FDC Notams

[Frenchie]

FDC 0/6923 (A1573/20) - IAP DES MOINES INTL, DES MOINES, IA.
ILS OR LOC RWY 13, AMDT 10...
ILS OR LOC RWY 31, AMDT 24...
ILS OR LOC RWY 5, AMDT 1...
VOR RWY 23, ORIG-B...
ILS RWY 31 (SA CAT I), AMDT 24...
ILS RWY 31 (CAT II AND III), AMDT 24...
ALTERNATE MINIMUMS NA,
DSM VORTAC UNMONITORED. 27 APR 14:18 2020 UNTIL 27 MAY 14:18 2020 ESTIMATED.
CREATED: 27 APR 14:19 2020

These always trip me up, can someone help make sense of this? Especially the part about Alternate Mins N/A (I've heard 3 diff explanations on that.)

 

[rwyadclsd]

LS OR LOC RWY 13, AMDT 10...
ILS OR LOC RWY 31, AMDT 24...
ILS OR LOC RWY 5, AMDT 1...
VOR RWY 23, ORIG-B...
ILS RWY 31 (SA CAT I), AMDT 24...
ILS RWY 31 (CAT II AND III), AMDT 24...

All of these NOTAMS mean that an Aeronautical information publication (AIP) has changed recently and they havent had the time to update the actual chart yet. Located here: Aeronautical Information Publication - AIP

These could have amendments for many different situations such as a recent Flight Check was done at the airport to raise minimums, a tree was cut down to lower minumums, a new AGIS survey was flown to give better minimums or lower minimums for a certain runway, etc.

BUT with the alternate NA mins directly below these certain RWY's, the means the Alternate Minimums are NA for these runways. Here is PDF example of what these would look like as notification to airports or for part 91 pilots on a website like AirNav: https://download.aopa.org/ustprocs/current/NE-1/mmk_alternate_minimums.pdf

Just like the PDF states NA - means alternate minimums are not authorized due to unmonitored facility, absence of weather reporting service, or lack of adequate navigation coverage.


So if your question of today as to whether you should use DSM as an alternate perhaps (based upon my OpSpecs for rwys I can use), the answer would be yes and no. Since 5/23 is CLSD and RWY 13/31 has altn mins NA listed above, you would assume no. HOWEVER based upon my companies IAP Charts, I am allowed to use RNAV (GPS) RWY 13 which as you can see is not listed above in the NOTAMS. I would just have to add 400ft to DH and 1sm to visibility because per the chart, it does not use the DSM VORTAC and I have to add the 1 NavAid Rule to my GPS approaches for alternates per my C055's.



Anytime you see NOTAMS just like you posted, read it like this:

FDC 0/6923(A1573/20) - IAP DES MOINES INTL, DES MOINES, IA.
ILS OR LOC RWY 13, AMDT 10...
ILS OR LOC RWY 31, AMDT 24...
ILS OR LOC RWY 5, AMDT 1...
VOR RWY 23, ORIG-B...
ILS RWY 31 (SA CAT I), AMDT 24...
ILS RWY 31 (CAT II AND III), AMDT 24...

Your thoughts "Okay so something has changed on the Instrument Approach Procedures plate/chart. What change did they make that I care about?"

Answer: ALTERNATE MINIMUMS NA

Your thoughts "Okay so what made the rwys alternate mins go NA?"

Answer: the DSM VORTAC is UNMONITORED. From 27 APR 14:18 2020 UNTIL 27 MAY 14:18 2020 ESTIMATED.


All answers will be different per everyone's different OpSpecs and A012's. There are loopholes for every situation BUT just know how to read it for flight planning and legality purposes.

 

[DispatcherSam]

Due to the DSM VORTAC being unmonitored, those specific approaches are not allowed to be used when calculating alternate minimums.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Which part?

"Alternate Minimums NA" on the NOTAM means exactly the same thing as on an approach plate. Do you understand what this means ?

Of you are asking why, @DispatcherSam answered that.

 

[A1TAPE]

One thing I gotta wonder is why does it take FAA TechOps 30 days at a minimum to fix these unmonitored VORs

 

[flynryan692]

BUT with the alternate NA mins directly below these certain RWY's, the means the Alternate Minimums are NA for these runways. Here is PDF example of what these would look like as notification to airports or for part 91 pilots on a website like AirNav: https://download.aopa.org/ustprocs/current/NE-1/mmk_alternate_minimums.pdf

Careful, it's not for the runway, it's for the approaches listed. Just as you later described, there is a GPS approach. The approach being NA, alternate minimums NA, and closed runways are separate issues. If the approach is NA so are the alternate minimums, you can't or use it at all. If the alternate minimums are NA you can still use it when planning a flight to that airport, and also after the point of diversion when the alternate becomes the destination, you just can't use it to derive alternate mins. If the runway is closed you can sometimes still plan an approach if it has circle to land minimums on it and you can legally land on another runway.

 

[A1TAPE]

I would look at the approach plate for the one you want to use and see if any part of the approach relies on that VOR. It’s usually the missed approach holding fix.

