down to approximately 1,000 feet agl (depending on the approach category), a pilot will need to plan on circling to land on the runway of their choice.

F: Confusing Missed

The notes for the missed approach indicate an initial climbing turn to the left to 2,500 feet on a 070 degree heading. This is an assigned heading until the pilot intercepts the VOR R-278 to ADAMM (an intersection from the PDZ and POM VORs that can also be identified with DME from the PDZ VOR) before continuing on the radial to the PDZ VOR. The pilot should not “go direct” to the PDZ VOR from the MAP.

The post El Monte, California VOR-A: A Deceptively Simple Approach? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Arguably one of the most stunning lakes in the United States, Lake Tahoe sits at a relatively high elevation surrounded by even loftier mountains. This can make flying an approach to South Lake Tahoe, California, something that requires a little more attention than your average approach, especially if you are going to be using the LDA Runway 18 procedure.

If I had to choose, this might be one of the coolest and most beautiful approaches to fly in the United States—in VFR weather. In IFR, it certainly has a few key points you wouldn’t want to miss.

A. Getting onto the Approach

While vectors are often offered to establish an approach, there are times when a pilot may seek to establish themselves at a fix that leads them onto the approach—or needs to, owing to a lack of radar coverage in mountainous areas. Both of these are reasons a pilot might seek to do this using an initial approach fix. On this approach, two are listed, but notes are applicable.

• DON’T MISS OUT: Subscribe to FLYING Magazine

A pilot might choose to use the FMG or SWR VORs to get established on this approach. While both lead a pilot to the eventual final approach path, notes 1 and 2 indicate that this portion of the procedure is not authorized under certain conditions from either of these VORs. In both cases, the reason is that the VOR can be used from the en route portion of flight (something you would find on the low en route chart), but depending on the direction of approach, it would require a course reversal to then fly inbound on the feeder route. The gist is that a pilot approaching from the east would not be able to use the SWR VOR (V494 westbound), and a pilot approaching from the south to the FMG VOR (airway radials R-167 clockwise to R-241) would not be able to use these points under these conditions to establish the approach.

B. LDA: What’s That Again?

A less-common approach type, the localizer directional aid—sometimes referred to as a “localizer darn angle”—is a localizer approach that is not necessarily directly aligned with the intended runway of landing. In this case, the LDA is not significantly displaced, with a final approach path of 171 degrees for a landing on Runway 18, but it is not within the required allowance for the approach to be a standard localizer approach.

C. Straight-In Landing—No Circling

Even though the approach is slightly offset in its path to the intended runway of landing, Runway 18, only straight-in minimums are published for this approach. Circling minimums to the opposite end of the runway are not published, and this should be a good hint to a pilot that it should not be even considered. Looking at the chart, the reason is obvious: There is rising and abundant terrain to the south, east and west of the runway. If you aren’t going to be able to land on 18, a missed approach is going to be needed.

D. Going Missed at a Distance

This approach requires DME (or a suitable IFR-capable GPS system to substitute) capability onboard to fly the approach, and that DME is going to be used to identify a missed approach point. WUGUK, the designated missed approach point, is at 4 nm from the localizer (denoted by D4.0 ITVL) and is in fact 4.3 nm from the runway end. This is much farther away than missed approach points are for most approaches, but it also corresponds with a required visibility that is published as 5 miles[AC1] [JF2]  for this approach. This isn’t the kind of approach that is going to get you in on the worst of days; it is more about having an approach to get you close to the airport in what most might consider marginal weather while avoiding terrain in the area.

E. Speaking of Going Missed, It’s a Bit Complicated

It’s not your standard missed approach by any means. If the runway environment isn’t in sight by the DME 4.0 point and at the MDA, it’s time to start a right turn to a heading of 329 degrees until the pilot can then intercept the 102-degree radial (a 282-degree heading) to the SWR VOR. The pilot will then follow this radial to the VOR and enter a hold with left turns on the 218-degree radial (038 degrees inbound) at the relatively high altitude of 11,000 feet msl. Climb gradients for nonturbocharged or turbine aircraft can be a factor in environments like this, so if you are going to be doing this approach, make sure your aircraft will be able to meet all the requirements—of not just the inbound portion of the approach but also the missed-approach requirements in the event they might be needed.

The post South Lake Tahoe LDA Approach Requires Key Points Not to Miss appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

When most people think of Holland, wooden shoes, canals, windmills and tulips are often top of mind. But that’s the Holland on the east side of the Atlantic actually known as the Netherlands. The subject of this month’s Chart Wise, Holland in the western part of Michigan, does bear some similarity to the European country for which it was named. Each May, the city’s Tulip Time Festival recalls Holland’s Dutch roots and brings visitors from all around the nation to see the variety of flowers blooming around the city. The airport, originally called Tulip City, is a regular destination for one of this column’s authors. While the ILS approach to Western Michigan Regional (KBIV) isn’t terribly challenging from a flying perspective, the chart does include a couple of notations that aren’t commonly highlighted and might prove confusing to new instrument pilots.

