Roger wrote:

On 19 Feb 2007 09:49:06 -0800, "gregscheetah"
wrote:


The VOR 16 approach to KEST is about 8deg off from the actual runway
heading. It feels like a lot more than this when you are 3 miles
out. I flew the approach and with the ground covered in snow, the
runway covered in snow, daylight, blowing snow (almost a ground
blizzard) so no airport lights, the runway was very difficult to see.
Without the handheld GPS telling me exactly where it was, it would
have been easy to have been too close to the airport by the time it
was seen to make a zig zap adjustment and a normal landing. A missed
approach for no reason.

Why not adjust the VOR approach to be 160 deg inbound instead of 156
deg?
There are no obsticals in the area. Why not fly outbound on 340 and
inbound on 160? This way one would be lined up with the runway and
the PAPI lights may help visibly locate the runway.


First take a look at the airport diagram. The VOR is well off to the
side of the runway. At a quick glance it appears to be between 1000
and 2000 feet to the side. If you were to come in on a heading of 160
you would be coming in parallel to the runway and well off to the left
which would require a side step. I think you will find all things
being equal coming in on a heading of 156 would be a lot easier than
the side step.

Some have mentioned obstacle clearance, but I'd guess it is that way
to take you across the extended centerline of the runway
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

The preferred alignment is for the VOR radial to cross the extending
runway centerline 3,000 feet prior to the landing threshold.