J Haggerty
August 17th 04, 05:03 AM
I went to look up the procedures for this airport, and there are no
instrument procedures listed. KPJY = Pinckneyville-Du Quoin in IL?
You can ask for a procedure by going to this FAA website;
http://avn.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=ifp/index
JPH
Snowbird wrote:
> OK, call me slow, but I only just learned that the PJY
> GPS 18 and GPS 36 approaches have been notamed NA.
>
> Ostensibly, the reason is that both approaches used
> the PJY NDB for the MAHP, and the PJY NDB has been
> decomissioned (high time -- it was flaky for years
> and unreliable the rest of the time).
>
> However, neither approach was "ADF required", both
> relied on the GPS to locate the MAHP. It would seem
> a very simple matter to define a GPS waypoint at
> the same location where the PJY NDB had to be and
> get them up and running again.
>
> So I'd like to know, where does one direct questions
> about instrument approaches (like, is this in the works?
> and what's holding it up?)
>
> Best,
> Sydney
instrument procedures listed. KPJY = Pinckneyville-Du Quoin in IL?
You can ask for a procedure by going to this FAA website;
http://avn.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=ifp/index
JPH
Snowbird wrote:
> OK, call me slow, but I only just learned that the PJY
> GPS 18 and GPS 36 approaches have been notamed NA.
>
> Ostensibly, the reason is that both approaches used
> the PJY NDB for the MAHP, and the PJY NDB has been
> decomissioned (high time -- it was flaky for years
> and unreliable the rest of the time).
>
> However, neither approach was "ADF required", both
> relied on the GPS to locate the MAHP. It would seem
> a very simple matter to define a GPS waypoint at
> the same location where the PJY NDB had to be and
> get them up and running again.
>
> So I'd like to know, where does one direct questions
> about instrument approaches (like, is this in the works?
> and what's holding it up?)
>
> Best,
> Sydney