Non-precision approach without a published MAP?

[Peter R.]

Last Friday I flew with another pilot to Starke County, Indiana (KOXI) to
pick up my stranded Bonanza.

The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS approach,
linked here:

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF

Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach without
a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my experience
has provided to date?


--
Peter

[Peter R.]

"Peter R." > wrote:

> Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach without
> a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my experience
> has provided to date?

Just after sending this up, I recalled a discussion in this group about a
year ago that talked about VOR approaches whereby the VOR is on or very
close to the field. I then pulled up a couple of other approaches to
nearby airports where this is the case and the VOR serves as the MAP.

My confusion was a result of expecting to see the point published on the
chart as MAP, but apparently these types of approaches imply the MAP is at
the VOR without needing to specifically label them as such.

I do not have the Jepp subscription to the chart linked in my previous
post, but I will pull up my Jepps to see how they chart the MAP on nearby
approaches similar to this one.


--
Peter

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

The profile view on the approach plate illustrates that the MAP is at
the VOR/DME.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter R. ]
Posted At: Sunday, July 30, 2006 10:40
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Non-precision approach without a published MAP?
Subject: Re: Non-precision approach without a published MAP?

"Peter R." > wrote:

> Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach
without
> a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my
experience
> has provided to date?

Just after sending this up, I recalled a discussion in this group about
a
year ago that talked about VOR approaches whereby the VOR is on or very
close to the field. I then pulled up a couple of other approaches to
nearby airports where this is the case and the VOR serves as the MAP.

My confusion was a result of expecting to see the point published on the
chart as MAP, but apparently these types of approaches imply the MAP is
at
the VOR without needing to specifically label them as such.

I do not have the Jepp subscription to the chart linked in my previous
post, but I will pull up my Jepps to see how they chart the MAP on
nearby
approaches similar to this one.


--
Peter

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Peter R. wrote:
> Last Friday I flew with another pilot to Starke County, Indiana (KOXI) to
> pick up my stranded Bonanza.
>
> The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS approach,
> linked here:
>
> http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF
>
> Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach without
> a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my experience
> has provided to date?
>

Unless I am missing something obvious, the VOR is the missed approach
point. There are hundreds (thousands?) of approaches like this where
the missed begins at the navaid.

[Dave S]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> Peter R. wrote:
>
>>Last Friday I flew with another pilot to Starke County, Indiana (KOXI) to
>>pick up my stranded Bonanza.
>>
>>The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS approach,
>>linked here:
>>
>>http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF
>>
>>Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach without
>>a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my experience
>>has provided to date?
>>
>
>
> Unless I am missing something obvious, the VOR is the missed approach
> point. There are hundreds (thousands?) of approaches like this where
> the missed begins at the navaid.
>

It also occurs BEYOND the departure end of the runway...

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Dave S wrote:
> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> > Peter R. wrote:
> >
> >>Last Friday I flew with another pilot to Starke County, Indiana (KOXI) to
> >>pick up my stranded Bonanza.
> >>
> >>The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS approach,
> >>linked here:
> >>
> >>http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF
> >>
> >>Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach without
> >>a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my experience
> >>has provided to date?
> >>
> >
> >
> > Unless I am missing something obvious, the VOR is the missed approach
> > point. There are hundreds (thousands?) of approaches like this where
> > the missed begins at the navaid.
> >
>
> It also occurs BEYOND the departure end of the runway...


So what? I would consider a MAP that begins before the runway to be an
exception rather than the rule. That's what VDP's are for. Here are a
few VOR approaches that begin beyond the departure end of the runway.

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/00958V24.PDF
http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/00863VG33.PDF
http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/00863VG6.PDF
http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/00583VG4L.PDF

[Peter R.]

Andrew Sarangan > wrote:

> Unless I am missing something obvious, the VOR is the missed approach
> point. There are hundreds (thousands?) of approaches like this where
> the missed begins at the navaid.

In retrospect my confusion may be due to the differences between Jepp
charts and the NACO charts. The Jepp charts include the M on these types
of approaches to indicate the MAP.