A. Ground-Based ATC Communications

Though the airport is nontowered, the chart lists 133.825 as the frequency for “Great Lakes Approach,” a convenience that could be overlooked. Great Lakes can communicate with pilots on the ground, offering the opportunity to open or close IFR flight plans without using the phone. For clearances, take a look at the airport chart to view the clearance delivery frequency of 123.95.

B. Two DMEs Listed at the Intermediate Fix JAVPO

The ILS Runway 26 approach is commonly joined via the feeder route to JAVPO from the Pullman VOR (PMM) or via radar vectors from Great Lakes Approach. Pilots should, however, pay close attention to what navigational aid they’re using to identify the intermediate fix because it’s defined as both 13.2 nm along the IBIV localizer or 22.4 nm from PMM. Each uses a different frequency.

C. The Hold at JAVPO

The holding pattern depicted at the JAVPO intersection includes notes requiring a minimum holding altitude of 2,700 feet and a maximum holding altitude of 5,100 feet. These kinds of restrictions are most commonly used when there is potential overflight traffic that could conflict with aircraft at other altitudes. Grand Rapids Michigan Airport (KGRR), 27 miles northeast of JAVPO, is a busy commercial facility, for instance.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Missed Is Anything but Direct

The missed approach procedure to the ZEELE intersection can be a little confusing because the VOR that partially creates the intersection is not used in any other way until the missed approach. That can make the Victory VOR (VIO) frequency easy to miss until the pilot begins that initial climb straight ahead to 1,500 feet before making a right turn to a heading of 020 and climbing to 2,600 feet to intercept the VIO 285 radial, which begins off the chart. If you’re questioned about the hold entry after crossing the 185 radial of Muskegon VOR (MKG) and you chose course reversal back to ZEELE, you’d be correct. A GPS or DME could also be used to identify ZEELE.

E. Checking Notams Is Important

Awareness of current ground-equipment outages is always important, but for this approach, they can often be critical. Pilots who regularly fly to KBIV say the MKG and PMM VORs used to identify cross radials and the approach’s feeder route are often out of service, which means if your aircraft is not GPS-equipped, shooting this approach might at times be impossible.

F. Time Block, but No Time Listed

While a descent-rate box still exists below the approach’s profile view, confirming the need for a 3-degree glideslope, notice there are no times mentioned at the listed groundspeeds. This is because of the requirement to identify the missed approach point using DME—in this case, 1.2 DME from the localizer—or the decision height when flying this approach as an ILS. Hence, timing does not apply, even if the approach is flown as localizer-only.

This story appeared in the September 2021 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Holland, Michigan, ILS or LOC Runway 26 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Despite a falloff in world air traffic since early 2020, Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (PANC) in Alaska still represents a stopover point for thousands of airline and business-aviation flights between North America and Asia, as well as thousands of local general aviation and military airplanes. Visitors will notice that many of those local GA aircraft are mounted on floats, so they can freely move between PANC and the nearby Lake Hood Seaplane Base. About the terrain transient pilots can expect, city-data.com says: “The Chugach Mountains to the east have a general elevation of 4,000 to 5,000 feet, with peaks from 8,000 to 10,000 feet. These mountains block warm air from the Gulf of Mexico, keeping precipitation relatively low.”

A. Required Equipment

On this month’s chart, the ILS Runway 15 into PANC, pilots will learn that while many precision procedures allow a pilot to identify a final approach fix with a crossing radial, an outer marker or something similar, this procedure does not. That’s why the first note reminds pilots that DME is required. Even if an aircraft is vectored to the approach with ATC calling out the CARDD intersection, aircraft are still required to carry DME or a suitable substitute such as GPS to fly this approach.

B. DME ARC

DME arc approaches still exist, and this procedure employs two—one from each side of the final approach course. There are, however, no procedure turns. The DME arc is based on the Anchorage VOR (TED), making the arc a desirable method of establishing an aircraft on the approach. A pilot could fly directly to the TED VOR and then follow either the 288 radial to the IVANN IAF or the 012 radial to the PEPVE intersection, then via the 22-mile DME arc to intercept the IBSC localizer inbound. Pay careful attention to the requirement at some point to switch from the TED VOR to the ILS localizer that delivers DME data. It must be an easy switch to miss because Note 3 calls it out to the pilot reviewing this chart.

