Y'All,
Received this email for which I have come to the group for an answer.

Dear Gene,
I was recently on an instrument checkride for the Military, and the
instructor asked me a bonus question: "can you have a IAP with no published
inbound course." I couldn't think of any scenarios, maybe you could? The
checkride ended up getting weathered out so he couldn't tell me how I did on
the ground phase or the answer.

Thanks
Mike Petruska

wrote:
> Y'All,
> Received this email for which I have come to the group for an answer.
>
> Dear Gene,
> I was recently on an instrument checkride for the Military, and the
> instructor asked me a bonus question: "can you have a IAP with no published
> inbound course." I couldn't think of any scenarios, maybe you could? The
> checkride ended up getting weathered out so he couldn't tell me how I did on
> the ground phase or the answer.
>
> Thanks
> Mike Petruska
>
>
No.

wrote:

> Y'All,
> Received this email for which I have come to the group for an answer.
>
> Dear Gene,
> I was recently on an instrument checkride for the Military, and the
> instructor asked me a bonus question: "can you have a IAP with no published
> inbound course." I couldn't think of any scenarios, maybe you could? The
> checkride ended up getting weathered out so he couldn't tell me how I did on
> the ground phase or the answer.
>
> Thanks
> Mike Petruska
>
>
Well, I think it is a trick question.

An ASR or PAR (GCA in military speak) has no charted inbound (final
approach) course. But, it has a published course ala the controller's
video map, which is a legal course for FAA radar approach procedures.

Well, how about the final being a dme arc, which we all know is an IAP
that exitst. In which case, the "inbound course" to the MAP is
constantly changing. Don't have my pubs with me, but I don't see how
it could have a "published" course in this instance
Stan

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:33:49 -0700, > wrote:

>Y'All,
>Received this email for which I have come to the group for an answer.
>
>Dear Gene,
>I was recently on an instrument checkride for the Military, and the
>instructor asked me a bonus question: "can you have a IAP with no published
>inbound course." I couldn't think of any scenarios, maybe you could? The
>checkride ended up getting weathered out so he couldn't tell me how I did on
>the ground phase or the answer.
>
>Thanks
>Mike Petruska
>

With the exception of one or two that arc to the runway, all arcs terminate
at a final approach course. The arc itself is an intermediate segment.

Bob Gardner

> wrote in message
...
> Well, how about the final being a dme arc, which we all know is an IAP
> that exitst. In which case, the "inbound course" to the MAP is
> constantly changing. Don't have my pubs with me, but I don't see how
> it could have a "published" course in this instance
> Stan
>
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:33:49 -0700, > wrote:
>
>>Y'All,
>>Received this email for which I have come to the group for an answer.
>>
>>Dear Gene,
>>I was recently on an instrument checkride for the Military, and the
>>instructor asked me a bonus question: "can you have a IAP with no
>>published
>>inbound course." I couldn't think of any scenarios, maybe you could? The
>>checkride ended up getting weathered out so he couldn't tell me how I did
>>on
>>the ground phase or the answer.
>>
>>Thanks
>>Mike Petruska
>>
>

wrote:
> Well, how about the final being a dme arc, which we all know is an IAP
> that exitst. In which case, the "inbound course" to the MAP is
> constantly changing. Don't have my pubs with me, but I don't see how
> it could have a "published" course in this instance
> Stan

There is only one of those beasts in existence. If that what the "drill
instructor" was looking for, then it was an exercise in silliness.

And, to be highly technical, the ARC IAP "final" does not meet any of
the characteristics of a true final approach segment, for it has full en
route ARC width, and intermediate segment obstacle clearance.

Sam Spade > wrote:
> There is only one of those beasts in existence. If that what the "drill
> instructor" was looking for, then it was an exercise in silliness.

And that makes in inappropriate for this newsgroup how?

Roy Smith wrote:

> Sam Spade > wrote:
>
>>There is only one of those beasts in existence. If that what the "drill
>>instructor" was looking for, then it was an exercise in silliness.
>
>
> And that makes in inappropriate for this newsgroup how?

Beats me. I did not suggest that. I suggested the "drill instructor"
was being silly if he was looking for the answer to be "that one DME ARC
IAP."

> I suggested the "drill instructor" was being silly if he was looking for the answer to be "that one DME ARC IAP."

I disagree.

To bust somebody on a question like that would have been more than
silly. However, =asking= the question, as a "bonus question", is a way
of examining people's unstated assumptions about flight and the
environment in which we aviate. This is always a good thing.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

<<The arc itself is an intermediate segment.>>

Given that arcs begin with an INITIAL Approach Fix, that would make
them initial segments.

