![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ben Jackson" wrote in message news:PAm9b.464249$o%2.205992@sccrnsc02... In article , Greg Esres wrote: There ARE some ILS DME approaches out there (or were). Aren't those approaches refering to DME for stepdowns for the GS-out LOC approach? I went to find an ILS DME but can't find one. The one we had locally (IAD ILS 1L) doesn't have DME in the title anymore, but it does say DME required on the plate. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This was my point before. NALLS is not a DME fix. It's not
charted as one either. It's still charted incorrectly. You can identify the fix using the radial AND DME, but not the localizer and DME off of SNS. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
And I suspect the ILS DME approaches that may be charted will
eventually be renamed to conform to the para 161. They are being renamed, but it's in order to conform to ICAO standards. The FAA apparently doesn't have an issue with the concept itself. Your objection to this naming convention, and mine, are not the reason for the change, if you consider Wally Roberts to be a reliable source. I'll quote the relevant sections from the thread, when I have more time. (BTW, the reference to TERPS is meaningless in this context, because they're redefining what "necessary" means. So the naming convention conforms to TERPS.) |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Aren't those approaches refering to DME for stepdowns for the GS-out
LOC approach? No, those approaches would have a note "DME Required" or "DME Required for LOC minimums". (Or should.) |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I went to find an ILS DME but can't find one.
I don't have the current plates, but maybe someone can check the Durango, CO, La Plata, ILS DME Rwy 2, or the ILS DME 34 at Denver International. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Providence RI has an ILS DME 34 approach. There is no outer marker, and
the localizer only FAF is identified only by a DME fix. If you were to fly it localizer only, you'd need the DME. The DME fix also provides the altitude reference on the glide slope so that you can confirm your altimeter's operation (you do do that, right?). As I understand it, it is the lack of any other way to identify that fix (it is over water) that makes the approach an ILS DME. Of course if you have a GPS with that intersection in the database.... Greg Esres wrote: if DME was required on an ILS (and that would be, of course, prior to the final approach fix), that it would be shown as a "DME required" note, rather than as part of the name of the procedure. That's the way it's becoming, but, according to Wally, that's only in order to conform to ICAO standards. There ARE some ILS DME approaches out there (or were). Can you explain how DME would ever be needed to fly final approach on an ILS? -- --Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 http://www.andraka.com "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Looking at the latest Providence plates, they renamed the ILS DME 34
to ILS34 with a note saying DME required. I also note that the ILS23 and ILS 5 are also now DME required and that the LOM's are no longer charted (they are still operational, but I suspect on the verge of decommissioning since they are not charted). I understand it is legal to use an IFR GPS for DME intersections if they are in the database, but what about a VFR GPS? Does this charting change now make it illegal to fly any of the ILS's into Providence without a DME or IFR GPS on board? Does this mean I need to either install a DME or pony up for an IFR GPS? Kind of sucks to have to put out $1000's to fly into an airport I've called home for 10 years. Greg Esres wrote: I went to find an ILS DME but can't find one. I don't have the current plates, but maybe someone can check the Durango, CO, La Plata, ILS DME Rwy 2, or the ILS DME 34 at Denver International. -- --Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 http://www.andraka.com "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Never mind, that has been renamed ILS 34 with a DME required note. The
ILSDME34 had a DME *or* radar required note. Now no option shown for radar. Ray Andraka wrote: Providence RI has an ILS DME 34 approach. There is no outer marker, and the localizer only FAF is identified only by a DME fix. If you were to fly it localizer only, you'd need the DME. The DME fix also provides the altitude reference on the glide slope so that you can confirm your altimeter's operation (you do do that, right?). As I understand it, it is the lack of any other way to identify that fix (it is over water) that makes the approach an ILS DME. Of course if you have a GPS with that intersection in the database.... Greg Esres wrote: if DME was required on an ILS (and that would be, of course, prior to the final approach fix), that it would be shown as a "DME required" note, rather than as part of the name of the procedure. That's the way it's becoming, but, according to Wally, that's only in order to conform to ICAO standards. There ARE some ILS DME approaches out there (or were). Can you explain how DME would ever be needed to fly final approach on an ILS? -- --Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 http://www.andraka.com "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 -- --Ray Andraka, P.E. President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc. 401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950 http://www.andraka.com "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:34:57 GMT, Greg Esres wrote:
Ok, I became motivated to find the thread. (BTW, turns out you weren't in the thread at all, so you're not getting senile.g) I will gladly accept your judgement regarding my lack of senility! g The thread concerns the BTV ILS/DME 33 ----------------------- From: Wally Roberts Date: 09/26/2001 As of 8/1/2003, the name remains ILS DME RWY 33 By the way, I don't have a dog in this race. I don't care one way or the other whether they put DME in the title of the procedure, or have a note requiring DME down below. I always look in both places. Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Which of these approaches is loggable? | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 26 | August 16th 03 05:22 PM |