C. VOR to Navigate to CARDD IF

A feeder route for this approach is designated by the heavy arrow line coming from the Big Lake VOR (BGQ) to the CARDD intersection and represents a common path to join the approach from the en route environment, but there are a number of limitations. This route is not allowed “for arrivals at the BGQ VOR on V438-456 northbound and T227 northeast-bound” because it would require too steep of a turn to intercept the course back inbound.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Missed Approach or the Alternate?

Some approach plates, such as this one, publish a missed approach and an alternate missed approach procedure. Typically, these are provided when one fix may be unreliable at times—such as if a VOR is out of service—and are often located in completely different places. In this case, however, it might be easy for any pilot to be confused about why there are two, when both place the aircraft in holding at the JUKEP intersection. The primary missed approach is based around the 15-mile DME on the 210 radial from the TED VOR. The same intersection can be identified as the 34.2 DME on the 028-degree radial from the Kenai VOR (ENA). The difference here is not where an aircraft will hold but which VOR and DME source the pilot will be relying upon to establish themselves in the hold from the missed approach point.

E. No Localizer or Circling Minimums

Many ILS approaches can be flown as precision or nonprecision approaches, but this approach publishes only ILS minimums, meaning a pilot would not be able to use this approach to circle to land on another runway or if the glideslope were inoperative. It also means there is no approach timing available from the final approach fix from KANSY at the 6.2 DME point on the localizer, from the IBSC ILS transmitter.

This story appeared in the August 2021 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Anchorage ILS Runway 15 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Chicago’s Midway International Airport (KMDW) is heavily used by the airlines, business-aviation turbine fleets, and a sizable number of smaller GA transient and training aircraft, especially since the city of Chicago closed nearby Meigs Field (KCGX) some years ago. The PANGG 3 (RNAV) arrival is one of seven at KMDW, and controllers say it’s commonly used for traffic arriving from the east destined for runways 22L and 31C.

This arrival includes a variety of instructions the crew must absorb before entering the Chicago terminal area to be certain everyone understands what’s expected of them. Gathering all the critical data on one chart allows a pilot to sort through the details of this arrival procedure and reduces radio chatter and unnecessary vectoring by ATC.

A. The Beginning

The PANGG 3 offers pilots at least two initial connection points beginning in South Central Michigan (Litchfield, KLFD) and East Central Indiana (Fort Wayne, KFWA). But these are not the only locations on the map where an aircraft might be instructed to join the arrival. ATC might also assign BAGEL or PANGG.

B. Holding Along the Way

When the pace of arrival traffic picks up, aircraft should be prepared to hold at PANGG, HALIE and IROCK intersections. This arrival depicts PANGG and IROCK as holding patterns with 10 nm legs just like the one over the Gipper VOR (GIJ). But pilots will seldom be instructed to hold at GIJ because it’s primarily a departure fix. Note the hold at HALIE has only 8 nm legs.

C. Landing Instructions

There’s plenty of procedural information for arrivals at Midway depending upon which runways the tower’s ATIS is broadcasting on 132.75. All aircraft will initially cross HALIE at 6,000 feet. Aircraft landing, runways 4R or 13C will continue to track the arrival procedure to the CTLER waypoint until radar vectors for an instrument or visual approach are provided. Arrivals headed for Runway 22L will proceed northwest at HALIE to GERMN, then to LNANE and on to STERE, where they can expect radar vectors to the final approach course. Confused yet? If you’re lucky, KMDW will be landing Runway 31C which involves tracking from HALIE to HAADN, then on to HILLS where you will be assigned the approach.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Hard Altitudes

Note that many of the altitudes listed include a solid line above and beneath the number. That means crossing altitude HALIE at 6,000 feet, for instance, is a requirement—not above or below that altitude unless ATC assigns something else. If most arrivals from the east use the PANGG 3, what happens when slower airplanes find themselves in front of the jets? Chicago Approach will descend you early to allow the jets to pass over you, or they will leave you at 6,000 feet and allow faster traffic to pass beneath you.

E. Three Items of Equipment Required

The box in the upper right corner of this procedure indicates three requirements in order to use this procedure. First, the aircraft must be operating in a radar environment. That means pilots arriving at KMDW when it was “ATC Zero” this past year would not have been using the PANGG 3. ATC Zero turns an airport into a nontowered field. The aircraft must carry DME/DME/IRU or GPS, and it must also be RNAV 1-capable. RNAV 1 is code for an IFR-certified GPS that gives ATC the flexibility to assign a direct clearance to any of the listed waypoints. This arrival procedure matches up nicely with the RNAV (GPS) Z Rwy 22L or RNAV (GPS) Z Rwy 31C. Take a look to see how the PANGG 3 feeds you onto either of these approaches.