Greg Esres wrote:
> <<The arc itself is an intermediate segment.>>
>
> Given that arcs begin with an INITIAL Approach Fix, that would make
> them initial segments.

I think what Bob was trying to say is that the ARC final approach
segment criteria are identical to ARC intermediate segment criteria;
thus, there isn't really any ARC final approach segment criteria.

The initial, intermediate, and final all are the same width
2-4-centerline-4-2. The required obstacle clearance (ROC) for the
initial is 1,000 feet, for the intermediate and final it is 500 feet.
500 feet is TERPS standard intermediate segment ROC.

Standard ROC for "real" final approach segments is either 250, 300, or 350.

Jose wrote:

>> I suggested the "drill instructor" was being silly if he was looking
>> for the answer to be "that one DME ARC IAP."
>
>
> I disagree.
>
> To bust somebody on a question like that would have been more than
> silly. However, =asking= the question, as a "bonus question", is a way
> of examining people's unstated assumptions about flight and the
> environment in which we aviate. This is always a good thing.
>
> Jose
I agree, asking the question is appropriate and thought-provoking. But,
if the "drill instructor" was thinking in terms of DME ARC IAPs, then
that was silly. But, as I said at the beginning, he may have been
thinking of ASR and PAR.

In any case, based on the information available, there is a tad of
speculation going on here.

"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
news:l5I2g.173862$bm6.22562@fed1read04...
> Greg Esres wrote:
>> <<The arc itself is an intermediate segment.>>
>>
>> Given that arcs begin with an INITIAL Approach Fix, that would make
>> them initial segments.
>
> I think what Bob was trying to say is that the ARC final approach segment
> criteria are identical to ARC intermediate segment criteria; thus, there
> isn't really any ARC final approach segment criteria.
>
> The initial, intermediate, and final all are the same width
> 2-4-centerline-4-2. The required obstacle clearance (ROC) for the initial
> is 1,000 feet, for the intermediate and final it is 500 feet. 500 feet is
> TERPS standard intermediate segment ROC.
>
> Standard ROC for "real" final approach segments is either 250, 300, or
> 350.

RoD?

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Sam Spade" > wrote in message
> news:l5I2g.173862$bm6.22562@fed1read04...
>
>>Greg Esres wrote:
>>
>>><<The arc itself is an intermediate segment.>>
>>>
>>>Given that arcs begin with an INITIAL Approach Fix, that would make
>>>them initial segments.
>>
>>I think what Bob was trying to say is that the ARC final approach segment
>>criteria are identical to ARC intermediate segment criteria; thus, there
>>isn't really any ARC final approach segment criteria.
>>
>>The initial, intermediate, and final all are the same width
>>2-4-centerline-4-2. The required obstacle clearance (ROC) for the initial
>>is 1,000 feet, for the intermediate and final it is 500 feet. 500 feet is
>>TERPS standard intermediate segment ROC.
>>
>>Standard ROC for "real" final approach segments is either 250, 300, or
>>350.
>
>
> RoD?
>
>
Required obstacle clearance as stated in the next to last paragraph.

"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
news:N0L2g.173867$bm6.165675@fed1read04...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "Sam Spade" > wrote in message
>> news:l5I2g.173862$bm6.22562@fed1read04...
>>
>>>Greg Esres wrote:
>>>
>>>><<The arc itself is an intermediate segment.>>
>>>>
>>>>Given that arcs begin with an INITIAL Approach Fix, that would make
>>>>them initial segments.
>>>
>>>I think what Bob was trying to say is that the ARC final approach segment
>>>criteria are identical to ARC intermediate segment criteria; thus, there
>>>isn't really any ARC final approach segment criteria.
>>>
>>>The initial, intermediate, and final all are the same width
>>>2-4-centerline-4-2. The required obstacle clearance (ROC) for the
>>>initial is 1,000 feet, for the intermediate and final it is 500 feet. 500
>>>feet is TERPS standard intermediate segment ROC.
>>>
>>>Standard ROC for "real" final approach segments is either 250, 300, or
>>>350.
>>
>>
>> RoD?
> Required obstacle clearance as stated in the next to last paragraph.

Toooooo fast!

> But, if the "drill instructor" was thinking in terms of DME ARC IAPs, then that was silly.

Not at all. I bet most people don't know the parameters of a DME arc,
and most have never flown them, even in practice.