From the first days of instrument training I used Jepps over NACO charts
and had grown into thinking that this visual indicator was the method for
indicating the MAP on both types of charts.

The approach linked in my original post was the first VOR approach I flew
outside my Jepp subscription (the Northeast US).

--
Peter

[Stefan Lörchner]

>Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach without
>a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my experience
>has provided to date?

almost every VOR-A with the VOR at the airport.

Instrument flying Handbook 8-20:

In nonprecision approaches, a final descent is initiated at the
FAF, or after completing the procedure turn and established
inbound on the procedure course. The FAF is clearly
identified by use of the Maltese cross symbol in the profile
view. When the FAF is not indicated in the profile view,
the MAP is based on station passage when the facility is on
the airport or a specified distance (e.g., VOR/DME or GPS
procedures).

In nonprecision
procedures, the pilot determines the MAP by timing from
FAF when the approach aid is well away from the airport, by
a fix or NAVAID when the navigation facility is located on
the field, or by waypoints as defined by GPS or VOR/DME
RNAV.

[Sam Spade]

Dave S wrote:
> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>> Peter R. wrote:
>>
>>> Last Friday I flew with another pilot to Starke County, Indiana
>>> (KOXI) to
>>> pick up my stranded Bonanza.
>>>
>>> The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS
>>> approach,
>>> linked here:
>>>
>>> http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF
>>>
>>> Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach
>>> without
>>> a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my
>>> experience
>>> has provided to date?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Unless I am missing something obvious, the VOR is the missed approach
>> point. There are hundreds (thousands?) of approaches like this where
>> the missed begins at the navaid.
>>
>
> It also occurs BEYOND the departure end of the runway...
>

I think you meant to say the MAP occurs beyong the approach end of the
runway.

VOR and NDBs that are located on the airport are "on airport" approach
facilities. The missed approach point is the facility even though it is
beyond the landing threshold. The only exception is where it is a
VOR/DME IAP, then a DME fix at the threshold will mark the MAP.

[Sam Spade]

Peter R. wrote:

> Last Friday I flew with another pilot to Starke County, Indiana (KOXI) to
> pick up my stranded Bonanza.
>
> The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS approach,
> linked here:
>
> http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF
>
> Until this approach, I had not encountered a non-precision approach without
> a published missed approach point. Is this more common than my experience
> has provided to date?
>
>
The plan view makes the MAP quite clear.

[Dave S]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

>>
>>It also occurs BEYOND the departure end of the runway...
>
>
>
> So what? I would consider a MAP that begins before the runway to be an
> exception rather than the rule.

I agree..

But what I am referring to were MAPs that are reached after you have
already passed the runway completely (approach AND departure end), and
are leaving the airport boundary, which is portrayed in the approach in
question. I'm sure there are more than a few.. I just haven't seen many
like that.

Thanks,
Dave

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

Peter R. wrote:

> The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS approach,
> linked here:
>
> http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF

I found it interesting that BOPIJ is a CNF (computer navigation fix) but appears
on this chart to be identified by VOR/DME.

[Sam Spade]

Dave Butler wrote:
> Peter R. wrote:
>
>> The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS
>> approach,
>> linked here:
>>
>> http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF
>
>
> I found it interesting that BOPIJ is a CNF (computer navigation fix) but
> appears on this chart to be identified by VOR/DME.

Looks like a NACO error.

[Sam Spade]

Dave S wrote:

> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>>>
>>> It also occurs BEYOND the departure end of the runway...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> So what? I would consider a MAP that begins before the runway to be an
>> exception rather than the rule.
>
>
> I agree..
>
> But what I am referring to were MAPs that are reached after you have
> already passed the runway completely (approach AND departure end), and
> are leaving the airport boundary, which is portrayed in the approach in
> question. I'm sure there are more than a few.. I just haven't seen many
> like that.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave

That's why it's called a non-precision approach. You are suppose to
understand on on-airport-faciliy's IAP limitations and be guided
accordingly.

These are antiques now.