This story appeared in the June/July 2021 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Chicago Midway KMDW PANGG3 (RNAV) Arrival appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

As pilots north of the Mason-Dixon Line continue wrestling with the snow and ice of another winter, a few lucky aviators have been planning flights to much warmer destinations. And where better to head than sunny, warm Florida with pristine beaches and daily temperatures in the upper 70s and low 80s?

As unlikely as it might seem to pilots headed to the panhandle state, there are actually times when an instrument approach might be needed to land at one of Florida’s 140 available airports. That’s why we picked Key West International (KEYW) this month, an airport surrounded by water—and one that might seem least likely to demand any IFR skills.

A. Restricted Area Nearby

During an approach and a pre-departure briefing, pilots should take note of restricted area R-2196 about 20 miles northeast of KEYW. Restricted areas don’t prohibit flying but usually contain enough hazards to warrant the restriction, and in this case, there’s good reason this procedure begins at CARNU. R-2196′s defining hazard is the Cudjoe Key Tethered Aerostat Radar System. A TARS uses a tethered balloon called an aerostat that’s about twice the size of the Goodyear blimp and is attached to the ground by a cable at least 10,000 feet long. That makes this a very bad approach on which to try any shortcuts.

B. “Not to Scale”

Notice the phrase “not to scale” running between CARNU and GUCEL in the upper right corner of the plan view. It’s a reminder that although the distance between CARNU and GUCEL and the distance between GUCEL and BURPY appear visually to be the same, they aren’t. In this example, the former distance is nearly 30 nm but only 18 in the latter instance.

C. Water, Water Everywhere

This procedure demands a considerable amount of overwater flying. In fact, most of the approach is over the ocean except for the final 5 miles. This is because Naval Air Station Key West lies just to the east of KEYW. A savvy pilot should always know which way to turn to reach land in an emergency, whether IFR or VFR. Also important is a look at the missed approach that heads an aircraft west from KEYW and a holding pattern about 10 nm away from the nearest land. If overwater flying—even though you may be on an IFR flight plan—is not for you, don’t wait until the Navy Key West controller clears you for the approach to mention this concern.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Hold with 5 NM Legs

There are a few points worth noting if a pilot should go missed on the RNAV (GPS) Runway 27 approach. This procedure’s holding pattern features 5 nm legs that will require fewer turns than one with standard one-minute legs. Following the turn northward to the CHETS intersection from ATNAW, the pilot could prepare for a direct entry to the holding pattern.

E. Glidepath Details

If there’s anything a pilot on solid instruments approaching an airport doesn’t need when they break out of the clouds, it’s confusing messages. Note 3 says that could be a possibility by explaining that the visual glideslope indicator and RNAV glideslope are not coincident. In other words, if a pilot flies this approach as an LPV, the visual glidepath on the precision approach path indicator will not line up with the glidepath they’ll be seeing on their PFD. A glidepath-angle chart near the bottom of the chart confirms that this approach is based on a 3-degree glidepath. The chart also shows the rate of descent in feet per minute required to remain on that 3-degree slope. For example, approaching at a 100-knot groundspeed, the aircraft needs to maintain a 531-feet-per-minute rate of descent.

F. No Late Hours

If you’re arriving at KEYW late at night or early in the morning, take note of who is awake and who is not. Key West Tower and Navy Key West Approach Control services are only available on a part-time basis.

This story appeared in the April/May 2021 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Key West RNAV (GPS) Runway 27 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

If you enjoy watching airplanes, especially any of the quickly declining global fleet of jumbo jets, Muhammad Ali International—the old Standiford Field (KSDF)—in Louisville, Kentucky, is an excellent place. The home of UPS, KSDF offers the opportunity to see large Boeings—747s, 757s and 767s—as well as Airbus A300s and McDonnell Douglas MD-11s operating day and night. With slightly more than 175,000 takeoffs and landings annually, most of them air carrier, a light-aircraft pilot operating through KSDF needs to be alert on the ground and in the air for these wake-turbulence producers.

Parallel Approaches

Note 2 offers pilots a serious piece of information as they approach Runway 17 Left: An airliner might be shooting an approach to the parallel 17 Right—referred to as “simultaneous approaches”—bringing with it the need to be alert to the wind and the location of the heavy aircraft to avoid wake turbulence. The note also reminds pilots to be certain they’re looking at the correct runway when they do break out on the approach to 17 Left. With a strong west wind, the aircraft’s nose would crab into the wind and possibly aim at 17 Right. Pilots should also not be surprised to see another airplane off their right as close as 3,000 feet away, lined up for the right side.