"They're not all like that" is a very important thing to learn, and
examples pop up in the oddest places. My wish is that they never pop up
at inopportune times.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
>> But, if the "drill instructor" was thinking in terms of DME ARC IAPs,
>> then that was silly.
>
>
> Not at all. I bet most people don't know the parameters of a DME arc,
> and most have never flown them, even in practice.
>
> "They're not all like that" is a very important thing to learn, and
> examples pop up in the oddest places. My wish is that they never pop up
> at inopportune times.
>
> Jose
How? There is only one such IAP in the country (probably the world).
If, however, you mean most pilots don't know how to fly DME ARC initial
approach segments, then their training is seriously lacking.

> There is only one such IAP in the country (probably the world). If, however, you mean most pilots don't know how to fly DME ARC initial approach segments, then their training is seriously lacking.

Then count me in. I was never taught the procedure; I asked here some
time ago and practiced it on my own. However, my training is not
"seriously lacking". The DME arcs were not around much (DME was not in
the aircraft either) when I took my training. I've kept up, but one
cannot keep up with what one does not know to keep up with, and some of
those things are obscure "gotchas".

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

The secret of flying a DME arc is the initial heading you
turn to when at the first fix and then turning to a heading
every 10 degrees of radial change, probably a 20 degree turn
each ten degrees on the arc. You can even stay pretty close
without a DME or GPS by guessing at a wind correction angle.
You can try using VOR cross bearings to set the first turn
fix and then try the first turn 90 degrees from the radial,
with about 5 degrees inside the turn. Then adjust the
heading as you cross each 10 degree radial. When you get to
the inbound course, less 10 degrees, turn to intercept.
Have somebody use a handheld GPS to monitor your distance,
but don't "fly" the GPS, this is a VFR dead reckoning
experiment.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Jose" > wrote in message
...
|> There is only one such IAP in the country (probably the
world). If, however, you mean most pilots don't know how to
fly DME ARC initial approach segments, then their training
is seriously lacking.
|
| Then count me in. I was never taught the procedure; I
asked here some
| time ago and practiced it on my own. However, my training
is not
| "seriously lacking". The DME arcs were not around much
(DME was not in
| the aircraft either) when I took my training. I've kept
up, but one
| cannot keep up with what one does not know to keep up
with, and some of
| those things are obscure "gotchas".
|
| Jose
| --
| The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

> The secret of flying a DME arc is...

Yes, I know. But I wasn't taught that, I found out later on my own.
This is probably true of many older IFR pilots.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>
> Then count me in. I was never taught the procedure; I asked here some
> time ago and practiced it on my own. However, my training is not
> "seriously lacking". The DME arcs were not around much (DME was not in
> the aircraft either) when I took my training. I've kept up, but one
> cannot keep up with what one does not know to keep up with, and some of
> those things are obscure "gotchas".
>

DME arcs were much more common years ago than they are today.

Not a bad skill to brush up on during an IPC or something. I usually
start doing them about 10 DME from the VOR once I'm in the grove turn
inwards to 8 DME and try again, going successively closer until you're
really cranking around.

I've never had to fly one in real life though.

Robert

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> "Jose" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Then count me in. I was never taught the procedure; I asked here some
>>time ago and practiced it on my own. However, my training is not
>>"seriously lacking". The DME arcs were not around much (DME was not in
>>the aircraft either) when I took my training. I've kept up, but one
>>cannot keep up with what one does not know to keep up with, and some of
>>those things are obscure "gotchas".
>>
>
>
> DME arcs were much more common years ago than they are today.
>
>

Jose wrote:
>> There is only one such IAP in the country (probably the world). If,
>> however, you mean most pilots don't know how to fly DME ARC initial
>> approach segments, then their training is seriously lacking.
>
>
> Then count me in. I was never taught the procedure; I asked here some
> time ago and practiced it on my own. However, my training is not
> "seriously lacking". The DME arcs were not around much (DME was not in
> the aircraft either) when I took my training. I've kept up, but one
> cannot keep up with what one does not know to keep up with, and some of
> those things are obscure "gotchas".
>
> Jose
The procedure for flying DME ARCs was in the old instrument flying
handbook, both with and without an RMI.

I was never taught the procedure, either, when I obtained my instrument
rating. But, as a professional CFI-I, I became proficient in their use
and how to teach them as soon as it became apparent (circa late 1960s)
that they better be part of the proficient instrument pilot's toolkit.

The track on the arc is +- 1 NM, it can be done closer.
I've flown them in actual, no radar approach control used
the arc as a means to get required sep.


