DME ARC

tgrayson said:
It helps to know the background of the letter.
Click to expand...
I'm familiar with the context and the prior interpretation (how "disastrous" it was is a matter of opinion). But the bottom line for me is that Legal =did= limit the follow-up opinion to a non-radar environment. You're welcome to use the history to suggest they "really" meant to go further, but it's at least equally valid to suggest that having heard arguments that it applied radar or non-radar, the choice to limit it to radar suggests exactly the opposite.
 
This is crazy talk . . . lol.

Ian, I'm not sure about all of these letters and such, but ATC will often have you join the arc at other than the IAF.
 
mtsu_av8er said:
This is crazy talk . . . lol.

Ian, I'm not sure about all of these letters and such, but ATC will often have you join the arc at other than the IAF.
Click to expand...

No kidding. Ask a silly question I guess...

It's much simpler in the Army. Our version of the instrument flying handbook tells you specifically what to do - none of these vague letters, opinions and such.
 
Ian J said:
It's much simpler in the Army. Our version of the instrument flying handbook tells you specifically what to do - none of these vague letters, opinions and such.
Click to expand...
Having been an Army Aviator, I understand what you mean,...however, in the instrument flying part, the military aircraft are operating according to FAA and U.S. Airspace rules, and must be knowledgable and proficient in all the FAR's and AIM instrument procedures.

The FAA instrument flying handbook also tells us what to do, but, just as in the Army, some folks see it one way, and some folks see it another way...and sometimes, both are correct.:D
 
ATC personnel are not versed on TERPS requirements.
Click to expand...

i have an instrument student who is a controller and he thinks because he is a controller he know all there is to know about the IFR system and procedures. he asked my why we do approach briefings because he told me what he would do for a random approach i picked out and i had to tell him he was completely wrong. he proceded to tell me that if he was out there he would do what he told me first, that is a whole 'nother ballgame right there.....
 
Ian J said:
No kidding. Ask a silly question I guess...
Click to expand...

No, not silly at all - I always taught students how to join the arc anywhere. Besides, the DME arc has value for more than just an IAP. I'm flown an approach with a DME arc as a final approach segment, and in some places, there are DP's with DME arcs!

It's much simpler in the Army. Our version of the instrument flying handbook tells you specifically what to do - none of these vague letters, opinions and such.
Click to expand...

It's pretty simple out here, too. I don't have time for letters. ;)
 
Ian J said:
It's much simpler in the Army
Click to expand...


Actually Ian, it's much simpler in reality than some here are making it.


seagull said:
While you may be generally correct that it is often ok, the bottom line is that, absent a change to the rules, it is not wise to go ignoring them because you feel the "dynamic nature" makes it ok.

I know Wally personally, and I would be VERY hesitant to do something contrary to his thoughts on this. It appears, from your post, that you are not aware of who this man is?
Click to expand...


Seagull, Please be careful making assumptions that I routinely ignore rules. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you meant no offense. My life in the military, as well as now, revolves around obeying rules. If you are suggesting to others here that we have the luxury of living in some make believe world where no situation will ever exist that will force us to think and act outside of a rule book, you are mistaken or naive.

For the purposes of discussion, it is interesting and entertaining to talk about the intricacies of what we do. It is always a good thing as professional aviators to know what the rules are, and how the FAA and others interpret them. As I read, study and discuss my world with others, I admit that I am often surprised at how many things I thought I knew, but didn't. What I have learned to be true is that not all the answers we seek are in a rule book - ask Capt Al Haynes about that concept.


You are right Seagull, I don't know Wally, or any other person named Wally for that matter. I am glad you have a friend like him to provide you direction and answers. Captains are required every day to make dynamic decisions to accomplish their goal of providing safe and reliable transportation. The very best pilots I have ever known have had the ability of discernment. They preach the rules to the young guys and operate within them 99.999 percent of the time. What makes them extraordinary is their ability to see a bigger picture that at times requires them to go beyond what someone may have written in a book or manual. I call this experience and wisdom, and I strive to be that good someday.
 
I hate to stir this hornets nest again..... (Ok, I admit it, I LOVE stirring the hornets nest:D)....