GPS Required

Even if the pilot plans to use only the ILS components of this procedure, an “RNAV 1-GPS” is required to reach the TORAC waypoint in the missed approach, should it be needed.

How Low Can You Go?

Approach minimums are important to review so pilots will understand the distance between them and the ground if they don’t break out until at minimums. Common ILS minimums are 200 feet agl and half a mile. That means that even though your altimeter reads 699 feet at the decision altitude, the airplane will be just 200 feet above the ground. Understanding this will help correlate the reported ceilings on an ATIS, AWOS or ASOS with what pilots will experience. If the reported ceiling is 400 overcast, the pilot can expect to break out of the clouds and see the runway as the altimeter unwinds through 899 feet (TDZE 499 feet plus the 400-foot ceiling), though pilots should always be prepared that the ceiling might be worse than reported. If the glideslope were inoperative, the pilot is working with localizer-only minimums. Using that same 400-foot overcast, pilots could descend only to 1,000 feet msl, or about 501 feet agl. A different approach may be in order altogether. In any event, as pointed out by Note 3 near the top of the plate, pilots should be prepared that, even though they may be established on the glideslope, the visual approach indicator probably won’t show the same on-glidepath indication.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

DME Won’t Read Zero at the Loc-Only MAP

This localizer-only approach’s MDA is 1,000 feet. With no runway in sight at minimums, the only option is a missed approach. But note that, even though the co-located VHF/ILS DME is counting down to zero as the aircraft approaches the runway, it won’t indicate zero at the missed approach point—but 1.4 miles. The GPS would read zero at the MAP.

Simple Missed Approach

The missed approach for 17 Left seems simple at first, but it could catch a pilot who had not briefed the procedure. Before beginning the left turn and heading for the TORAC waypoint and the 4 nm GPS hold, the pilot must climb straight ahead to 1,600 feet, most likely to remain clear of the obstacles.

This story appeared in the January-February 2021 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Louisville ILS or LOC Runway 17L appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

If you’re an active IFR pilot or training to become one in the US, you have a choice of two instrument approach-plate providers. One is Jeppesen (now within Boeing Global Services), and the other is the US government, which provides plates known as digital terminal procedure publications—and often known to pilots by two outdated terms: National Aeronautical Charting Office or National Ocean Service plates, named after the offices that once produced them. Most airline and corporate pilots tend to use Jeppesen plates rather than the d-TPPs, though, these days, either can be made available on iPads, tablets and other airborne flight management systems. A Jeppesen subscription costs more than access to comparable d-TPP content. Generally, the majority of necessary IFR approach information is contained on a single Jeppesen chart, whereas the government plates require the pilot to check a few different locations, for example, when it comes to obstacle departure procedures. This month, we’re taking another look at the Van Nuys ILS Z Runway 16 Right chart as presented by these two different providers.

There are many small details that differentiate these two approach-plate presentations, many more than we have room to note in this month’s brief. In the end, which one a pilot chooses often comes down a personal preference. Some pilots simply like the way information is depicted on one or the other.

Finally, a word of caution for pilots who regularly switch between the two providers: Be sure to understand the differences between the two while you’re still on the ground, or when you’re far enough out from the destination to not be rushed trying to gather important data. Once you’re about to commence the approach in the soup, it’s far too late.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

A. “Briefing Strip” vs. Top-of-the-Chart Data Offerings

Jeppesen very specifically set up the trademarked structure of their Briefing Strip at the top of their charts to ease the approach-briefing process, with items laid out in a standardized sequence. Similar data is available on the d-TPP charts but in a different order, calling for a different briefing sequence.

B. Airport Diagram

One difference on d-TPPs is an airport diagram and runway depiction in the lower right. Jeppesen’s KVNY airport information is available in a larger format on a separate page.

C. Minimum Sector Altitude

Jeppesen depicts an approach’s minimum safe sector altitude in the upper right portion of the chart as a part of the briefing block. Alternately, d-TPPs place the MSA in the plan view—in this case, within the middle left quadrant.

D. Depicting Step-Down Hard Altitudes

Altitudes below which the pilot should not descend are shown on d-TPP charts as numbers with a black line drawn beneath them, while Jeppesen charts depict a step-down and level-off more graphically. Consider the descent from

JINAT (11.4 DME from the VNY VOR) to the FURRY glideslope intercept point at (7.4 DME). The d-TPP chart shows this as a constant descent angle but depicts passing altitudes of 4,900 and 3,800 as absolute minimums along the way. The Jeppesen version shows the descent as a series of step-downs with specific level-off points until reaching the next descent fix.

