"B" wrote in message ...
Dave Butler wrote:
karl gruber wrote:

I have never used NACO charts, ever.

From the NACO chart I downloaded, there are four identical asterisks. It
is very easy to read the chart as I did, as one of the asterisk points
to crossing at the lower altitude. Another poster read it that way as
well.

The Jeppesen charts show no such ambiguity.


I agree, Karl. With the benefit of all this discussion and sitting
comfortably at my workstation, the chart is unambiguous. If I were
prepping the approach while trying to fly the airplane (which *does*
happen sometimes) I'm not sure I couldn't have been similarly misled. I
think NACO could find a better way to convey the correct information.

DB

This was brought to the FAA's attention. The asterisk has no business
being associated with the 1120 minimum altitude. That does suggest the
minimum altitude is conditional.

Here is the FAA response:

"They are going to remove the asterisk by the stepdown fix altitude and
leave it at the fix and with the minimums line. Don't know where they got
it, but they will check their source to see where it came from."


If this is the case, this whole discussion has produced 'A Good Thing' (tm).

Thanks to all.

--
Doug Semler
a.a. #705, BAAWA. EAC Guardian of the Horn of the IPU (pbuhh).
The answer is 42; DNRC o-
Gur Hfrarg unf orpbzr fb shyy bs penc gurfr qnlf, abbar rira
erpbtavmrf fvzcyr guvatf yvxr ebg13 nalzber. Fnq, vfa'g vg?