IAP without inbound course?

wrote:
Well, how about the final being a dme arc, which we all know is an IAP
that exitst. In which case, the "inbound course" to the MAP is
constantly changing. Don't have my pubs with me, but I don't see how
it could have a "published" course in this instance
Stan

There is only one of those beasts in existence. If that what the "drill
instructor" was looking for, then it was an exercise in silliness.

And, to be highly technical, the ARC IAP "final" does not meet any of
the characteristics of a true final approach segment, for it has full en
route ARC width, and intermediate segment obstacle clearance.

Sam Spade wrote:
There is only one of those beasts in existence. If that what the "drill
instructor" was looking for, then it was an exercise in silliness.

And that makes in inappropriate for this newsgroup how?

Roy Smith wrote:

Sam Spade wrote:

There is only one of those beasts in existence. If that what the "drill
instructor" was looking for, then it was an exercise in silliness.


And that makes in inappropriate for this newsgroup how?

Beats me. I did not suggest that. I suggested the "drill instructor"
was being silly if he was looking for the answer to be "that one DME ARC
IAP."

I suggested the "drill instructor" was being silly if he was looking for the answer to be "that one DME ARC IAP."

I disagree.

To bust somebody on a question like that would have been more than
silly. However, =asking= the question, as a "bonus question", is a way
of examining people's unstated assumptions about flight and the
environment in which we aviate. This is always a good thing.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:

I suggested the "drill instructor" was being silly if he was looking
for the answer to be "that one DME ARC IAP."


I disagree.

To bust somebody on a question like that would have been more than
silly. However, =asking= the question, as a "bonus question", is a way
of examining people's unstated assumptions about flight and the
environment in which we aviate. This is always a good thing.

Jose
I agree, asking the question is appropriate and thought-provoking. But,
if the "drill instructor" was thinking in terms of DME ARC IAPs, then
that was silly. But, as I said at the beginning, he may have been
thinking of ASR and PAR.

In any case, based on the information available, there is a tad of
speculation going on here.

But, if the "drill instructor" was thinking in terms of DME ARC IAPs, then that was silly.

Not at all. I bet most people don't know the parameters of a DME arc,
and most have never flown them, even in practice.

"They're not all like that" is a very important thing to learn, and
examples pop up in the oddest places. My wish is that they never pop up
at inopportune times.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
But, if the "drill instructor" was thinking in terms of DME ARC IAPs,
then that was silly.


Not at all. I bet most people don't know the parameters of a DME arc,
and most have never flown them, even in practice.

"They're not all like that" is a very important thing to learn, and
examples pop up in the oddest places. My wish is that they never pop up
at inopportune times.

Jose
How? There is only one such IAP in the country (probably the world).
If, however, you mean most pilots don't know how to fly DME ARC initial
approach segments, then their training is seriously lacking.