 

[shutdown]

And depending on your OpSpecs and company policy, you might have a paragraph in C055 that says:

(d) The certificate holder may use suitable RNAV systems for flight planning at an alternate airport, provided planned availability of the substitute means of navigation is confirmed (e.g., NOTAMs and RAIM prediction for use of GPS and NOTAM/AIS checks for use of WAAS). The certificate holder may plan for a conventional approach at the destination and may plan to use a substitute means of navigation based on GPS at the alternate airport, not including substitution for the navigation aid providing lateral guidance on the final approach segment, unless otherwise authorized. For example, the certificate holder may use GPS to substitute for an out-of-service VOR that supports an ILS missed approach procedure at an alternate airport (unless the procedure is NOTAMed “not authorized”).

https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/notice/n_8900.364.pdf

or C085:

(11)The certificate holder may use RNAV substitution for planning purposes at an alternate airport for Part 97 NDB, NDB/DME, VOR, VOR/DME, and TACAN IAPs. This includes the authorization to use airports with an unmonitored NAVAID as an alternate. This authorization allows the unmonitored NAVAID to be treated as out of service within the context of this authorization only. The certificate holder must be authorized operations specification C055, Alternate Airport IFR Weather Minimums. When using operations specifications C085 and C055 together for alternate planning purposes, the substituted approach must be considered a GPS-based IAP. The certificate holder must follow all C055 limitations and provisions regarding the use of GPS-based IAPs for alternate planning.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Notice/N_8900.513.pdf

 

[rwyadclsd]

Careful, it's not for the runway, it's for the approaches listed. Just as you later described, there is a GPS approach. The approach being NA, alternate minimums NA, and closed runways are separate issues. If the approach is NA so are the alternate minimums, you can't or use it at all. If the alternate minimums are NA you can still use it when planning a flight to that airport, and also after the point of diversion when the alternate becomes the destination, you just can't use it to derive alternate mins. If the runway is closed you can sometimes still plan an approach if it has circle to land minimums on it and you can legally land on another runway.

After I got done typing all of that out, I realized this mistake and thought maybe I should go back and correct, but thanks for reiterating what I already explained below That's why I said there are loop holes after planning and for legality of planning. PLANNING is the key word, not amending in flight for a new destination.

 

[DE727UPS]

The post just above answers my question. It's my understanding I can do a VOR approach, without an operating VOR, if my whiz bang RNAV is working. Have to have that ops spec thingy though.

 

[MIADX]

In addition to the excellent answers already posted here, at my shop at least, we are only allowed to derive alternate minimums for part 121 ops. Part 91 requires the standard published alt mins for precision/non-precision approaches; to be no lower than 600-2/800-2 respectively. Just for clarification, this notam applies to both derived and standard published.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

One thing I gotta wonder is why does it take FAA TechOps 30 days at a minimum to fix these unmonitored VORs

Two things. Availability of personnel and decision about whether it's necessary to ever fix them.

 

[ahw01]

https://tfmlearning.faa.gov/publications/atpubs/NTM/not0503.html

 

[A1TAPE]

Two things. Availability of personnel and decision about whether it's necessary to ever fix them.

So pretty much if the FAA is never gonna fix them (like if the ALT MIN N/A NOTAM had XXXX date - PERM) and it makes every approach ALT MIN N/A would it make sense to drop if from your C070 as an alternate airport if you cant use it anymore?

 

[shutdown]

https://tfmlearning.faa.gov/publications/atpubs/NTM/not0503.html

Current version of the order 7930.2S: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7930.2S_Notices_to_Airmen_(NOTAM).pdf

So pretty much if the FAA is never gonna fix them (like if the ALT MIN N/A NOTAM had XXXX date - PERM) and it makes every approach ALT MIN N/A would it make sense to drop if from your C070 as an alternate airport if you cant use it anymore?

If the navaid has been permanently removed from service, I would eventually expect to see another FDC NOTAM with a new missed approach procedure that doesn't rely on it, prior to the charts being updated. See attached.

Edit to add: also, the alt mins NA is from the navaid being not monitored - they generally like to fix the monitoring if it's remaining in service.

 

[MIADX]

The post just above answers my question. It's my understanding I can do a VOR approach, without an operating VOR, if my whiz bang RNAV is working. Have to have that ops spec thingy though.

As a newbie/student pilot here's an OT question for you: Based on your opspec, is a GPS overlay approved on all ground-based approaches or does it depend? Thanks, I'll take the answer off-air.

 

[Frenchie]

I’ve been doing the dispatch thing for a week now you guys are absolutely awesome and I can’t thank you enough.

 

[DE727UPS]

As a newbie/student pilot here's an OT question for you: Based on your opspec, is a GPS overlay approved on all ground-based approaches or does it depend? Thanks, I'll take the answer off-air.

I couldn't find anything in Opspecs but our AOM (aircraft operating manual) says we can do any overlay approach that's in the nav database. I haven't seen one of those in years.

 

[Heliman81]

So pretty much if the FAA is never gonna fix them (like if the ALT MIN N/A NOTAM had XXXX date - PERM) and it makes every approach ALT MIN N/A would it make sense to drop if from your C070 as an alternate airport if you cant use it anymore?

C070 doesn't just say what alternates you can use.

 

[A1TAPE]

C070 doesn't just say what alternates you can use.

Yea it has all authorized airports. I’m saying if the airport is only in there as an alternate would it make sense to delist it if the FDC alt min NA had a Xxxx-PERM on the time stamps?