I asked a question a few weeks ago, but it got a little out of control. I had people telling me that I need to see an instrument refresher, other people arguing back and forth. By the way, nobody answered the question. Unless you want to try and answer the question without acting like a Mr. Know-It-All, don't respond. Thanks.

I'm trying to decide if by intercepting the glideslope at a higher altitude than the "minimum glideslope intercept altitude" (such as 2121' on ILS 6 at KBHM), if that constitutes your new "Final Approach Fix". For example, coming in at 2700' or 2200' and intercepting there. I understand it constitutes the Final Approach Segment, but what about "FIX"? Important to know if you have tower reporting RVR of 600' on a CAT1 approach.

On the Jeppesen approach chart legend, it states that "When ATC directs the lower noted altitude: For precision approaches, the altitude becomes the minimum glide slop intercept altitude and the resultant actual point of glide slop intercept becomes the FAF (USA)"

Thank you in advance!

 

I didn't follow the whole discussion in the other thread but I think you've answered your question. The AIM is more official than Jepp. It says the lightning bolt defines the FAF on a precision approach unless ATC has you join the final at a lower altitude. It does not say the FAF moves up if you join the final at a higher altitude.

 

The FAF is the published altitude on GS. It doesn't move but there may be lower authorized GS intercept altitudes, but those are published too.

You can't intercept the GS 20 miles out at 6000' and call that FAF.

 

Much like back boob, I'd be concerned about false lobes.

 

You can intercept lower if directed by ATC and continue as your FAF..

You CAN'T intercept at a higher altitude even though you have the GS and count that as you FAF...

so if you intercept and descend on the GS 20 miles out from 10,000ft...you are not at the FAF till whats published

*note*

There are several approaches...such as the westbout ILS's at CLE (dont remember the runway #'s) They have published several FAF along the GS.
I believe every thousand feet (4000,5000,6000,....8000) and ATC can clear you to intercept any of those as the FAF depending on congestion

 

Thank you for the clarification.

 

The time for FAF to MAP on the LOC app. in the case of GS failure would change if you were to intercept at a different altitude AND consider that your FAF. FAF should stay the same.

 

The FAF for a precision approach and Non-precision approach are 2 totally different things wih different symbols.

Dont confuse them.

 

None are marked as FAFs except one, JEDSU in this case.

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/1110/00084ILD24R.PDF

And contrary to Cleveland's apparent belief, they're not nearly busy enough to need anything more than a couple standard ILSes. I hate going in there and getting the micro-vectors.

 

Thank you...... I think it is so funny that CLE has all these stupid things for an airport that gets about as much traffic as a moderate sized class C airport at best. I fly into and out of BKL all the time and they treat CLE airspace like the holy grail. Heck the other night CLE approach gave a Lifeguard flight a vector around CLE airspace while going into BKL.

Its the same bravo-sierra dispatching flights into/out of there too. I know of at least one or two calls CLE made to our SOC about routes we filed back when I was on that side of things.

Not bashing any controller, obviously, but its very noticeable.

Just to add to what others have said, those ball flag notes for higher intercepts are not the legit FAFs.