Thread
:
OLV GPS 36 approach question
View Single Post
#
44
August 10th 06, 10:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Sam Spade
external usenet poster
Posts: 1,326
OLV GPS 36 approach question
wrote:
We all have different experiences.
That's why we share on this newsgroup.
However, I'm still trying to pin down your thoughts on this issue, so
I'll ask again:
"Would your opinion change if the OP had been cleared direct to the IAF
at 2,100, yet approach clearance were withheld until he arrived there?"
I predict that either "yes" or "no" will undermine your evaluation of
the situation. ;-)
Under the new procedure ATC was required to tell him he was being
cleared directly to the IF for a straight-in, at least 5 miles before
the IF. Had I received that clearance I would set my navigator for
direct to the IF, cleared the hold-in-lieu if it were in the approach
flight plan, tracked the intermediate segment until the FAF, then
descended in accordance with the procedure.
Under the old procedures I would have not accepted lower than 2,800,
then done as above, except descending to 2,100 crossing the IF, and so
forth.
Under the old procedures, had this not been a TAA procedure I would have
accepted no lower than 2,800 and done the course reversal, making it
clear to ATC that I would do the course reversal.
What is inconsistent about any of that?
Sam Spade
View Public Profile
View message headers
Find all posts by Sam Spade
Find all threads started by Sam Spade