E. Terrain

Some pilots think d-TPP-chart terrain information is often extraneous and simply makes the plate too busy. Jeppesen charts typically provide a less cluttered, smoother depiction of terrain with fewer high points noted. Jeppesens, for instance, do not point out nearby radio/TV towers. The Jeppesen philosophy is that pilots don’t need this information if they are flying the procedure correctly. If they’re not able, the pilot should normally execute a missed approach.

F. Approach Speeds

This area’s a personal favorite, and it depends on the approach speed for each specific aircraft. For light aircraft, 100 knots is a common approach speed. The d-TPP speeds—60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 knots—are evenly separated and may require some interpolation for consistency. Jeppesen posts speeds of 70, 90, 100, 120, 140 and 160 knots, and this seems likely to match more-commonly used approach speeds.

This story appeared in the December 2020 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Two Kinds of Instrument Approach Charts appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The key aspect of any standard instrument departure is the word “standard.” SIDs were created to reduce the required radio traffic between air traffic controllers and pilots, as aircraft transition from the terminal to the en route airspace in busy environments such as the one surrounding Van Nuys, California. This past year, KVNY locally handled more than 212,000 takeoffs and landings, making it one of the busiest general aviation airports in the United States. Adding to the local complexity is KVNY’s proximity to Hollywood Burbank Airport (KBUR) to the east and its location beneath the busy Los Angeles Class B airspace.

Terrain and Climb Requirements

The takeoff obstacle notes found on the right side of the SID plate provide required climb gradients per nautical mile. These ensure the aircraft is able to safely clear local terrain. Some pilots confuse this requirement with climb rates in feet-per-minute depicted on the vertical speed indicator. Climb gradients are not displayed in the cockpit and must be calculated using an aircraft’s performance charts prior to departure, considering atmospheric and altitude requirements. For example, an aircraft climbing at 120 knots must interpolate a climb gradient per nautical mile by considering the 100-knot groundspeed that translates into 617 feet per nautical mile and a 150-knot speed, a 925-foot rate per nautical mile. That works out to an approximate climb rate of 740 feet per nautical mile being required up to 7,000 feet.

It All Depends on the Departure Runway

A quick look at the lower right side of this chart offers details about what the pilot can expect, depending on which runways are in use at KVNY. When runways 16 Left and Right are active, departures should expect an initial climb followed by a left turn to 163 degrees and a climb to cross the VNY 2.0 DME at or below 1,700 feet. Next, there’s a climbing left turn to a heading of 113 degrees. When north departures off runways 34 Left and Right are in use, pilots can expect a climbing left turn to a heading of 253 degrees. The notes on the bottom right tell pilots to “expect radar vectors to IPIHO, then via transition to assigned route.” This means that no matter the runway in use, a pilot should expect to cross IPIHO before continuing the departure procedure.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

SIDs Offer Predictability

Once the aircraft crosses IPIHO, the route is easy to identify and needs no input from ATC. After IPIHO, the pilot flies to TWINE, then to LANGE, SLAPP and BOGET, next to the Palmdale VOR (PMD), then to ETHER, and finally on to DAG. Along this route, minimum altitudes are published much as they would be for an minimum en route altitude on a low en route chart. These altitudes increase in relation to the terrain. Pilots unable to maintain any of these altitudes along the way should notify ATC prior to departure by declining the SID and negotiating another option.

Lost Comms

Additionally, in the middle right column of the chart there’s a “Lost Comms” box that explains the action a pilot is expected to take if they lose radio communication with ATC during the departure. If departing Runway 16 Left, for example, the aircraft should fly the initial 113-degree heading. If the pilot was unable to make radio contact with SoCal Approach by the time they crossed the 5-mile point from the VNY VOR, they should turn left to 313 degrees and intercept the LAX 342-degree radial, and then continue on the published procedure. Also keep in mind that FAR 91.185 reminds pilots who experience radio failure in VFR conditions to proceed to the destination visually.

Editor’s Note: The text has been updated to correct the original text in print.

This story appeared in the October 2020 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Van Nuys Newhall 9 Departure appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

When pilots head to Las Vegas, most think of the nightlife or maybe gambling. With nearly year-round sunshine and often scorching temperatures, the last thing on their minds is probably the weather, despite Las Vegas’ regular monsoon season that runs from mid-June through September. That’s the time of the year when Las Vegas receives most of its annual 4.5 inches of rain—and it’s also when a pilot’s IFR skills could be put to the test. That’s how we arrived at this month’s chart, the ILS Runway 12L at North Las Vegas Airport. Because of KVGT’s proximity to town—just 5 miles north of McCarran International—pilots might also find themselves flying this approach simply for sequencing.

