IFR Approach PDF
11-27-2011 | 03:12 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,317
Likes: 0
From: Lovin' life at .4 (ish) mach
IFR Approach PDF
While looking for an answer as to what the difference is between the thick and thin holding patterns, I came across this PDF. It explains how to set up for an approach, differences between Jepp and NOS charts, even how to brief the approach plates. I hope this will help someone out.
http://www.1worldaero.com/HOW%20TO%2...20APPROACH.pdf
http://www.1worldaero.com/HOW%20TO%2...20APPROACH.pdf
11-27-2011 | 04:13 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,843
Likes: 1
From: FAA 'Flight Check'
This is some really good stuff jsfBoat - thanks for sharing!
I see that the Jepp approach briefed the highest obstacle.
“Highest Obstacle is at 2000 on the left side near Ricke”
Is this information standard on all Jepp approaches?
If the approach is an RNAV, does it list the controlling obstacle for the LNAV, LNAV/VNAV, and LPV approaches? What about the Missed Approach controller or the circling controllers?
I haven't looked at Jepp charts in over 20 years so I'm obviously not up to date. I knew that they derived their information from the NOS and presented it in a different fashion (though NOS has evolved to be more similar than in the past).
USMCFLYR
I see that the Jepp approach briefed the highest obstacle.
“Highest Obstacle is at 2000 on the left side near Ricke”
Is this information standard on all Jepp approaches?
If the approach is an RNAV, does it list the controlling obstacle for the LNAV, LNAV/VNAV, and LPV approaches? What about the Missed Approach controller or the circling controllers?
I haven't looked at Jepp charts in over 20 years so I'm obviously not up to date. I knew that they derived their information from the NOS and presented it in a different fashion (though NOS has evolved to be more similar than in the past).
USMCFLYR
11-27-2011 | 06:05 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: 73 gear slinger
Since we are kind of on the subject, a student asked me an IAP question the other day and I didn't have an answer.
Why is it that some of the IAF "T" procedures on RNAV appchs show an arrow, while some are completely connected as one solid line?
Why is it that some of the IAF "T" procedures on RNAV appchs show an arrow, while some are completely connected as one solid line?
11-27-2011 | 07:25 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,843
Likes: 1
From: FAA 'Flight Check'
USMCFLYR
11-28-2011 | 10:18 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: 73 gear slinger
USMCFLYR...check these three approaches out.
1st: College Station (KCLL) RNAV 10
IAFs (HAXUN or GOVEY) have arrows that don't connect to the (IF) ICESO.
2nd: Randolph (KRND) RNAV 14R
IAF (HADKI) has a solid bold line (w/ an arrow on it) that connects to the (IF) WAXEL.
3rd: San Antonio (KSAT) RNAV (GPS) 03
IAFs (BEBNE or ANUBE) have arrows that connect to (IF) HARDD.
All of KCLL's RNAV approaches have short arrows that do not connect to the (IF). Does it have something to do with "Radar Required" at KCLL?
KCLL: http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1112/00928R10.PDF
KRND: http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1112/00341R14R.PDF
KSAT: http://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1112/00369RY3.PDF
11-28-2011 | 06:17 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,149
Likes: 46
From: Volleyball Player
Only 1 of those utilizes a TAA (the 3rd, which also goes down to Cat 1 Precision Minimums), which is why I'd expect to see the solid lines there. The TAA is supposed to be a more standardized GPS approach procedure that when combined with WAAS has the capability for Cat 1 mins. Otherwise, I'd expect it's just a scale issue with multiple IAFs? Interested to see what anyone else has to say. I know I can drump up multiple examples of the same (approaches with multiple IAFs that are not connected with a solid line).
Point is, that while there are two of those above approaches with a "T", only one of those two is a TAA "T". The non-TAA one is most likely an older approach, possibly upgraded with LPV minimums recently.
Point is, that while there are two of those above approaches with a "T", only one of those two is a TAA "T". The non-TAA one is most likely an older approach, possibly upgraded with LPV minimums recently.
09-25-2018 | 01:49 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
While looking for an answer as to what the difference is between the thick and thin holding patterns, I came across this PDF. It explains how to set up for an approach, differences between Jepp and NOS charts, even how to brief the approach plates. I hope this will help someone out.
http://www.1worldaero.com/HOW%20TO%2...20APPROACH.pdf
http://www.1worldaero.com/HOW%20TO%2...20APPROACH.pdf
I wonder if you got into a membership area or something and they saw this and closed the link.
09-26-2018 | 10:29 AM
#9
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
10-25-2018 | 02:06 AM
#10
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
From: AFIS trainee and PPL trainee
This is a cool stuff, thanks. 
I also like the IFR app where you can have ADF + RMI, VOR + ILS,
HSI, IFR sim and holding pattern instructor.
Pilot Trainer IFR Pack app for iPhone, iPad | FlyGo-Aviation Ltd.
I also like the IFR app where you can have ADF + RMI, VOR + ILS,
HSI, IFR sim and holding pattern instructor.
Pilot Trainer IFR Pack app for iPhone, iPad | FlyGo-Aviation Ltd.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
