Missed approach procedure...

"ArtP" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:54:41 -0800, wrote:

If the missed approach on the IAP says something like:

heading of 270 to 4000
Intercept the XXX VOR R-180
Direct to XXX VOR

What should you do if you get to R-180 before you get to 4000?

Keep climbing on 270 to 4000?

Turn and track the R-180 while climbing?

Follow the procedure (keep climbing on 270 until 4000 feet then turn
back to intercept the radial. It is possible that unless you are at
4000 you may not want to be on that radial.

I think it far more likely that ATC will expect the pilot to remain on the
specified course and if an obstruction was a problem there would be a
minimum gradient specified or a minimum crossing.

I would interpret the above missed instruction as "climb and maintain 4000,
maintain heading of 270 to intercept the 180 radial inbound..." without a
second thought.

Perhaps an example from "nospam" of an actual plate would be more
instructive.

-Greg





The IAP has no minimum climb gradient specified.

What minimum climb gradient is assumed if none is specified?

200 feet per nautical mile.

On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 02:01:13 GMT, "Greg Goodknight"
wrote:


"ArtP" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:54:41 -0800, wrote:

If the missed approach on the IAP says something like:

heading of 270 to 4000
Intercept the XXX VOR R-180
Direct to XXX VOR

What should you do if you get to R-180 before you get to 4000?

Keep climbing on 270 to 4000?

Turn and track the R-180 while climbing?

Follow the procedure (keep climbing on 270 until 4000 feet then turn
back to intercept the radial. It is possible that unless you are at
4000 you may not want to be on that radial.

I think it far more likely that ATC will expect the pilot to remain on the
specified course and if an obstruction was a problem there would be a
minimum gradient specified or a minimum crossing.

According to the AIM (Instrument Departures) a climb gradient
would only be specified if a climb of greater than 200 feet per
nautical mile were required. Without an indication of a climbing turn
via I would continue on the specified heading until the specified
altitude were reached.


I would interpret the above missed instruction as "climb and maintain 4000,
maintain heading of 270 to intercept the 180 radial inbound..." without a
second thought.

Take a look at FQD LOC RWY 1 for an example of a climb then a
climbing turn. Take a look at RWI VOR/DME 22 for an example of a climb
via an intercepted radial (the method you are describing). Take a look
at RDU NDB RWY 5R for another example.


Perhaps an example from "nospam" of an actual plate would be more
instructive.

I agree.

"ArtP" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 02:01:13 GMT, "Greg Goodknight"
wrote:


"ArtP" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:54:41 -0800, wrote:

If the missed approach on the IAP says something like:

heading of 270 to 4000
Intercept the XXX VOR R-180
Direct to XXX VOR

What should you do if you get to R-180 before you get to 4000?

Keep climbing on 270 to 4000?

Turn and track the R-180 while climbing?

Follow the procedure (keep climbing on 270 until 4000 feet then turn
back to intercept the radial. It is possible that unless you are at
4000 you may not want to be on that radial.

I think it far more likely that ATC will expect the pilot to remain on
the
specified course and if an obstruction was a problem there would be a
minimum gradient specified or a minimum crossing.

According to the AIM (Instrument Departures) a climb gradient
would only be specified if a climb of greater than 200 feet per
nautical mile were required. Without an indication of a climbing turn
via I would continue on the specified heading until the specified
altitude were reached.

Perhaps if you found just one missed approach, or any procedure that
specifies passing through a radial and doubling back after a specified
altitude without the benefit of any course guidance; remember, the
hypothetical was just flying a heading until the radial was intercepted. I
can't imagine a course reversal ever being implied in free space.

The hypothetical seemed flawed to me, hence my request for an real example
from "nospam". If I was faced with the actual wording posed and ATC was not
available, I would not be playing FAR Bingo, I'd fly the course specified
and not invent a new one because of a possibility of an implied altitude
problem.

-Greg



I would interpret the above missed instruction as "climb and maintain
4000,
maintain heading of 270 to intercept the 180 radial inbound..." without a
second thought.

Take a look at FQD LOC RWY 1 for an example of a climb then a
climbing turn. Take a look at RWI VOR/DME 22 for an example of a climb
via an intercepted radial (the method you are describing). Take a look
at RDU NDB RWY 5R for another example.


Perhaps an example from "nospam" of an actual plate would be more
instructive.

I agree.

Perhaps an example from "nospam" of an actual plate would be more
instructive.

Take a look at the ILS to RWY 24 and (K)CRQ

This is where I saw the missed. It is not a good example as the missed
takes you out over the ocean and in fact either way you look at it, it
would be safe.

I'm just trying to understand in the general sense what the rules are.
In reading the recent AOPA magazine it had a sumary of accidents in
CA and one was someone getting a radar vector and assuming that he
could let down to the crossing altitude of the next segment.
He did this at night and it was fatal.

I understand that not understanding the subleties of what the rules
are for flying IFR can also be Fatal so I'm just trying to understand.

Another approach with a similar missed that is unlclear:

KCNO ILS RWY 26R

Missed:
Climb to 1400 then climbing left turn to 4000 direct PDZ and hold.

Looking at the plate missed seems to be about 4 mi from PDZ.
DH is 836 so at 200ft /mi 1400 gets you to 6 mi from PDZ
Assume that the turn gives you another 200 ft thats 1600 and 6 miles
at 200 per nm that gets you to PDZ and 2800.