A. Opposite-Direction Approach

In spite of the terrain-laden territory west and north of the airport where peaks rise to 6,000 feet msl, this approach is frequently used despite prevailing westerly winds. A pilot assigned the Runway 12L approach should be prepared to circle to Runway 30R or Runway 25. A straight-in to Runway 30R would bring traffic too close for ATC’s comfort at McCarran. Pilots should expect circling instructions from ATC. While left traffic is common at most airports, it probably wouldn’t work here if the aircraft requested landing on Runway 30R; it would force the aircraft to first cross Runway 30L’s extended centerline.

B. DME and Radar

Note 1 located below the communications box indicates that aircraft must be DME-equipped or a carry a substitutable IFR GPS system, and ATC radar services must be used. A pilot could not fly this procedure as a full approach in a nonradar environment because there is no published way to establish the aircraft onto the localizer. A note in the plan view also confirms the DME distance—IHWG—is generated on the ILS DME frequency, 110.7.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

C. Approach to the Shorter Runway

A quick look at the airport diagram highlights an issue that’s not apparent from looking at the approach plate itself: This procedure actually points aircraft at the shortest of VGT’s runways, 12L/30R. Parallel Runway 12R/30L is 800 feet longer. This means the higher circling minimums—2,680 feet, placing the aircraft 224 feet higher—must be observed if the pilot wants to land straight in on Runway 12R or circle to land to the northwest.

D. Steeper-Than-Normal Glidepath

Note 3 details an important fact: The ILS glideslope and the visual glideslope don’t line up. When the aircraft breaks out, it may be lined up on the ILS but appear higher than the PAPI sitting just left of the runway. The pilot will also see a note in the approach speed and timing box labeled “GS 3.20 degrees,” pointing out that this approach includes a 3.2-degree glideslope. A typical slope is 3 degrees.

E. Read All the Missed-Approach Text

Many missed-approach procedures are understood by looking at the graphical detail. But it’s easy for a pilot to believe this procedure begins on the 330 Radial. The graphic on the chart reminds the pilot to reference the hold using the LAS VOR and the 251 Radial inbound. In case this isn’t quite confusing enough, this MA puts the aircraft over the top of McCarran, so ATC might just have a completely different plan in mind in the event of a pilot’s real-world missed approach.

This story appeared in the August 2020 issue of Flying Magazine

The post North Las Vegas ILS or LOC Runway 12L appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Until the recent slowdown in travel because of the COVID-19 virus, Branson, Missouri, was a top destination in the Ozarks for families with kids, boasting a host of live shows, restaurants, golf courses, museums, hiking trails and much more. While everyone hopes the lull in flying to getaways such as Branson will be short, the current downtime offers pilots a perfect opportunity to tune up their IFR chart-reading skills. This time, we offer up the RNAV (GPS) Runway 32 approach into Branson’s privately owned, public- use airport (KBBG), sporting a 7,140-foot runway where most of the traffic is itinerant, not local flight training.

A. Aligning With the Final Approach Course

Most pilots generally expect vectors to the approach when transitioning from the en route environment, but this isn’t always the most efficient arrival method. Branson’s RNAV (GPS) offers three initial approach fixes posted in a standard T-bar configuration. Approaching from the north or east, a pilot might choose either the AFPAM waypoint or the Dogwood VOR to start the transition. From the south or west, a pilot might choose the Harrison VOR or the UYULA intersection. But why not accept radar vectors? Because using one of these arrival points often establishes an aircraft on a course—and sometimes at a lower altitude than with vectoring. This is the case at KBBG, located some 50 nm from Springfield, Missouri, where the FAA staffs the terminal radar approach control.

B. Choose the Right Airport

In the plan view of the KBBG chart, pilots should note the depiction of the M. Graham Clark Downtown Airport (KPLK), a facility with a similarly aligned though shorter Runway 12/30. To avoid being one of many pilots who have accidentally landed at the wrong airport over the years, this is worth adding to every approach briefing. It could very well prevent calling the wrong runway in sight during marginal weather.

C. Step-Down Considerations for Non-WAAS Aircraft

Arriving in the Branson area in a non-WAAS-capable airplane means flying the approach to LNAV MDA minimums instead of following the LPV glideslope. Pilots should be prepared to disregard a “suggested glideslope” that might appear—a slope that could take them below 1,940 feet MSL before crossing ASUKE 1.9 nm from the runway threshold. At 1.1 nm from the RW32 waypoint, the aircraft should be at or above the MDA of 1,700 feet (using the local KBBG altimeter) because of Note 2 in the plan section of this plate, which indicates that a glidepath with the standard ratio of 34-to-1 is not clear of obstacles prior to reaching this point. Put simply, descend early and you could hit something.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Glidepath Angle and Required Descent Rate

Most of us assume we will be flying a typical approach at a descent rate of about 500 feet per minute. Not on this approach, where groundspeed is important. A chart just below the profile view states the expected descent rate required in feet per minute for a corresponding groundspeed to match a 3-degree glidepath angle. An aircraft flying at 90 knots groundspeed requires a descent rate of 478 feet per minute. A faster groundspeed calls for a corresponding increase in the rate of descent.

