Why an NDB approach with a miss to an intersection?

[Ben Jackson]

What's the point of the CVO NDB 17? It's an off-airport NDB approach
to a runway that also has ILS, VOR and GPS approaches, all with lower
minimums. Like all but one other approach (a GPS approach from the
south) it has a missed approach that takes you to an intersection hold
about 9 miles to the east.

So if all you have is an NDB, you still can't shoot this approach without
alternate missed instructions. Why wouldn't they just put the missed
approach hold at the NDB?

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[ArtP]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:50:17 GMT, (Ben Jackson) wrote:


>So if all you have is an NDB, you still can't shoot this approach without
>alternate missed instructions. Why wouldn't they just put the missed
>approach hold at the NDB?

That lightning bolt to SHEDD says the controller can identify it. So
it is perfectly legal to fly the approach with just an NDB as long as
you are in radio contact with ATC.d

[[email protected]]

Ben Jackson wrote:

> What's the point of the CVO NDB 17? It's an off-airport NDB approach
> to a runway that also has ILS, VOR and GPS approaches, all with lower
> minimums. Like all but one other approach (a GPS approach from the
> south) it has a missed approach that takes you to an intersection hold
> about 9 miles to the east.
>
> So if all you have is an NDB, you still can't shoot this approach without
> alternate missed instructions. Why wouldn't they just put the missed
> approach hold at the NDB?

Your points are well taken. Sometimes, when the FAA designs backup for
backup approaches they don't think it all through. If the CVO VOR is OTS you
are, indeed, SOL. Alternate missed approaches (if published for ATC) or
radar vector missed approaches, are not supposed to be used before you're
with approach control.

But, then again, only 'da Shadow really know.

[Dale]

In article >,
ArtP > wrote:


> That lightning bolt to SHEDD says the controller can identify it.

How do you know that's what it means? I don't doubt you, just can't
find the info/definition on the lightning bolt symbol.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

[ArtP]

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 17:48:47 -0900, Dale > wrote:

>In article >,
> ArtP > wrote:
>
>
> > That lightning bolt to SHEDD says the controller can identify it.
>
>How do you know that's what it means? I don't doubt you, just can't
>find the info/definition on the lightning bolt symbol.

I suspect that piece of trivia is buried somewhere in a King course.
But if you look at an approach plate labeled RADAR REQUIRED (BWI ILS
28), you will only see that symbol associated with the word "RADAR".
The only time I have seen that symbol not accompanied by the word
"RADAR" is on approaches which are legal with only an NDB or single
VOR. On these the symbol is always associated with an intersection
that would require DME or a second VOR to identify.

[Gary Drescher]

"ArtP" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 17:48:47 -0900, Dale > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > ArtP > wrote:
> >
> > > That lightning bolt to SHEDD says the controller can identify it. So
> > > it is perfectly legal to fly the approach with just an NDB as long as
> > > you are in radio contact with ATC.
> >
> >How do you know that's what it means? I don't doubt you, just can't
> >find the info/definition on the lightning bolt symbol.
>
> I suspect that piece of trivia is buried somewhere in a King course.
> But if you look at an approach plate labeled RADAR REQUIRED (BWI ILS
> 28), you will only see that symbol associated with the word "RADAR".

Not at all. Look at BED ILS 29--radar required, and JAYSE and MORIS have
the jagged symbol, but no "RADAR" label.

With all due respect, it's pretty dangerous to assign operational
significance to an approach-chart symbol by guesswork or by suspected King
trivia, if the symbol doesn't appear in the legend for the chart. There's
really nothing to indicate that the jagged symbol is anything other than an
arrow pointing from the name to the fix.

--Gary

[Gary Drescher]

"ArtP" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 17:48:47 -0900, Dale > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > ArtP > wrote:
> >
> > > That lightning bolt to SHEDD says the controller can identify it. So
> > > it is perfectly legal to fly the approach with just an NDB as long as
> > > you are in radio contact with ATC.
> >
> >How do you know that's what it means? I don't doubt you, just can't
> >find the info/definition on the lightning bolt symbol.
>
> I suspect that piece of trivia is buried somewhere in a King course.
> But if you look at an approach plate labeled RADAR REQUIRED (BWI ILS
> 28), you will only see that symbol associated with the word "RADAR".

Not at all. BED ILS 29, for example, is a radar-required approach with the
jagged symbol at JAYSE and MORIS, but there's no "RADAR" label at those
fixes.

With all due respect, it's dangerous to attribute operational significance
to an approach-chart symbol by guesswork or by suspected King trivia, if the
symbol does not appear in the legend for the chart. There's no indication
that a jagged line in the plan view does anything other than connect the
name to the fix.

--Gary

[Roy Smith]

In article <dDt3c.223637$uV3.883095@attbi_s51>,
(Ben Jackson) wrote:

> So if all you have is an NDB, you still can't shoot this approach without
> alternate missed instructions. Why wouldn't they just put the missed
> approach hold at the NDB?

My guess is to keep you out of the flow of incomming traffic.

[[email protected]]

ArtP wrote:

> I suspect that piece of trivia is buried somewhere in a King course.
> But if you look at an approach plate labeled RADAR REQUIRED (BWI ILS
> 28), you will only see that symbol associated with the word "RADAR".
> The only time I have seen that symbol not accompanied by the word
> "RADAR" is on approaches which are legal with only an NDB or single
> VOR. On these the symbol is always associated with an intersection
> that would require DME or a second VOR to identify.

I suspect it is some chart makers way of tagging the name to the fix.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"ArtP" > wrote in message
...
>
> That lightning bolt to SHEDD says the controller can identify it. So
> it is perfectly legal to fly the approach with just an NDB as long as
> you are in radio contact with ATC.
>

The lightning bolt at SHEDD says nothing about ATC. If you examine the IAPs
for OSH you'll find that same symbol used at GRATE and PINKY, which serve as
the missed approach holding points for most of the procedures there.
Neither of those fixes are depicted on the video map. If that symbol had
any specific meaning one would expect to find it in the legend, but it's not
there. It appears it serves only to connect the fix with it's associated
name and data.

[J Haggerty]

Some aircraft only have an NDB and VOR and do not have DME. In that
case, the NDB procedure makes sense, because that's the only straight in
procedure available to a pilot with NDB and VOR but without DME. The VOR
that doesn't require DME is a Circling procedure with 1400 MDA and the
other 2 VOR straight-in procedures both require DME.
As far as alternate missed approach instructions, the TERPS folks build
procedures with the expectation that everyone has an operable VOR on
board and the missed is supposed to let you get back to the enroute
environment, so the missed approach to an airway fix would be appropriate.

JPH

wrote:
>
> Ben Jackson wrote:
>
>
>>What's the point of the CVO NDB 17? It's an off-airport NDB approach
>>to a runway that also has ILS, VOR and GPS approaches, all with lower
>>minimums. Like all but one other approach (a GPS approach from the
>>south) it has a missed approach that takes you to an intersection hold
>>about 9 miles to the east.
>>
>>So if all you have is an NDB, you still can't shoot this approach without
>>alternate missed instructions. Why wouldn't they just put the missed
>>approach hold at the NDB?
>
>
> Your points are well taken. Sometimes, when the FAA designs backup for
> backup approaches they don't think it all through. If the CVO VOR is OTS you
> are, indeed, SOL. Alternate missed approaches (if published for ATC) or
> radar vector missed approaches, are not supposed to be used before you're
> with approach control.
>
> But, then again, only 'da Shadow really know.
>