The missed specifies 4000

So what do you do hold at PDZ and climb to 4000?

Again in this specific case it looks like that would be safe.

On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:45:57 -0800, wrote:


Take a look at the ILS to RWY 24 and (K)CRQ

This is where I saw the missed. It is not a good example as the missed
takes you out over the ocean and in fact either way you look at it, it
would be safe.

I would climb to 3000 then I would do the turn. If they wanted you to
turn before you reached 3000 they would have specified a climbing turn
or do what they did below (specify an altitude straight ahead and then
a climbing turn). When they specify a climb altitude before the turn,
you are expected to be at that altitude before you start the turn.


I'm just trying to understand in the general sense what the rules are.
In reading the recent AOPA magazine it had a sumary of accidents in
CA and one was someone getting a radar vector and assuming that he
could let down to the crossing altitude of the next segment.
He did this at night and it was fatal.

I understand that not understanding the subleties of what the rules
are for flying IFR can also be Fatal so I'm just trying to understand.

Another approach with a similar missed that is unlclear:

KCNO ILS RWY 26R

Missed:
Climb to 1400 then climbing left turn to 4000 direct PDZ and hold.

Looking at the plate missed seems to be about 4 mi from PDZ.
DH is 836 so at 200ft /mi 1400 gets you to 6 mi from PDZ
Assume that the turn gives you another 200 ft thats 1600 and 6 miles
at 200 per nm that gets you to PDZ and 2800.

The missed specifies 4000

So what do you do hold at PDZ and climb to 4000?


I would fly 255 until I reached 1400 feet. I would then do a
climbing left turn direct to PDZ. If by the time I got to PDZ I was
not at 4000 I would enter the hold and continue to climb until I
reached 4000.


Again in this specific case it looks like that would be safe.

"ArtP" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:45:57 -0800, wrote:


Take a look at the ILS to RWY 24 and (K)CRQ

This is where I saw the missed. It is not a good example as the missed
takes you out over the ocean and in fact either way you look at it, it
would be safe.

I would climb to 3000 then I would do the turn. If they wanted you to
turn before you reached 3000 they would have specified a climbing turn
or do what they did below (specify an altitude straight ahead and then
a climbing turn). When they specify a climb altitude before the turn,
you are expected to be at that altitude before you start the turn.

Assuming you are in radar contact (and that is a very good bet) if you
followed your own advice you would get a call from ATC asking you what
you're doing. The missed says to climb to 3000' via a specified route
consisting of a heading and a radial to intercept. If you are intercepting a
radial, a turn is implied.

-Greg

ArtP wrote:

On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:45:57 -0800, wrote:

Take a look at the ILS to RWY 24 and (K)CRQ

This is where I saw the missed. It is not a good example as the missed
takes you out over the ocean and in fact either way you look at it, it
would be safe.

I would climb to 3000 then I would do the turn. If they wanted you to
turn before you reached 3000 they would have specified a climbing turn
or do what they did below (specify an altitude straight ahead and then
a climbing turn). When they specify a climb altitude before the turn,
you are expected to be at that altitude before you start the turn.

That is wrong.

On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 06:17:04 -0800, wrote:

I would climb to 3000 then I would do the turn. If they wanted you to
turn before you reached 3000 they would have specified a climbing turn
or do what they did below (specify an altitude straight ahead and then
a climbing turn). When they specify a climb altitude before the turn,
you are expected to be at that altitude before you start the turn.

That is wrong.

You are right. I looked at the plate again and the description
disagrees with the little symbols in the profile. The descriptions has
an "and" in it while the symbols show two separate operations. In
other plates (RWI VOR/DME 22) a climb and an interception is shown in
a single symbol rather than two separate ones.

You are right. I looked at the plate again and the description
disagrees with the little symbols in the profile. The descriptions has
an "and" in it while the symbols show two separate operations. In
other plates (RWI VOR/DME 22) a climb and an interception is shown in
a single symbol rather than two separate ones.

That was my confusion,
I was looking at the missed symbols, trying to decide what to do if
you are not at 3000 before the radial.

"ArtP" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 06:17:04 -0800, wrote:

I would climb to 3000 then I would do the turn. If they wanted you to
turn before you reached 3000 they would have specified a climbing turn
or do what they did below (specify an altitude straight ahead and then
a climbing turn). When they specify a climb altitude before the turn,
you are expected to be at that altitude before you start the turn.

That is wrong.

You are right. I looked at the plate again and the description
disagrees with the little symbols in the profile. The descriptions has
an "and" in it while the symbols show two separate operations. In
other plates (RWI VOR/DME 22) a climb and an interception is shown in
a single symbol rather than two separate ones.

There is no disagreement from my point of view. The first symbol in both
cases gives the altitude to climb to and the initial route. Altitude, route.
I can't think of any missed that has very tricky routes, although MYV ILS 14
is a local approach to me and is the only one that's given me fits in
training since you have two radials to track to define the route to the hold
and the intercept you choose really defines what the needles do. Have fun:
http://www.myairplane.com/databases/...t/MYV_ir14.pdf

Hint, you want your indicators set so you're inbound on the ILS R-085 (ie
set OBS to 265) and outbound SAC R-329 (ie OBS to 329) to not get confused
and remember which one you want to end up on. Note the briefing boxes
really don't ever give you a flyable clearance, they really are meant to be
an aid to briefing. The text properly defines the published missed.

cheers
-Greg
PP ASEL IA