E. A (Literally) Straightforward Missed Approach

KBBG offers one of the easiest missed approaches we’ve seen in some time. Climb straight ahead to 4,000 feet MSL to WITUB, and use the entry method of your choice for the required 4 nm legs—but not one-minute inbound legs. The good news is, most GPS systems coupled to a three-axis autopilot will handle the work.

F. Who You’ll Be Talking To

Planning for the necessary ATC frequencies ahead of time offers an opportunity to set up the active and standby radio frequencies to avoid doing so in a last-minute rush. That job is made easier by following the sequence in the briefing box near the top of the plate: ATIS is available on 124.625, Springfield approach control on 126.35, tower on 128.15 and even ground control on 118.4, if there’s time.

This story appeared in the June/July 2020 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Chart Wise: Branson RNAV (GPS) RWY 32 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Olive Branch—in Mississippi— might not be a city that easily rolls off the tongue of pilots everywhere, but as the crow flies, Olive Branch Airport (KOLV) is just 26 miles from Memphis International (KMEM), home base to package-delivery giant FedEx. That airline alone adds some 450 daily operations to KMEM. But KMEM’s nearly 230,000 annual operations include plenty of traditional airlines bringing people to listen to soul, blues, rock ‘n’ roll, and maybe even visit the Graceland palace that was once home to the King, Elvis Presley.

Each year, about 65,000 aircraft arrive and depart at Olive Branch, many just to avoid the traffic chaos at KMEM. While this month’s ILS appears very straight forward on the surface, it contains a number of notes that could confuse any pilot who skips over them too quickly.

A. Missed Approach, “Or As Directed by ATC”

KOLV’s primary missed approach takes aircraft out to hold at ZAMXU intersection. But pilots should be ready for a different instruction, based on the note in the textual description that says “…or as directed by ATC.” That means be ready to possibly head to Holly Springs VOR (HLI), farther to the south from ZAMXU. Alternate missed approach points are often used to further separate traffic or if multiple aircraft are holding at the same time because of poor weather conditions. Because no other published notes relate to this procedure, a pilot should expect to use the same altitude for the secondary hold—2,500 feet—as the primary missed approach procedure, “or as directed by ATC.”

B. Where does the missed begin?

Despite the fact that the DME for the procedure is being transmitted from the localizer itself, don’t expect the DME to indicate zero when the aircraft arrives at the MAP, whether shooting the localizer-only approach or the full ILS. In either case, the DME will actually read 1.1 from IOLV.

C. Finding WIMUB

The lowest minimums on the KOLV localizer-only approach are based on two items: identifying WIMUB and the pilot’s choice of an altimeter setting. This procedure can become a bit confusing though because there are two different locations on the plate with a Note 1—the first in the plan view indicating a GPS is required and the other in the minimums box that calls for dual VOR or DME. The top Note 1 relates to the terminal- advisory-area semicircles that have begun replacing the MSA boxes on old plates. Technically, you’d be unable to identify either of those TAAs without GPS. The bottom Note 1 is for something completely different and relates to localizer-only approach minimums when the pilot identifies WIMUB as the intersection of the localizer at 2.5 DME and the 091-degree radial of the MEM VOR. That requires the capability to receive two VOR/LOC signals—or have DME.

Check out more charts: Chart Wise

D. Remember how to time an approach?

Pilots can easily become reliant on the DME or GPS to indicate the precise point when a missed approach becomes necessary. There are fewer and fewer approaches where time to missed approach can be used, but it never hurts to practice the now nearly ancient method of timing from the FAF based on groundspeed, as shown in the chart on the left side of the plate. Once established inbound on the approach from the EFPUB intersection, a pilot flying at 100 knots groundspeed would start their timing once they cross the NUXAH FAF and follow the localizer until two minutes and 56 seconds have elapsed. If they’re still in the soup when the time runs out, the only alternative is a missed approach.

E. When the pilot is responsible for the lights

The Olive Branch control tower on 125.27 normally activates the runway lights for pilots. But that facility isn’t open 24 hours a day, as noted by the asterisk in the briefing bar next to the frequency and also by Note 3 in the briefing section. A pilot arriving after the tower has closed must turn on the runway lights if they’re to have any chance of finding the runway when they break out of the clouds.

This story appeared in the May 2020 issue of Flying Magazine

The post Chart Wise: Olive Branch ILS RWY 18 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.