If you lead the initial turn about 1 mile, you should roll
out pretty close.

Like a lot of IFR training, procedures that are taught may
never be used in real life, such as time/distance to station
by bearing change.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
news:6OV2g.174009$bm6.4021@fed1read04...
| Jose wrote:
| >> There is only one such IAP in the country (probably the
world). If,
| >> however, you mean most pilots don't know how to fly DME
ARC initial
| >> approach segments, then their training is seriously
lacking.
| >
| >
| > Then count me in. I was never taught the procedure; I
asked here some
| > time ago and practiced it on my own. However, my
training is not
| > "seriously lacking". The DME arcs were not around much
(DME was not in
| > the aircraft either) when I took my training. I've kept
up, but one
| > cannot keep up with what one does not know to keep up
with, and some of
| > those things are obscure "gotchas".
| >
| > Jose
| The procedure for flying DME ARCs was in the old
instrument flying
| handbook, both with and without an RMI.
|
| I was never taught the procedure, either, when I obtained
my instrument
| rating. But, as a professional CFI-I, I became proficient
in their use
| and how to teach them as soon as it became apparent (circa
late 1960s)
| that they better be part of the proficient instrument
pilot's toolkit.

> DME arcs were much more common years ago than they are today.

Not for the bugsmashers I learned in. DME was stuff you'd see in
somebody's personal high performance airplane, as was an intercom.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Not for the bugsmashers I learned in. DME was stuff you'd see in
> somebody's personal high performance airplane, as was an intercom.
>

DME arcs were more common on IAPs years ago than they are today. Many
procedures that had them saw them removed in the early '80s.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> "Jose" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>>Not for the bugsmashers I learned in. DME was stuff you'd see in
>>somebody's personal high performance airplane, as was an intercom.
>>
>
>
> DME arcs were more common on IAPs years ago than they are today. Many
> procedures that had them saw them removed in the early '80s.
>
>

As you say, many of them were removed in the late 80s or so. The
present policy is:

4) Arc Initial Approach Segment. Requirements for arc initial approach
segments must be fully evaluated to determine if this type of procedure
entry is essential to the local traffic flow. Experience indicates that
arc initial segments have been established at locations where they are
used on a very limited basis or have not been fully accepted by the
user. Long arcs and/or multiple arcs have contributed to undesirable
chart clutter with minimum operational advantage.
(a) An arc initial segment in a radar environment shall not be
authorized unless it is operationally required.
(b) When a DME arc segment of an approach lies along an arc which
traverses an area of unusable radial information, the provisions of OA P
8200.1, paragraph 214.3 apply.
(c) Arc initial segments should be authorized via the shortest routing
when flight time can be reduced.
(d) Arc initial segments shall be designated by CW for clockwise and CCW
for counter-clockwise.
(e) Arc initial segments shall be designed to satisfy requirements for
executing the instrument approach. They shall NOT be established for the
convenience of routing aircraft around a terminal area.
(f) Arc initial segments less than 3 miles in length are not
recommended. Use of aircraft heading to intercept the intermediate
course should be considered as an alternate action in lieu of short arc
segments.
(g) DME Arc courses must be predicated only on collocated facilities
providing azimuth and DME information. Arc initial segments must not be
authorized on DME collocated with ILS or localizer facilities due to the
lack of constant azimuth information. See Order 6050.32, appendix III,
section 2 for collocation parameters.

"Sam Spade" > wrote in message
news:0M53g.174115$bm6.54516@fed1read04...

> (c) Arc initial segments should be authorized via the shortest routing
> when flight time can be reduced.

What does this mean?

Stan Prevost wrote:
> "Sam Spade" > wrote in message
> news:0M53g.174115$bm6.54516@fed1read04...
>
>
>>(c) Arc initial segments should be authorized via the shortest routing
>>when flight time can be reduced.
>
>
> What does this mean?
>
>
I'll give it my best guess: It is federal redundancy saying in another
way that ARC initials are to be used only when they can reduce initial
segment miles and only when it is the shortest distance within some
particular quadrant.

>> There is only one such IAP in the country (probably the world). If,
>> however, you mean most pilots don't know how to fly DME ARC initial
>> approach segments, then their training is seriously lacking.

They used to have several DME ARC final approaches in Germany. The
military especially used them as backup procedures to get to the airport
if the base facilities were off the air, and sometimes as primary
procedures if there weren't any on-field facilities. Most of the time
the arc didn't line you up with the runway centerline unless the
facility just happened to be perfectly abeam the airport.

John