[Sam Spade]

Dave Butler wrote:
> Peter R. wrote:
>
>> The airport is only served by one instrument approach, a VOR/GPS
>> approach,
>> linked here:
>>
>> http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06847VG18.PDF
>
>
> I found it interesting that BOPIJ is a CNF (computer navigation fix) but
> appears on this chart to be identified by VOR/DME.

Disregard my previous response.

Note the procedure has optional DME minimums. A DME stepdown fix is
permitted in an On-Airport, No-FAF, VOR IAP. Since the DME stepdown fix
is at 4 miles it became cooincident with the sensor FAF (CNF) when GPS
overlay was authorized.

[Dave S]

> That's why it's called a non-precision approach. You are suppose to
> understand on on-airport-faciliy's IAP limitations and be guided
> accordingly.
>
> These are antiques now.

No... it's called a non precision approach if it lacks vertical guidance
component in the form of a glideslope. And of course if it has a
glideslope, its going to have a localizer or localizer type lateral
guidance to the runway end..

what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport. Hadn't seen that
before.. til now. Call me green.. I dont care..

I guess that isn't that remarkable of a thing to all the wise old men
out there..

[Roy Smith]

Dave S > wrote:

> what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
> nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
> MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
> midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport.

The primary thing an approach does is make sure you don't hit anything.
After that, it's good if it also gets you to a runway.

[John R. Copeland]

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message ...
> Dave S > wrote:
>
>> what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
>> nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
>> MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
>> midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport.
>
> The primary thing an approach does is make sure you don't hit anything.
> After that, it's good if it also gets you to a runway.

Or at least *close enough* to the runway that you can see it for landing.
I guess that'd be within about a mile for the approach we're talking about.

[Peter R.]

Dave S > wrote:

> what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
> nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
> MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
> midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport. Hadn't seen that
> before.. til now.

Keep in mind that what is important about the MAP is that it is not
necessarily the point at which a safe descent to the runway will occur, or
even the point at which the airport will be spotted, but rather that it is
the point at which the pilot *begins* flying the missed approach.

This is especially important on approaches such as Starke County (the
approach linked and discussed in this thread) where it is imperative that
the pilot continue along the final approach to the MAP before beginning the
missed instructions.

Terrain or man-made obstacles might dictate flying the final approach
course past the airport before the missed can begin, or perhaps in this
approach's case it was simply that the VOR was close enough to the airport
to conveniently designate the missed approach point (although given that
this VOR is co-located with a DME that could have been used to designate a
closer MAP, maybe not)?

> Call me green.. I dont care..

I just rolled 1,000 hours with plenty of actual IMC and I still consider
myself green. :)

--
Peter

[Sam Spade]

Dave S wrote:
>
>> That's why it's called a non-precision approach. You are suppose to
>> understand on on-airport-faciliy's IAP limitations and be guided
>> accordingly.
>>
>> These are antiques now.
>
>
> No... it's called a non precision approach if it lacks vertical guidance
> component in the form of a glideslope. And of course if it has a
> glideslope, its going to have a localizer or localizer type lateral
> guidance to the runway end..

Some non-precision IAPs have more non-precision than others.
>
> what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
> nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
> MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
> midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport. Hadn't seen that
> before.. til now. Call me green.. I dont care..
>
> I guess that isn't that remarkable of a thing to all the wise old men
> out there..

It is a matter of training, not experience.

[Sam Spade]

John R. Copeland wrote:

> "Roy Smith" > wrote in message ...
>
>>Dave S > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>what I thought was unique and remarkable about this approach, which
>>>nobody seems to notice what I was actually referring to.. was that the
>>>MAP wasnt before the runway, or over the threshhold, or over
>>>midfield.... but clean past the whole stinkin airport.
>>
>>The primary thing an approach does is make sure you don't hit anything.
>>After that, it's good if it also gets you to a runway.
>
>
> Or at least *close enough* to the runway that you can see it for landing.
> I guess that'd be within about a mile for the approach we're talking about.
>

If you fly out an On-Airport IAP to the facility, your only viable
option is circle-to-land. And, without planning, you could very well be
below the circling MDA.