But aren't there two cases here? The first case is if it is legal for ATC to tell you to intercept an arc and continue along to a final from PAST the IAF (which seems to be the point under debate). In this instance you'd have to worry about increased descent gradients required and so forth, because you wouldn't be flying the initial part of the approach. So it seems like this would be the more questionable of the two scenarios.

But there is a possible second case. Seems like they could tell you to intercept the arc at a point BEFORE the IAF, then arc along until you get to the IAF, and then fly the rest of the procedure. I can't see any reason why that wouldn't ALWAYS be perfectly legal.
 
fish314 said:
But there is a possible second case. Seems like they could tell you to intercept the arc at a point BEFORE the IAF, then arc along until you get to the IAF, and then fly the rest of the procedure. I can't see any reason why that wouldn't ALWAYS be perfectly legal.
Click to expand...


Yes, that's fine and done a lot. ATC can have you arc around any VOR, no instrument approach required. Happened a few times when I flew the Tupelo ILS approach.
 
calcapt said:
You are right Seagull, I don't know Wally, or any other person named Wally for that matter. I am glad you have a friend like him to provide you direction and answers.
Click to expand...
BTW, just as an FYI since no one has said it directly, Wally Roberts is one of the few generally-acknowledged TERPS experts around. His background includes the Air Force, TWA Captain and chair of ALPA's TERPS committee. WALLY intersection in California is named after him (near his home airport)

That's not meant to suggest he's always right (I don't know anyone who meets that test), but his opinion on the subject of instrument procedures is not quite on the level of the proverbial "some guy on the internet" or someone whose opinion is easily dismissable with:
We have all seen examples of pilots/examiners that can quote page numbers and paragraphs of obscure rules and worthless information. These are typically the folks that have a hard time coping with more mundane things like snow storms, thunderstorms, emergencies and gusty crosswinds
Click to expand...
 
calcapt said:
Seagull, Please be careful making assumptions that I routinely ignore rules. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you meant no offense. My life in the military, as well as now, revolves around obeying rules. If you are suggesting to others here that we have the luxury of living in some make believe world where no situation will ever exist that will force us to think and act outside of a rule book, you are mistaken or naive.

You are right Seagull, I don't know Wally, or any other person named Wally for that matter. I am glad you have a friend like him to provide you direction and answers. Captains are required every day to make dynamic decisions to accomplish their goal of providing safe and reliable transportation. The very best pilots I have ever known have had the ability of discernment. They preach the rules to the young guys and operate within them 99.999 percent of the time. What makes them extraordinary is their ability to see a bigger picture that at times requires them to go beyond what someone may have written in a book or manual. I call this experience and wisdom, and I strive to be that good someday.
Click to expand...

I did not mean to imply that you ignored rules, and I'm glad you didn't take it that way. My concern was that what you wrote could be interpreted that way by some of the younger pilots on this forum, and that would be a bad thing, and something you did not intend!

I was more concerned in what I perceived as a dismissive tone wrt to Wally Roberts. Not only was he chair of ALPA CHIPs, but he established that committee, and is still considered the World's expert on TERPS by everyone, including FAA. He _literally_ wrote a lot of TERPS.
 
seagull said:
I did not mean to imply that you ignored rules, and I'm glad you didn't take it that way. My concern was that what you wrote could be interpreted that way by some of the younger pilots on this forum, and that would be a bad thing, and something you did not intend!

I was more concerned in what I perceived as a dismissive tone wrt to Wally Roberts. Not only was he chair of ALPA CHIPs, but he established that committee, and is still considered the World's expert on TERPS by everyone, including FAA. He _literally_ wrote a lot of TERPS.
Click to expand...

If I am to live up to my claim of being open minded and willing to learn, it sounds like I need to read more about Wally Roberts. I look forward to doing so and learning something I don't know. Thanks Seagull!!
 
calcapt said:
If I am to live up to my claim of being open minded and willing to learn, it sounds like I need to read more about Wally Roberts. I look forward to doing so and learning something I don't know. Thanks Seagull!!
Click to expand...

Some of his older articles are available here: http://www.terps.com/

Actually, I served on CHIPs towards the end of Wally's career (he's the one that roped me into it), and was fairly familiar with the DME Arc issue, as I was directly working for Tom Young at the time. My sub-area was more PANS-OPS, but I was still involved in some of the discussions that led to the letters of interp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top